All Posts

In chronological order. Newest posting at the top:

References   [ + ]

1. I doubt, above all, that this is all about LRH's body, which is being treated here. RVY did not know LRH personally, since he was only in Scientology since 1974, two years after LRH's arrest. Possibly, this was the body of his doppelganger
2. Robert Vaughn Young
3. Sherman D. Lenske, John G. Peterson und Earl C. Cooley
4. The Challenger misfortune was interesting on 28th January 1986: - also interesting that the astronauts who were alleged to have died thereafter are almost all of them alive:
5. Should that be the deeper reason why the Challenger misfortune was created as a fake news? The falsification of this accident has already been reported by many, but here we have, IMHO for the first time a possible reason for this
6. And we are supposed to believe that LRH has not surrounded himself with an auditor in his lonely last 8 years, but only with two housekeepers Pat & Annie Broeker and a physician Dr. Denk, who should treat Hubbard psychiatrically? It is interesting that Pat Broeker has only been to meet with "LRH" since the middle of the 1970s: - I notice that all these old timers, which worked together with "LRH" to have known him "personally", had only been introduced to "him" since 1973 at the earliest. Scientologists and friends, who knew LRH before his arrest in 1972, did not seem to have gotten into contact any more. This would be a way to protect the Doppelganger from detection, because each later "LRH"-associate naturally had no possibilities to compare and so can easily be deceived. RVY also knows "LRH" only since 1974
7. RVY does not mention this important outpoint: LRH appoints his two domestic staff as the top leader of Scientology, who have no auditor training and are not trained executives. One would expect a Class XII fully trained OEC and FEBC the choice of LRH. Not the Broekers, not David Miscavige, who is also without any OEC- or Auditor-training
8. There is still much more missing !!! If, according to Miscavige, the Broekers were deceivers, to whom counterfeits of LRH writings have been proved, RTC has since then faced a much greater problem: for then the validity of all LRH issues and revisions has to be questioned since 1978. For all these changes in the tech and policies have entered the church through the Broeker-Miscavige line. Presumably, Broeker will justify himself that Miscavige is the deceiver. However, no matter who is the culprit, the communication line from "LRH" to Broeker and Miscavige in to the church is beyond any credibility, since you have to reckon with every cheeky falsification, not only that of the LRH successor. And my further studies here on the website about the change of the bridge and the tech give sufficient reason to distrust these changes already from themselves. However even more, facing these mutual allegations of fraud and this war about the leadership of the Church of Scientology. I do not trust either of them, presumably both are fraudsters, who could not agree on the division of their prey.
9. This critique is, of course, true-of-gold and should always be highlighted. In the Basic Staff Hat it is required that each employee not only ensures that he finds a successor, but that he is also responsible for this Job well done. Otherwise it will take him back to the old post. And, of course, if LRH had not been arrested in 1972 and had the chance to do so, LRH would have made a clear follow-up, and would incorporate the successor until the Scientology Church was in the best hands. His son Quentin, Class XII was the first choice. That's why he had to die 1976. And his wife would certainly have kept the task of Guardian to secure Scientology. But Miscavige has disempowered her and set her apart. How can you trust him since?
10. Especially in the 1980s DM could not have had the opportunity to do so dictatorially against others alone: it was a whole team of people who took over the orgs. In addition to the "Scientologists", the lawyers, who have lent "power" to these "top executives" as "commissioners of LRH". Later it came to light, who was behind this plot: the US government with its agents. See the excellent documentation on this site: - it is all explained here with proof.
11. Here with MK Ultra, RVY has - apart from the remote viewing story - one of the main reasons why already very early the CIA was to monitor LRH and fight and infiltrate Scientology
12. see the Film „Operation Big City“ – U.S. Army/CIA Bio-Weapon Tests on U.S. Citizens
13. And even less has it ever occurred to him that in the years since LRH's arrest in 1972, LRH could no longer influence the direction of Scientology or avoid any revision of the tech
14. Why does he not name the names?
15. Vistaril is the product name of Hydroxyzin, more about this here, a sedative to keep people quiet. If this had been administered to LRH, then not with his consent!
16. hah! Yes, totally absurd! Why should Scientologists not want an autopsy, on the contrary: I have asked in my will for an autopsy to be made even without any suspicion, to make sure that any murder does not stay undetected. We Scientologists have no piety about the corpse, which is only MEST. Every Scientologist should therefore immediately recognize this document as a fake. Why should LRH use a will to prevent a possible murder from being revealed? Totally absurd!
17. So the testament is immediately questioned, and the spotlight of attention immediately is directed at the people who instigate something like this and profit from the will: the new rulers!
18. gambling is not a "very typical occupation for Scientologists" - rather an indicator to hostile agents who have gained access to unlimited resources. Miscavige has also liked to gamble with Dr. Denk
19. Another reason to doubt the whole story: LRH would have asked for a high-classed auditor if he were ill and not first and only after a medical doctor. Here the Doppelganger is clearly disposed of
20. The main question is not primarily "Who" but above all "When was LRH withdrawn from the control of Scientology?" - and this is not only of historical or criminal importance, but throws a light on the fact that Scientology was already infiltrated in the early 1970s and increasingly taken over, and the Tech & Policy has been revised and rewritten.
21. And this is the biggest outpoint in the determination of the LRH identity: Instead of - as usual - to gather and ask the relatives about the corpse - his wife, his daughters - so that they can identify the body, the identity is "confirmed" by "complicated" and elaborately fingerprints. Which of course only works if government agencies like the FBI are not involved in the plot. Because in that case - which has unfortunately been so since CoIntelPro - one must assume that the FBI covers the identity theft on the part of US agents and is willing to issue fake data
22.  MSH would, of course, have been immediately come to identify her husband, she probably had not seen him since 1973 and would certainly have made sure whether her husband has died here. Why was this avoided? This is the normal method
23. Same false datum can also be found in the RTC-revisions of 1992, 1997 and 2002 of the book.
26. and both is "on the internet" today, digitalized and available for the interested person
27. do we already got the hyper inflation?
28. I quote the Axioms 21, 25, 26 & 28 but without the explanation to keep it clearly
29. you find it with Google
30. LRHs
31. this was 1978, when no one had access to LRH directly, so it was unnessesary to keep the old timer in the RPF
32. this medical nurse, who claims to have been with "LRH" in the 9 missing months in NY
33. Revealing about Jim: he mocks up LRH as PTS III case
34. Jim as everyone of that time knows that this is true, but hopes his listeners find that ridiculous
35. that was actually on 3rd Dec. 1972
36. no Scientologists: agents provocateurs
37. not to apply them, but to be aware of them
38. nice wording: believed, after all these visible attacks!
39. that was in Sept. 1973: the Doppelgänger went to the Apollo to take over full control over Scientology
40. Attention: that was not the LRH we know from his works and his lectures, it was the low-tone Doppelgänger!
41. This text was originally published as an article on and republished as FSB on 19. July 2005.
42. The two revised paragraphs are marked with foot notes.
43, 265. according to 'What Is Scientology?' 1978 edition.
44. It is not confirmed that this issue is by LRH. We have no last page of that ref. Why? ‘GO 1206’, 22 June 1974 “The Snow White Program”  by Fred Hare issued a whole 14 months later claims that but what do we know?
45. This is the first of two changes of the revision of this FSB of Jan. 13, 2007: Originally, this paragraph was placed under 1984 but it belongs to March 1982, as shown to me by a present bridge.
46. This line was added and is the second change of the FSB revision of Jan. 13, 2007.
47, 267. We never had heard that term from Ron, but luckily CBR informed us about his status.
48. Download on 4 July 2006 from
49. In order for this list to be printed legibly with a black and white printer, I put the red texts in cursive. AG
50. I have written a detailed paper on David Mayo in the FSB 8. 8. 2006 Die bösartige Rolle von David Mayo.
51. See the 1st entry here:
52. 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: „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.
53. 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."
54. 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.
55. 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.
56. See LRHs Handwriting 15 February 1968 Additional Tech Data for how the Milazzo is audited with R3R.
57. 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.
58. § 52a Public Access for the Purpose of Lectures and Research (1) Admissible are: 1) small, published parts of works, works of a small scope as well as single articles from newspapers or magazines for the illustration in classrooms at schools, colleges, non-commercial facilities for training and further education as well as facilities for professional education, exclusively for a determined, limited circle of class participants or 2) small, published parts of works, works of a small scope as well as single articles from newspapers or magazines, exclusively made accessible for the personal, scientific research of a limited circle of people, as long as it is required for the respective purpose and justified for the persecution of non-commercial purposes.
59. Reproductions for Personal Use, § 53 Abs. 1 Urheberrechtsgesetz
60. The original formulation of “Theta stands above MEST”.
61. DMSMH, Chapter I, "The Scope of Dianetics": „The cause and cure of all psychosomatic ills, which number, some say, 70% of Man’s listed ailments.“
62. I mirrored a copy of the lost website with the „Timetrack“ here on my pages:
63. Details about this time frame and further relevant information has been meticulously documented by Scientologist and Dutchman Michel Snoeck. His website is well worth a visit. Article “The Whereabouts of LRH Chronology”:
64. By that, the author is of course referring to the auditing in the PTS-RD since the ethics handlings according to Aug. 10 had been taking place as a replacement since 1973. Note AG
65. Namely in an HCOB of the previous Tech & Training Aides CS-4 Ron Shafran who published many HCOBs in the 70s. According to the report by Julie Mayo – David Mayo's wife – she had received orders from LRH to revoke all these HCOBs by Ron Shafran. But she didn't agree with that and didn't really do what she was asked. Instead, she continued to let him give her advice "for Ron" for the writing of new HCOBs. Note AG
66. This is my personal, successful method. You can also go earlier-similar if the TA gets too high: above 4.0. If necessary, the value must be individually adjusted for the PC: for some PCs 4.0 is not particularly high and the incidents not too solid so you have to set a higher value. Others usually have a TA close to 2.0 if they're keyed out. Then 3.5 can be pretty high.
67. You can request a PDF copy of this bridge via email. Address and title "Delivery of bridge 1970 requested" is sufficient.
68. Cited after Hubbard, LaFayette Ron, 1986, "A HANDBOOK OF DIANETICS PROCEDURE - Dianetics: THE MODERN SCIENCE OF MENTAL HEALTH "
70. s. HCO PL 12. June 1970 C/S-Serie 2: Programming of Cases: PROGRAM Definition—A program is defined as the sequence of actions session by session to be undertaken on a case by the C/S in his directions to the auditor or auditors auditing the case. The master program for every case is given on the Classification and Gradation Chart issued from time to time. The earliest of these Charts was 1965 followed by 1st December 1966 followed by 1st January 1968 followed by 1st December 1969. The reissues of the Chart are done to improve the communication of the data on the Chart. The program factor has not much changed since its earliest issue. Tapes about this Chart were made for the SHSBC at its first issue and of course remain valid. The processes called for on the Chart are all part of the SHSBC or for upper levels part of the SH and AO Confidential materials. From time to time they are reissued but they remain standard and have been so since the first issue of the Chart. The Chart and its materials have now and again been neglected or disregarded and THE NEGLECT HAS RESULTED IN FIELD FLAPS AND DOWN STATS. Omitting this gradient of processes not only stalls cases but results in a case manifesting out-grade phenomena. A pc must attain the full ability noted on the Chart before going up to the next level of the Chart.
71. L. Ron Hubbard was arrested on his arrival in New York on December 3, 1972, on the basis of an international arrest warrant. He then indisputably disappeared for 9 months. He supposedly surfaced again after that time, although there are arguments that it might have been a doppelganger (seeänger_ersetzt_worden or In any case, there have not been any new books, no published speeches, photos or videos of him, no public appearances since. His family lost touch with him. He allegedly withdrew and hid himself increasingly more. Especially since Januar 1977, after the murder of Quentin Hubbard (Nov 1976), almost nobody had seen him and he had apparently been living in hiding since. The attorneys who are still in control of CST and the Church nowadays claim that they are authorized by Ron to represent his interests. They wrote the will that led to the full disempowerment of the Hubbard family and re-organization of the Church under command of RTC and CST. Ron’s Standing Order No. 1 (SO-Line 1) said that anyone could communicate with him at any time. This order has been broken since 1977 at the latest as many of Ron’s friends reported. Therefore, he had not been able to control or even correct the development of the Church anymore. Ron’s wife Mary Sue supposedly saw him last in 1978. His unknown, alleged place of resident was only found out in January 1986 after his death. It was quite unusual that the Coroner found 10 needle insertions in L. Ron Hubbard’s buttocks and a significant amount of the psychiatric drug Vistaril. That is why I assume that L. Ron Hubbard was not able to spend the last 14 years of his life before his supposed death in 1986 in freedom. I also don’t think much of the changes of his writings since 1972 because, first of all, the authenticity is questionable and, secondly, it wasn’t Ron’s way to revise his writings and much less so to change them to the opposite without an explanation.
72. HCOB December 12, 1981 The theory of the new grade chart. Here it is “reasoned” why Dianetics should come after the grades: So that there is a deeper gradient for Dianetics: The grades. Until 1972 L. Ron Hubbard has always emphasized why Dianetics is the lower gradient before the grades and he explicitly stigmatized a different order as an example for bad squirreling.
73. New versions of the bridge were published in 1986, 1991, 1995 and finally 1998 according to the editions I have. New levels were added and others removed. The start-up path has been increasingly extended: up to 6 major courses before the level-0-pack. Since 2007 there has been “yet another gradient before these major courses”: The Golden Age of Knowledge on which „The Basics“ are to be studied in order to “receive a full conceptional understanding”, which had actually been the EP of the removed Primary Rundown. It is completely unclear how this EP can suddenly be obtained without the Primary Rundown. But it is very clear what the reason for such an extension of 6 more years of the start-up path means ( in 2013 the first graduates of this course which is barely shorter than the SHSBC will be celebrated, just without any auditing, co-auditing, simply without applications and without mass).
74. RTC wants to make us believe that L. Ron Hubbard worked in a very sloppy way. Rather than simply handing over a newly written manuscript for a technical edition or guideline to a Commodore’s Messenger on hand so that he could take it to the HCO for immediate typewriting, he just misplaced pieces of paper here and there. Or he hid them under a carpet or behind wallpaper so that there are notes being found (in the most unbelievable places!) even years after his death, which can now be typed out and published. Thus, there are over 460 pages in the red technical Volumes that were published after his death. However, not until after a year of respective abstinence. In the meantime, while he was missing from 1980 until 1986, he had only written 720 pages of HCOBs that must have been typed and published immediately. Or was his output of manuscripts so substantial that an entire room full of typing women at the HCO was not able to keep up with his writing mania and only finished after years? - Be that as it may, I say that all publications since 1973 are quite fishy and I only accept what is in unison with earlier writings.
75. Whoever is not confiding enough, will simply be declared SP and be removed. Otherwise, he will “enturbulate” the other members as well. This shows: The SP-Declarers are not turned against the Declared because those will be freed of the burden of the RTC but rather against the remaining members who are kept away of the truth. Similar to the purpose of the excommunications in the Middle Ages.
76. see, for example, the following references which once established the HAS Co-Audit and the Comm-Course. It is interesting that these references are still found in the red Tech Volumes but not in the 1991 index edition when you look for HAS Co-Audit, Co-Audit or HAS-Comm-Course or similar keywords. This was still existing in the index editions of the old red Volumes. This most important introductory line into Scientology is simply being suppressed: HCO B 24 MARCH 1959 HAS CO-AUDIT and HCO B 25 MARCH 1959 HAS CO-AUDIT & COMM COURSE and HCO BULLETIN OF 3 APRIL 1959 HAS CO-AUDIT AND COMM COURSE and HCO B 19 January 1961 "Additional HAS Processes" the used processes on the HAS Co-Audit.. 5907C04 TCC-3 HAS Co-audit and 5907C05 TCC-6 How to Conduct a HAS Co-audit and Why and also the other THETA CLEAR CONGRESS LECTURES Washington, D.C. 4.-6. July 1959 HCO B 21 JULY 1959 HGC ALLOWED PROCESSES “From where could you communicate to a (ill body part named)? ”. HCO B 19 AUGUST 1959 HAS CO-AUDIT—FINDING TERMINALS HCO B 27 AUGUST 1959 GROWTH WITH COMPETENCE "The HAS Co-Audit course taught in Washington, D.C., by Nibs, Dick, Jan and Nina West has made Mest Clears using only muzzled co-auditing. So it is working for the many in the hands of the relatively unskilled group coauditor." HCO B 25 SEPTEMBER 1959 HAS CO-AUDIT HCO B 29 SEPTEMBER 1959 THE ORGANIZATION OF A PE FOUNDATION HCO B 15 DECEMBER 1959 HAS CO-AUDIT
77. According to HCO Info Letter 2.9.64 „Anatomy of the Human Mind Course“
78. The book auditor is described in the Ability Issue 50 of July 1957, which is printed in the Tech Volume IV, page 111ff. The reader who audits by auto dictation and is certified and recognized that way. This important introductory line of the Church is hereby getting lost.
79. HCO B 23 AUGUST AD14 HQS COURSE: "PURPOSE OF THE HQS COURSE: Personal gain to be expected: to be able to study and learn. Auditing skills to be acquired: (a) To be able to run the CCHs on a pc without ARC Breaking the pc and to achieve case gain. (b) To be able to sit down as an auditor and run a session on repetitive commands on a pc with gain."
80. See the column "Processes taught" for the HQS-Course in the bridge of 1970.
81. See the column "End Result" for the HQS-Course in the bridge of 1970.
82. HCO PL 21 Mar 71 Student Hat and HCO PL 3 May 71 Student Hat checksheet and HCO PL 5 Feb 71 Students Hat Revised, quoted after
83. Also in the bridge of 1974 like here in 1976: BSM instead of Student Hat.
84. List according to “What is Scientology” from 1978
85. I can not believe that L. Ron Hubbard would have tolerated that, if he had any control on the church. So this goes back to 1972!
86. In HCOB Nov. 15, 1969 I CASE SUPERVISION - AUDITING AND RESULTS Ron explains why the student has to be trained in Dianetics before the academic training: "... the Standard Dianetic auditing is so simple THAT IT DEMONSTRATES CLEANLY WHETHER THE PERSON CAN AUDIT OR NOT. This is not true of Scientology auditing particularly VI, VII and VIII. Here the procedure is more complex. The errors of the auditor are obscured in the possibility of a wrong C/S or a complex pc. Thus whether the auditor can audit or not, just as an auditor, is obscured. Thus, with the auditor as a variable factor, the tech can look variable. Therefore you can lay down this rule as truth and it will be truth until the end of time: If a IV, V, VI, VII or VIII cannot produce invariably excellent results his basic auditing is deficient but obscured by the complexity of material. Therefore it is vital that an auditor be a proven result-getting Standard Dianetics auditor before any result can be expected of him in his/her Scientology auditing."
87. ibidem
88. See the well worth to read history about the PRD here:
89. See the original booklet “The E-Meter-Drills”, there you find in the table of contents, that only from Level II on you have to do the first Meter drills.
90. The concept of provisional and gold seal/permanent Certs certainly goes back to LRH. But precisely not a as a separate course with mandatory internship. After proving that you can audit the learned material without mistakes, you would receive the gold seal: „The student is given a PROVISIONAL CERTIFICATE. This looks like any other certificate but is not gold sealed and has Provisional plainly on it. - In the case of an Auditor, an Interneship or formal auditing experience is required. When actual honest evidence is presented to C&A that he has demonstrated that he can produce flubless results his Certificate is VALIDATED with a gold seal and is a permanent certificate.” HCO BULLETIN OF 13 AUGUST 1972R FAST FLOW TRAINING
91. Also see my FSB of May 3, 2004R Squirrel warning at SHSBC Briefing Course
92, 93. See my FSB from Feb. 24, 2004R You can only become Clear on the Clearing-Course
94. LRH                              Executive Director Philip Quirino                 LRH Comm                               Living under guard In Reclusive retirement home Pat Bloomberg               Dissem Sec                              DECLARED SP             (Declared by Current Church Church Leadership) Peter Hemery                HCO Secretary                         DECLARED SP Personal Friend of LRH Mike Rigby                    Dir Accounts                             DECLARED SP             (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Ken Urquhart                 LRH Pers Comm                       DECLARED SP LRH Butler, LRH Pers Comm for 15 years            (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Joyce Popham               LRH Pers Sec                           DECLARED SP                         (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Len Regenass:              HCO Area Sec                           DECLARED SP Joan McNocher:             D/Guardian                               DECLARED SP                                     (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Dalene Regenass           Org E.S                                    DECLARED SP                                     (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Robin Hancocks            Deputy HCO Executive Sec       DECLARED SP                                     (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Frank Freedman            D/Qual                                      DECLARED SP Clear #127 Class VIII      (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Betty James Ad             Council Chairman                       DECLARED SP                                     (Declared by Current Church Leadership) John McMaster              SHSBC Course Supervisor        DECLARED SP FIRST CLEAR Otto Roos                     Ad Council  DECLARED SP Clear #25   One of the original LRH trained Class XII  (completed A-E of a prior Declare. But Re-Declared by Current Church Leadership) Pam Pearcy                  Ad Council                                DECLARED SP Clear #211                     (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Reg Sharpe                   LRH Assistant                           DECLARED SP Clear #7      Personal Friend of LRH Leon Steinberg              Exec Council                            DECLARED SP Clear #10    Personal Friend of LRH   One of the original LRH trained Class XII        (Declared by Current Church Leadership) J.J Delance                   Technical Staff                           DECLARED SP Clear #17    Started Scn in France (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Tony Dunleavy               Clearing Course Supervisor     DECLARED SP Clear #20                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Connie Broadbent          Dir Accounts                             DECLARED SP Clear #29                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Craig Lipsitz                  Qual Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #30                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Marilynn Routsong         HCO Staff                                 DECLARED SP Clear #31                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Brian Livingston             Tech Staff                                DECLARED SP Clear #35    One of the original LRH trained Class XII     (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Herbie Parkhouse          Org Exec Sec                           DECLARED SP Clear #55    Personal Friend of LRH        Org Exec Sec (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Anton James                 Tech Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #53                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Jenny Parkhouse           Treasury Staff                            DECLARED SP Clear #54    Personal Friend of LRH     (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Virginia Downsborough   Tech Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #39                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Van Staden                   Treasury Staff                            DECLARED SP Clear #40                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Sheena Fairchild            Tech Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #41                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Jennifer Edmonds          Tech Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #15                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Bernie Green                 Tech Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #18 Gareth McCoy               Dissem Staff                              DECLARED SP Clear #21 Dalene Regenas            Tech Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #24                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Felice Green                  Tech Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #26                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) John Lawrence               Tech Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #28                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Peggy Bankston            Tech Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #34                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Helen Pollen                  Qual Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #47                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Fred Fairchild                Tech Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #49    .                  (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Dorothy Knight               Dissem Staff                             DECLARED SP Clear #50                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Judy Gray                     Tech Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #56                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Cal Wigney                   Div 6 Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #57                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Mary Long                     Div 6 Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #58                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Bill Robertson                Tech Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #61                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Linda Nussbaum            Exec Staff                                 DECLARED SP Clear #62                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Robin Lindsell                Tech Staff                                  DECLARED SP Clear #73    Class XII    (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Jenny Parkhouse           Saint Hill Staff                           DECLARED SP Clear #54                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Val Wigney                   Saint Hill Interne                        DECLARED SP Clear #87                       (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Edith Hoyseth                Saint Hill Interne                        DECLARED SP Clear #105                     (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Roger Biddell                 Saint Hill Interne                       DECLARED SP Clear #107                     (Declared by Current Church Leadership) Cyril Vosper                  Tech Staff                                   DECLARED SP           
95. An extensive essay about the suppression of the Class VIII auditor’s training can be found in the FSB 20070824 Suppression of Class VIII - Symptom of Governmental Control
96. See detailed stats on the lack of Auditors made in CoS today here:
97. Proof for this in FSB August 8, 2006 The mean role of David Mayo
98. The detailed proof for this can be found on this article by some Guardian Office staff: Remote Viewing Timeline. This important Exposure was once lost in webspace but was then saved and mirrored by the Free Scientologists here:
99. Quote of this web page:
100. See my evaluation here: FSB 20040809 Die drei Generationen von Class XIIs zeigen den Zeitpunkt der technischen Übernahme.pdf
101. All information from this web page:
102. For example, in the HCOB November 14, 1987 II Process checklist for the Advanced Grade 0 (on page 315 in level 0 pack), there the grade 0 processes will only be found starting with no. 22 on page 30 of the references!
103. An example for many references that Dianetics is supposed to be delivered before the grades can be found in HCO PL June 12, 1970 C/S-Series 2: Programming of Cases: "In giving a pc process after process that are not related to each other and follow no Repair Program or Return Program is non-sequitur in the extreme. If processes were remarks one would get a sequence of processes given the pc sounding like this. “The submarine just went by so we will order a hundred tons of bread. There wasn’t any beer so birds are seldom seen. The dance was very fast so we fixed the carburetor. He has very long hair so we decorated his father’s tomb.” “Give pc Scn Triples then do his Dianetics then fix up his hidden standard,” would be a series of crazy non-sequitur C/Ses. Nothing is connected to or proceeds from anything. That would be a dispersed program for sure. It actually happens horribly enough. Study a Class Chart and then look through some old folders. At once, the sequence of processes ordered sounds like “The submarine just went by so order a hundred tons of bread.” and later on it says in the same HCOB "And a PC who is unflat on Dianetics will have out lower grades."
104. See the circular mail by Max Hauri about the topic Reading Questions from summer 2001.
105. HCOB June 12, 1970 C/S-Series 2, The Programming of Cases, which, among others, state: "Jumping processes on the Class Chart set the pc up to fall on his head later. An “OT VI with problems” is really just an unflat Grade I. And until Grade I is flattened to permanent Ability Attained on the Class Chart, he remains an unflat Grade I." If it is right for an OT VI to receive the grades first then it counts even more so for Clears.
106. In the IGN bulletin no. 39 (Inspector General Network of the RTC) from June 6, 1999, titled “Your Progress To OT - Arbitraries Cancelled!”, Captain David Miscavige personally writes that numerous “arbitraries” were identified during programming: “In many instances this resulted in Clears being programed DOWN the Bridge. The fact is, Clears should be rapidly gotten UP to OT.” Then he writes: “If you have attempted to move forward and have not made it up to OT, it is also quite possible that some steps you were previously programed for – quite lengthy in nature – are unnecessary and that you could be gotten up to OT far more rapidly than you are even imagining.” … “Nothing in this issue changes the lower Grade Chart. If you are not Clear, your route is through the Grades just as listed on the Grade Chart. But, there are specific rundowns LRH advised C/Ses to employ to handle any barriers to your rapid progress through the lower Grades. And if you are a stalled Clear, and you are stalled if you have not moved onto the OT levels, then the precise actions you need are those for stalled Clears and not some other lower Grade Chart action.” D.M. - who, by the way does not have any auditor’s training - then criticizes the following quoted bulletin no. 152 of the Class XII Snr C/S Int and cancels it:
107. The senior C/S Int Ray Mithoff (Class XII) has published a “bulletin of the Senior Case Supervisor Int No.152” on June 20, 1994 with the title: “Regarding: Expanded Scientology Grades”: He reports about stalled Clears that he found who had not received their grades. Er found that all stalled Clears did not fully receive their grades and ordered something new: “Every Clear who has not received his grade needs them and will take a huge advantage from them. … If a Clear has not received his grade yet but would enter a higher Org for duties, he would either receive the expanded Grades there or he could obtain the expanded Grades in his local Org if he wishes to do so.” He also points out the just (back two footnotes) quoted HCOB June 12, 1970 C/S-Series 2, The Programming of Cases, which agrees with the Snr C/S Int. So do we.
108. See my FSB from Feb. 24, 2004R You can only become Clear on the Clearing-Course and the FSB from March 2, 2004 Clears, Clearing-Course and OT’s
109. "Only about 2% go actually Clear on Dianetics. A Dianetic Clear or any other Dianetic pc now goes on up through the grades of Scientology and onto the proper Clearing Course. The Dianetic Clear of Book I was clear of somatics. The Book I definition is correct. This is the End Phenomena of Dianetics as per the Class Chart and Book I. 2%, no more, make Dianetic Clear accidentally. They still need Expanded Lower Grades, to make Scientology Clear. Becoming a Dianetic Clear does not stop them from getting Power Processing. Modern Power is to its total End Phenomena.“ (HCOB 25.6.70) Interestingly, the RONS is allowing the distribution of a PDF version of the Red Volumes with a fake date in its favor: "Only about 25% go actually Clear on Dianetics...“ on page 98 of file 1970_71.PDF !
110. Capt. Bill Robertson writes in his tech briefing no. 12 Super Static C/S-ing from June 16, 1986 (Caution: confidential OT data following, this text is incomprehensible for OT II untrained people): "On OT II there are other points that have been misunderstood by C/Ses in the past, but I want to straighten those out. did so on Tape 4 I believe, for most of you. I just want to repeat again: If he has not done the Clearing Course to go Clear, then he must look, run, and look over the platens on the Clearing Course on OT II. Not for himself through, but for beings in the composite. Because it is earlier on the track than OT II. Do you understand? If he doesn't do that he could still have a composite case glued together by the pictures and items of the Clearing Course Implant. He can maybe break loose a few from the OT Il pack materials, but he didn't break loose this earlier one on the track, which is at one to one and a quarter, one and a half quadrillion. It was used quite often. So if he didn't break that he is going to have trouble on III, you see? He is not gonna be able to get things back through to incident one, because this bunch of A = A pictures is stopping him. So you must break the Clearing Course composite. It is earlier than the OT II composite, so it also makes any being who is stuck in both of them break loose. It breaks loose the earlier similar of the OT II picture-composite. Therefore, it will make it easier to run the OT II-one. That is only if he did not run the Clearing Course platens when he went Clear. he didn't run them before, then he must run them on the composite at the right date, pushing them back the track till that right date, like he's auditing a bunch of people in an auditorium and running them through those items till a persistent F/N. That ' s what he must do, and then he goes onto the OT II-ones, and he does those the same way"
111. See FSB 20060808 DIE BÖSARTIGE ROLLE VON DAVID MAYO.pdf and FSB 20050325 How the squirrel tech has been made acceptable: NOTs revealed.pdf
112. Quoted from Criminal Time Track: Issue III (, Jesse refers to Jesse Prince, used to be the second man in the RTC right after COB David Miscavige (see “Jesse says that Ray Mithoff wrote OT 8 from scraps of paper containing little notes, it was a compilation process. And yet the church issued OT 8 as if it was authored by LRH, that this was his work. The initials at the end of the COB are LRH/RM and whoever the typist was, just like the NOTS materials. The church has delivered different versions of OT 8. Ray Mithoff was the one who wrote the original OT VIII supposedly from LRH notes. Pat Broeker was also involved in writing it. DM said he had to see it because he was Issue Authority. (Criminal Time Track: Issue III, (38
113. Originally written in February 2003 and published here: Published as FSB in December 2014
114. See the original designation by LRH for our subject: „THIS IS SCIENTOLOGY - THE SCIENCE OF CERTAINTY“ LRH-lecture from June 1953
115. It is remarkable that all these reference materials fall into the end-70s when a lot of other basics were messed up.
116. I have always been dissatisfied with having to make huge efforts to check and recheck the sensitivity of one and the same PC in a session: Time better spent with auditing. Most of the time – up to a bigger case gain – the sensitivity of a PC remains the same, as every auditor can easily identify looking up his admins.
117. The turned around mistake is introduced here: As if the sensitivity stayed the exact same during a session. No: It can be useful to change the sensitivity several times during a session. That is why there is still a column S for sensitivity in the auditors reports form, since it can be adjusted during the session. And that is the main point of the original of this reference: The auditor is supposed to understand what a real sensitivity is so that he can readjust it at any time. There just isn't a method that sets the perfect sensitivity to begin with. Ron's instruction in the HCOB of November 16, 1965 E-Meter Sensitivity Setting is a first attempt to the right sensitivity during the session preparation, but it does not replace the understanding and readjustment during the session. There it says: „Rudiments are run at Sensitivity 16. Lower Level processes are run at Sensitivity 16. Above Grade V Sensitivity is run at 5.“
118. Since the Mark VI (1979), the sensitivity scale has been changed, thus explaining the modifications of the numbers here. "5-32" refers to setting 5 on the left sensitivity control knob and 32 on the toggle switch to the right. Compare with the photo of the Mark V on the previous page.
119. Here the adjustment to Mark VI is missing in the revision which lets the study of the HCOBs end in confusion. This mistake has not even been corrected until 1991 – it can still be found on page 618 in the Red Volume 10.
120. And exactly that is the bummer: "E-Meter-Exercise 5RA instructs how to execute a squeezing correctly"! It influences the PC more than it makes the auditor learn how to use an e-meter!
121. Here we have it again: The PC is trained to give a consistent, soft squeezing. Two possible instances follow which are both a catastrophe for the sessions: Either the auditor spends a lot of time with the PC in trying to train him on "how he should squeeze" before the beginning of the session. PC and auditor can very well become desperate by that. The PC notices that he can't fulfill the auditor's expectations and gains more attention on the e-meter, which is also fatal. The auditor can become desperate with a PC untrained on e-meter-exercise 5RA: How is he supposed to set the sensitivity correctly if the PC doesn't manage to give the same squeezing again and again. Or the PC has been "fully trained" to give a steady squeezing and is therefore being stopped to give a squeezing according to his havingness. A squeezing, similar to a handshake, shows the havingness of a PC and it is therefore used for the purpose of finding the right havingness process of the PC. But if the PC has learned to give a consistent squeeze, then exactly that won't work anymore. Thus, an important tech – the finding and using of the suited havingness process – is made useless. "It's not so bad", one or the other may think, "that little bit of havingness"! Hah: Let's see what Ron says about the meaning of havingness: "When havingness is neglected, cases do not improve, that's all there is to it." LRH on page 2 of the PAB 80 of April 17, 56 "SCIENTOLOGY'S MOST WORKABLE PROCESS".
122. With a short afterthought the reference gets turned around completely. As if this reference was originally about hammering e-meter-exercise 5 – which had existed in its unrevised form before, into people's heads. No: It was precisely about giving the auditor an understanding of how he can recognize the wrong sensitivity during a session so that he can correct it. The sensitivity setting by squeezing at the beginning of the session is only a first attempt to get to the right sensitivity. But according to this reference it will be readjusted on the basis of the F/N size, if necessary.
123. And this is why this significant sentence has been removed after setting the sensitivity in such a way that the F/N spreads over half the range of a scale. With a hovering tonearm it is difficult to differentiate the F/N from the BD.
124. Yes, you will be amazed at how long you can hassle students with this meaningless exercise and make them desperate. You only need – as is actually common in the Church nowadays (seriously: no joke!) - to have one third of the scale calculated: There are exactly 40 secondary lines divided by 3 = 13 1/3 secondary lines. These are counted from set (as if you could always exactly adjust on set) and then you will have precisely the point at which the right squeeze will create "a fall of one third of the scale". Of course, no one actually manages to do this in practice. Simply because of the impossibility to give the same squeeze over and over. And what happens to auditors of the Church who think they're not working precisely? They just prefer to not audit anymore instead of continuing to pile up mistakes. - And that is where we reach the product that the enemy wants to achieve, IMO.
125. Revised to add the series number. In the previous edition, I had radically repealed the e-meter drill. However, it can be done in the modified version to be prepared for the rare case of such dating. For this, I have added a section with the title The modified EM-25.
126. Extended with the following four sections: "EM-25 is only expected by advanced auditors", "Auditing styles and KSW" and "LRH objects to the EM 25" and the P.P.S.
127. The e-meter has become a better Oui-Ja-Board because it can even repair false reads with the respective correction lists and rehabilitate the ability to use it OT-like.
128. However, advanced dianetics auditors can use dating effectively to help their PC's find the date and duration of the events. But you wouldn't expect this ability from an HSDC student yet.
129. In square brackets I will add references. The numbers in square brackets are to refer to the references listed afterwards so that I can quickly refer to those within the following text.
130. This is not verified, see HCOB 27. Mai 70 Unreading Questions and Items
131. See HCOB 6. Feb. 57 Procedure CCH
132. This paragraph and the following quote make up the addition of the RA version of this FSB.
133. As described later on, the BC used to consist of parts 0, 1 to 6, respective of the bridge levels.
134. The Admin Dictionary gives the following information for this name: „INTERNATIONAL BOARD, the International Board is composed of three board members, L. Ron Hubbard, Chairman, Mary Sue Hubbard, Secretary, and Marilynn Routsong, Treasurer. It is the controlling board of Scn. There are no other boards or board members, individual board members, officers or secretaries with the power of issuing policy. (HCO PL 5 Mar 65 II)
135. By now, one year has passed and I have completed SHSBC level 0 and 1. I have mainly been auditing and I also took the OT III course, which I have successfully finished. But over all, I am satisfied with the original checksheet and have advanced quickly.
136. This is nowadays reached by the misuse of the reference of "critical PC". Nowadays, almost no one dares to express appropriate criticism because the stimulus-response-mechanisms sets in right away: Criticism = missed Withhold. – By excessive use of this criticism defense, the Orgs have "put themselves above reproach" and, therefore, allowed the new management to steer the course of Scientology into the opposite direction without criticism.
137. This reminds me of my first encounter with David Miscavige in the AOSH EU in Copenhagen in the early 90s. It was very disconcerting that he was protected by bodyguards who were armed. D.M. makes himself "unreachable" with that. Now it could not happen that a Sea Org member starts to see through him and maybe even convinces one of his execs in an AO to bring D.M. to the meter and conduct a Sec Check. – Not for as long as he is protected by strong and well armed bodyguards. No chance! Unreachable!
138. This does not only count for laws that protect orthodox medicine which is spread and used in a lot of countries to attack people who can really heal others. Just recently used against the cancer specialist Dr. Hamer (new Germanic medicine) and the vitamin pope Dr. Rath. Scientology had established itself as a church to get away from such attacks. – Now the new Church management attacks (almost) every scientologist as a squirrel who still dares to audit. Surely they will be able to prove a mistake in everyone who does something. You simply need to exaggerate something and you have a squirrel: Hunt him! – Because only auditors trained and certified and controlled by the Mother Church are allowed to practice, no one else!
139. And not a healthy Scientology Church either that discourages auditing if it is not "done perfectly".
140. Sad but true: We have powerful Orgs today in alliance with the US government (and a secret coalition contract with the US revenue office IRS, according to which the Church uses Sec Checks to deal with tax evaders). And the more powerful the Orgs are becoming, the less auditing and training takes place.
141. And Ron had already lost his influence on his publishing lines HCOB’s, HCOPL’s in 1973, as later stated in the HCO B Jan 24, 1977 TECH CORRECTION ROUND-UP. Even later on, he was not able to regain this influence, assuming we can believe D. Miscavige: Because, since 1978, the entire Tech and the Bridge has been rewritten by a tech team under David Mayo who claimed to have been announced Snr C/S Int by Ron. But he never showed the statement of designation: not in the Church and not in the FreeZone either. Mayo was fired but his Tech (NED instead of standard dianetics, CCRD instead of Clearing Course, NOTs instead of the original OT-levels etc.) remained: because they were “approved by LRH’s telexes.” LRH who “was unreachable” (see above). LRH’s single Comm-line to the Church was via Pat Broeker who later became the strongest man in Scientology with a faked LRH issue after Ron’s death (FLAG ORDER 3879 from Jan 19, 1986 THE SEA ORG & THE FUTURE). Two years later, D.M. declared him a fraud and forger and disempowered Broeker, as we know from the following reference: FLAG ORDER 3879 by David Miscavige on the 18 April 1988 „FO 3879, THE SEA ORG & THE FUTURE, CANCELLED“. So if Mayo and Broeker are frauds, squirrels and oppressors, why is the Tech that has been changed by 180º since 1978 and can only be from Ron if you believe these “confidants of LRH” still valid today? — And reversed: If you really believe these “confidants of LRH”, has David Miscavige not been convicted of villainy and hostile takeover of the Church? However you turn and twist it: In the 70s, there was a takeover of the Church by the powers mentioned above and predicted by Ron in this lecture in 1955.
142. His hints to the thousands of arbitrary SP-declares in the early 80s to completely free the path for the new management. Contrary to the claims and the LRH policies, there are no review possibilities for these and subsequent unfair declares.
143. Since these large boots have been uninhabited so far, I will take on this task that Ron has left with "somebody": Overthrow this organization!
144. This is a powerful posit by LRH that you can only endorse: And this is how it will happen!
145. The canceling of the certificates was a method back in the day that was ahead of the SP-declares. Ron is also hinting in a funny way that this method of justice had already been used excessively and unfairly by bad guys back then.
146. The "separation orders" are not part of Ron's mistakes as he has clearly voided those in the HCO PL Nov 15, 1968 DISCONNECTION CANCELLED (only found in the old green OEC, not revised or cancelled since, though). The disconnection is a really important tool of the takeover tool: Not to suppress the SP-declared (he doesn't care) but to protect the "people who stayed at home" of the "poison of truth". The disconnection isolates the "members in good standing", not the "SP's".
147. That is why the OT materials should never get into the wrong hands. Today that is exactly where they are. And they are being used to create media campaigns, such as the twin tower attack, with the highest re-stimulation effect.
148. He doesn't say here who is responsible for not allowing it: But we know it from the HCOPL KSW 1: Every single one! Because that is the price of freedom: Constant alertness and the willingness to fight back. And whoever misses that, doesn't pay the price and, therefore, won't reach freedom!
149. Unfortunately, we haven't had this for a long time: rather a suppressing organization.
150. Today, the management is rather seeking a minimum of people: by thousands of invented reasons to deny the bridge, by prices too high, by salaries on a level next to 0 and thousands of SP-declares for the best among us. Did it ever hit someone who would have deserved it? No!
151. The Golden Age of Tech has levered out the study-tech and is therefore barely producing any new auditors. Not even all old hands have come through the GAT courses and, therefore, tolerate cancelled certificates or leave the Church to continue practicing outside of it: "Squirrels!"
152. So far, we can still turn tack: Make the takeover public, rehabilitate the changed tech by application of KSW 1-10 and deliver new, pure Scientology.
153. Def. An interiorization means going into it too fixedly and becoming part of it too fixedly. It doesn't mean just going into your head. Hubbard, LaFayette Ron: LRH-Lecture SH spec 84 of 13. Dez 1966 Scientology Definitions III.– If Int is keyed in and supposed to be audited out with the Int-Rundown, you talk about a case condition Out-Int.
154. See FSB 12. Sept. 2004R What are the effects of Out-Int with your PC
155. Def. failed help: When you expected help and only experienced a loss, an overlooked charge on help gets created, a "help button" which may lead to harsh reactions in future offers of help. – An ideal button if you want to outplay Scientology.
156. Of course I am referring to the bottle of hand lotion cream. We affectionately call these Out-Int PCs "our bottle babies".
157. Those hidden hostile manipulators tend to say the opposite of what they actually mean. Readers of Orwells 1984 are aware of that. LRH suggests to read that book.
158. Hubbard, L. Ron in HCOB 23. Dez 1971 THE NO-INTERFERENCE AREA
159. This is the standard C/S as Int RD is audited.
161. Revised in order to mark the quotes red and give all references.
162. Besides "Tone 40 as auditing procedure" you also have to consider "Tone 40 as tone level". A third meaning is more like slang: "with full intent/assertiveness."
163. In the early PAB's, Ron handled the first to third "thing" in the communication. Later on this numbering turned into TRs 1-4. So this PAB 151 is about "the fourth thing", today's TR4, the handling of originations.
164. My emphasis.
166. Emphasis by LRH. See old Red Vol. III, page 370.
167. so CCH 1 & 2.
168. so CCH 4 & 3
169. My emphasis. In practice this means: You ask in the completion of an action cycle: "What happened?" or the like. – This process, as added to the Tone-40 processes in later references, is only to be applied to non-Tone-40 processes, according to this PAB 151.
170. And the difference from this paragraph needs to be understood because "circuit originations" are simply skipped during Tone-40 processes. But the real origination of the being that could come would be an origination of having reached the EP of the process, which we don't want to miss. So there is no replacement of understanding for the auditor, which LRH hereby intended. The auditor simply wants to apply the process for once with Tone-40 without being stopped by the PC's talk. The PC's bank would like to stop the auditor and becomes quite creative in doing so. If he is invited through the new rule that was introduced later (that "bodily originations are picked up by "What is happening?"), the PC will quickly get involved and play the game with the auditor. This should be avoided by the auditor with Tone-40 processes.
171. "all way south“ is used by Ron for "all the way to the bottom“, i.e. "very bad cases“, just like psychotics and even institutionalized cases.
172. We are still familiar with this today because of Sea Org members: They "confuse" Tone-40 with a military-like order sound which is "accentuated" with yelling if necessary. Another case of redefinition.
173. This composition of doubt was published again in 2005 because it may help others make a similar one. It is important to compare the right alternatives. It is not about belonging to either the Church or the Freezone. There is nothing wrong about being a member in the Church which Ron supported for years. It is simply about where you will be able to walk up the bridge quicker or even at all.
174. Payments of indulgence were paid by religious people to the Catholic Church in medieval times. By doing so, they were relieved of their sins and were allowed into heaven.
175. This exec from the CC Düsseldorf could have got the same confessionals in her own Org for free. But it was obvious to her that it was more about paying the sum and the accompanying act of subjugation. Horrific!
176. At the time I was postulating this sentence, I had not realized how right I would be. Back then I actually believed there was no alternative to the OT levels outside the Church. But the opposite proved to be right: For a quarter of a century you have not been able to go Clear or OT in the Church! But I was only able to find out about it years later. - But that's just how it is when you want to show some backbone first.
177. Hah! I thought so back then. It turned out to be a transient release condition. In fact, I recently went Clear for sure – on the Clearing Course and I'm currently auditing on OT III.
178. By now I am Class V and I'm studying on the SHSBC on the second level.
179. Now, I have gotten out of the Non-Ex by now. Among other things, it is expressed on our website
180. The just-mentioned website is also a great start to find all the data proving the takeover. Furthermore, I recommend all FSBs of the Scientology Engram Prior Beginning Series.
181. Quote from "The Book of E-Meter Drills", New Edition 1968, EM-5: “Purpose: To train a student auditor how to get an accurate can squeeze which correctly indicates the preclear’s current state of Havingness and state of case." The sensitivity-setting was not cancelled with the EM-5 in the past!
183. “the sensitivity knob always being set the same, session after session.” HCOB 26 Aug. 60 REGIMEN TWO
185. ..\AGs Auswertungen, Zusammenstellungen\AGs Studie über die E-Meter-Empfindlichkeit.doc
186. The landing page of Pierre Ethier's (class XII) website shows the complete list of all class XII trainees (as of 1998) and divides those into three generations of class XIIs: Download of July 4, 2005 from - also see my FSB 9. August 2004 FSB 20040809R The Three Generations of Class XIIs
187. Proof: email from Julie Gillespie Mayo (his wife) from April 1996 and the solemn affirmation by David Mayo on May 1, 1987, as published on the Internet.
188. Source: The history of the takeover of the Scientology Church, called "The Criminal Time Track of Scientology", completed and published on the Internet by ex-guardian office worker Mike McClaughry (New OT 7). This large collection of data of over 1000 pages, which is well worth the read, used to be published in several places on the WWW. - One version is found on the homepage of the FreeZone e.V. Munich:
189. Source: "An Open Letter to All Scientologists From David Mayo", from around 1985. Published numerous times on the Internet, i.e. here – The reincarnated LRH did not show up 2007 as announced here by Mayo, any dupes may still be waiting for him ;-)
190. Here Mayo describes the reason for this letter: To inform the Free Scientologists that he is their highest tech terminal.
191. This we have to (?) believe him since I could not find anything from LRH in writing about this. The title "Snr C/S Flag" for David Mayo first shows up in the following BTBs: BTB 10 April 1977 PSYCHOSIS RESEARCH CASE 1, BTB 11 April 1977 PSYCHOSIS RESEARCH CASE 2, BTB 12 April 1977 PSYCHOSIS RESEARCH CASE 3, BTB 13 April 1977 PSYCHOSIS RESEARCH CASE 4, BTB 14 April 1977 PSYCHOSIS RESEARCH CASE 5, BTB 15 April 1977 PSYCHOSIS RESEARCH CASE 6, etc. These are all references from the expanded dianetics pack of May 1977, which had been signed responsibly by David Mayo and the class 12 auditor John Eastment. John Eastment is the only class 12 of the second generation who has remained in the Church until today (no one from the first generation) and taken over the Snr C/S Int position on November 10, 1989 under the RTC. So the first time we found written proof of the claimed Snr C/S Flag position in the bulletins (including the LRH EDs!) was after Ron's disappearance. I don't want to question that Mayo was the Snr C/S of Flag during this time, I am simply disputing that Ron gave him that position until there is proof.
192. For that I also don't know of any proof except for his claim.
193. This claim cannot be proved by anything except his claim. At the same time, this claim answers the big question that was going around among Scientologists: "Where exactly is Ron", he had not been seen in public at least since 1976!
194. Only with the HCOB 13. Dez. 1978R revised 24 SEPTEMBER 1979 PC SET-UPS AND C/S 53, the position of Snr C/S Int is mentioned for the first time in the red Volumes with the abbreviation DM. Then again in the HCO B 4 SEPTEMBER 1979 FYING RUDS IN CRAMMING and HCO B 21 DECEMBER 1979 AUDITOR ASSIGNMENT POLICIES, CRAMMING ASSIGNMENT POLICIES, as author in both of these HCOBs. However, there is no LRH reference in which Mayo is made Snr C/S Int or in which you can find an explanation on what the rights and duties of an Snr C/S are even supposed to be, since it didn't exist until then.
195. This we also have to believe him. There are no witnesses that he audited Ron in 1978 or that Ron had authorized NOTs. In fact, in his huge NOTs copyright trial against the Church, Mayo was able to claim, without objections (!), that he was the author of NOTs. The Church won this trial but not due to the appeal of Ron's contribution to NOTs but because Mayo used to write down NOTs in the name of the Church as a paid staff member, and according to US copyright law, the copyright belongs to the client! - In the FSB 25.03.2005R How squirrel tech has been made acceptable - NOTs revealed, I have explained in detail that NOTs is a squirrel tech that helped to remove the original OT levels. This FSB should be read in context with this because it clearly shows Mayo's character: A leader of the takeover team under contract of the government.
196. During his life, Ron had always immediately finished his cycles (see the HCOPL 19. Aug. 1959 III How to Handle Work) and published all scientific data. He had a secretary with him for that who typed everything on the same day and put it into distribution. RTC still claims today that there is a huge amount of unpublished materials from which they have been able to take information for their new HCOB's since Ron's official day of death. Therefore, no churchie is surprised that more LRH tech has been published in the 1990s and since 2000 as well. The Free Scientologists are skeptical for a reason. But Mayo wants to palm the same oppressive datum off on the independend Scientologists: Because the "unpublished data" make up a hidden data line which Ron clearly commented on in the HCOB 1 SEPTEMBER 1971 A C/S AS A TRAINING OFFICER - A PROGRAM FOR FLUBLESS AUDITING: „A "Hidden Data Line" is a pretense that certain data exists outside of HCO Bs, books and tapes. It can include "data in HCO Bs is conflicting" and "nowhere does it say how to _______ ". This is deadly and a C/S should work hard to stamp it out.” – For an Snr C/S, such an introduction of a hidden line of data is a real felony and it clearly shows the true side of D. Mayo.
197. About the date of May 16, 1982, so one month later, the already quoted "Criminal Time Track" notes: "Religious Technology Center (RTC) incorporated. L. Ron Hubbard donated all trademarks of Dianetics and Scientology to RTC.“ Two graphologic expertises doubt the authenticity of LRH's signature. Was the letter of appointment of Mayo to come from the same pen? Did he know about it and didn't publish it for that reason?
198. Despite urgent cries of many independend Scientologists, Mayo never published this letter and even denied its existence later on. Thus, he is exposed as a liar. In fact, he did a huge fraud. After all, he claims a position that is not due to him and claims support by LRH that he never received. This is significant for the entire role he played during the takeover. The date is also interesting: It was after the disempowerment of the ED Int Bill Franks, the mission holders, the thousands of SP Declares.
199. This outlook on a reincarnation of LRH on planet Earth contradicts LRH's announcement in "The Hymn of Asia" in which he clarified that he would not come back after this mission. Thus, a fatal attitude is created in the readership: You don't need to do anything except wait considering the downfall of Scientology: because at some point, the "old man" comes back and puts everything right. But Ron has done his job and given a tech to humanity with which it can free itself. Whether or not we take this chance or miss it due to negligence and inactivity is simply up to us: „the price of freedom: constant alertness and the willingness to fight back.“ - By the way: the announced time 20-25 years later was up in 2007 and LRH did not show up.
200. Thus, the fox put itself in charge of the henhouse: It was Mayo who twisted the tech and now "takes on full responsibility" to keep it clean and authentic. We already know this game from the RTC: They are also the guards of the KSW steps 1 to 10. When such a powerful organization guards the cleanliness of the tech, then little Scientologist me doesn't need to watch out any more. This assumption by Mayo and RTC, however, contradicts the HCOPL Keeping Scientology Working: every one is responsible for KSW or Scientology will falter.
201. "His communication line to LRH" is a hidden line of data. Because we have to believe him that he had one, that RTC had one. Factually, there was no communication line from the Scientologists to LRH or from LRH to the Scientologists: since 1973. And at least this is the time of takeover: January 1977. Since then, the law firm Stephen and Sherman Lenske (now special directors of CST, parent organisation to RTC) rules over Scientology.
202. This is what I call "directing of attention". The fact that a takeover of the Church had taken place could not be overlooked any more. It was unclear when it happened. The takeover team, which of course also controls the Free Zone according to the Marchiavelli principle of "divide and conquer" (ideally, you master both parts of the split), preaches 1982 as takeover date! - This is the point in time when the entire technical alter-is had been completed: The clearing course was eliminated, releases were attested as clears, the OT levels had been replaced by NOTs. The power processes and R6EW bridge steps as an "alternative route" were kept from most and dianetics was hidden behind the grades and forbidden for "Clears and OTs". - Now David Mayo had fulfilled his main task of destructing the bridge, and this had to be secured from the independend Scientologists so no one would get back to the original bridge from Ron's era! - So the "highest technical authority" was stamped as martyr (one shall read Mayo's unbelievable story about his RPF in the desert) and he changed to the Free Zone as a hero and also took on – with this writing – the highest tech position over the Free Zone.
203. Today we know there were thousands. All close friends of LRH, almost all highly trained auditors (take a look at the list of class XIIs that I showed in the FSB 9. August 2004 The three Generations of Class XIIs, almost no one remained on post, especially none of the oldtimers.
204. So comparatively late. Most Scientologists had to choose in 1982 on which side they wanted to be. In my opinion, Mayo's switch to the Free Zone was the takeover team's attempt to also keep the Free Zone under their control. And they did not save any staff and even put their own „Snr C/S Int“ into the game.
205. Justifies his "commlag", his delayed appearance.
206. Of course this would be of importance. But he didn't do it. Like the "best C/Ss" of the Church, he used his position to eradicate any resorts to old, functioning tech of the early 70s and to enforce the new, useless tech since 1978.
207. This question had never been asked before 1977: Back then, every grade (and each process on every grade) was audited before someone was able to start on the clearing course. And when one had reached its EP, one achieved Clear. There was no shortcut on this solid and functioning way.
208. See
209. See my FSB 19. February 2005R Bridge to total freedom – a no-game Condition
210. See my FSB 24.02.2004 You can only become Clear on the Clearing-Course and FSB 18. May 2005 There is no natural clear and FSB 2. March 2004 Clears, Clearing-Course and OTs
211. See my FSB 14. Apr 2005R Basis for PCs, auditors and case supervisors - Dianetics
212. See my FSB 17. January 2006 NED Criticism - Rehab Standard Dianetics and also FSB 30. January 2005R Issue I Forget NED! Rehab the Standard Dianetics' Pattern
213. See my FSB 31. March 2005R The Directing of Attention - It’s more blessed to give than receive
214. See my FSB 25. March 2005R How squirrel tech has been made acceptable - NOTs revealed
215. This and a lot more in the FSB 18. Jan. 2002RB Bridge Changes since 1972
216. See my FSB 18. January 2006 How a black bridge is built
217. See my FSB 3. May 2004 Squirrel-Warning about the SHSBC Briefing Course.
218. This essay has already been published by me in a similar way as a-codex.htm on my website on August 18, 2004. The observation of this change was done by others, I simply picked up on it and published it.
219. So the HCOPL 14 OCTOBER 1968 (as in the old OEC 4, page 111), the LRH-Class VIII-lecture Nr. 18 of 14. Okt. 1968, the revised HCOPL 14 OCTOBER 1968R and also the revised HCOPL 14 OCTOBER 1968RA, e.g. on page 1186 of the OEC Volume 4.
220. HCOPL 19. Juni 1980RA probably from 1982
221. It is most likely similar with other course packs from between 1980 and 1982.
222. Still the same lecture as above, also the next quotes on the next page.
223. As an objective process, NED-Serie 3 OBJECTIVE ARC does not belong to dianetics anyway and is only supposed to give the series one more edition so that it actually looks like something.
224. For the special importance of Dianetics, read FSB 14. 4. 2005R Basis for PCs, auditors and case supervisors - Dianetics.
225. DCSI = DIANETICS-CLEAR-SPECIAL-INTENSIVE, the precursors of today's CCRD. Both not from Ron.
226. This would be the uptone version.
227. Here we have the tone level of fear.
228. This is the 1.1er: He still follows his goal but with hidden means.
229. Probably a kind of tone scaling: "Oh what a nice kitty!" This not-is-ness of danger, however, only makes the condition worse. If Otto keeps walking up the stairs day by day ignoring the panther, he will sooner or later simply get eaten by it.
230. Tone scale of apathy. You give up and let yourself get eaten.
231. If there should really be a natural clear, then it would most likely mitigate the conditions of the people with a life's work of similar size as that of LRH. But even LRH claims to not have been a natural clear when he says that no one in this universe could have skidded past the R6 bank (see above). So he was also "just" a keyed out clear and OT.
232. Translated from a German proverb
233. Hubbard, LaFayette Ron, 1974, Book "Hymn of Asia", First Printing, Los Angeles, Publications Organization Worldwide.
234. However, you have to trust RTC and David Miscavige because he hasn't proved any of it, he's just made claims. But even old hands of the Freezone are going crazy about the new books: "I have to have these!"
235. International Freezone Association. See
236. is a website worth reading, but afaik he failed to fulfill his promise, no further comparison of the books was published.
237. HCOB 10 August 1973 PTS HANDLING
238. The Scientologist and Dutchman Michel Snoeck has presented extensive details about this mysterious time frame on his website. See the article "The Whereabouts of LRH". 
239. See HCO B January 24, 1977 TECH CORRECTION ROUND-UP
240. This never happened before, that some revision of the tech lead to the invalidation of the certs of the trained auditors in this subject! This is the basic on a chain of invalidation of certificates, later the Golden Age of Tech and such also stopped many auditors from auditing: the real purpose of such „revisions“.
241. For the rehabilitation of Standard Dianetics and the extensive reasoning of my allegations, I have written 19 FSBs that are summarized in the DIANETICS AUDITOR REHABILITATION SERIES. A MUST read for every NED auditor.
242. "Know then that: 1. there is no haphazard blowing of Bank 2. no item blows out of context 3. there are no prior holes blown in the Bank for anyone, no matter what the nature of any prior auditing might have been, until the item has actually been ran." This, for example, is what Ron says in the Clearing Course Booklet of September 1965 about the items of the basic-basics that are audited on the CC.
243. Please also compare the HCOB 05.08.65 Release Stages in which Ron explicitly describes this situation.
244. DCSI = Dianetics Clear Special Intensive – The precursor of today's CCRD = Clear Certainty Rundown. The purpose of this program is to let a release attest as clear. At the focus of the rundown, a former release condition is searched for and rehabilitated with date & locate.
245. My non-confidential studies regarding Clear and the OT levels I have published in the 18 FSBs of the ALTER-IS OF CLEARING AND OT-SERIES. There are more confidential FSBs about the located Alter-Is on OT II and III.
246. "almost" because Expanded Dianetics, Power, Power Plus, R6EW and CC were usually left out. But until the end of the 90s, grades 0 to 4 and ARC-SW were at least introduced to people before they were allowed onto the solo levels.
247. Quoted from the Grade Chart in the book "What is Scientology?", first edition 1978.
249. Ron's most important achievements can especially be seen in the processes that really and finally erase (as opposed to the processes that only keyout): Dianetics, Clearing Course, OT II (the GPMs) and OT III (Dianetics was originally used there too).
250. In a spectacular copyright process in a US court, David Mayo argued that he was the sole author of the NOTs-HCOBs and the Church did not deny it: Because Mayo has fulfilled this task as an employee of the Church and that is why the copyrights belong to the Church and not to Mayo. More to Mayo and NOTS on the already mentioned website of Snoeck.
251. Among those are mental diseases, total amnesia, deaths due to cancer, suicides, total paralysis, coma, severe heart attacks, perforations of the gut and many more. And that among at least 50% of the Scientologists on NOTS! Hidden under the Confidentiality of the OT-Levels. No one wants to spread Entheta!
252. MIT= Massachusetts Institute of Technology. A US "Think Tank".
253. Michael Snoeck has also collected data about this on his website. Among other things, there is a report in the Advance! Issue 53 from July/August 1978 OTs IN ACTION – EXPLORING THE ABILITIES OF MAN – AN INTERVIEW WITH INGO SWANN. See
254. The trustee of the LRH heritage. This wasn't handled by Mary-Sue Hubbard or one of his children, no: LRH apparently only trusted a stranger with his inheritance.
255. Spurlock is a Wog-lawyer and belongs to the group of lawyers who control the Church through CST. Whoever actually hired these attorneys will probably remain a mystery. Ron definitely wasn't so credulous.
256. A post that didn't exist until then and isn't even allowed to exist according to the relevant LRH references.
257. Details about this coup in my FSB March 25, 2005 HOW SQUIRREL TECH HAS BEEN MADE ACCEPTABLE: NOTs REVEALED.
258. Quote from "Hymn of Asia", 1st paragraph. ibidem.
259. At least today, nearly 30 years after LRHs official date of death, we know that L. Ron Hubbard did not reincarnate to complete his work. We would have heard about this. His work was already completed in 1972, we just have to apply it in its original version.
260. RPF=Rehabilitation Project Force. A highly disputed project supposedly from LRH, but actually not, into which Sea Org Members get placed who have been disgraced.
261. This is the bridge area between R6EW and OT III completion included. In this non-interference-zone no other auditing may take place so that the person can concentrate and quickly get through these solo actions without getting into any Q&A.
262. A revealing anomaly: a simple training course becomes an entire OT level. Up to then, the respective training had always been an integral part of the solo level, e.g. with R6EW, CC, OT I, OT II, OT III. But how else are you supposed to make four different levels out of the simple squirrel product NOTS?
263. On
264. This is my personal, successful method. You can also go earlier-similar if the TA gets too high: above 4.0. If necessary, the value must be individually adjusted for the PC: for some PCs 4.0 is not particularly high and the incidents not too solid so you have to set a higher value. Others usually have a TA close to 2.0 if they're keyed out. Then 3.5 can be pretty high.
266. It is not confirmed that this issue is by LRH. We have no last page of that ref. Why? ‘GO 1206’, 22 June 1974 “The Snow White Program”  by Fred Hare issued a whole 14 months later claims that but what do we know?
268, 269. Later I found more data on Natural Clear and wrote FSB 18.05.2005 There exists no Natural Clear
270. A year later I could attest the CC with a biiiig win, I was finally Clear!
271. In the sense of a poor man
272. Just like all other LOC students. Since everyone applied the squirrel tech, whatever had to happen did happen: they destroyed each other. The LOC ended catastrophically and represents a delivery wreckage of the Church. Although there is a lot of good LRH tech in the LOC, the RPEC brought the students down enough so that the LOC turned out to be a flop. To my knowledge, thus it is not being delivered anymore nowadays.
273. The so-called R6 bank that is audited on the Clearing-Course. The PC has to solo-audit an hour a day for about a year in order to confront and dissolve the rather big load in these implants bit by bit.
274. Sorry, I have no English version of this 1998-revision of that RPEC-HCOPL at hand, only 2 different German issues. If you have one, please send a copy to me. Thus I translated this back from my german version which says: Sie wendet die Formel auf jenen nicht gehandhabten Zustand an, nicht auf eine gegenwärtige Situation oder irgendetwas anderes. Sie führt eine Formel durch, die früher nicht angewandt wurde, oder schließt eine alte unvollständige Formel ab. Lassen Sie sie jeden Schritt der Formel durchführen. ... Manchmal erfordern es die Formeln, dass die Person irgendwo hingehen und etwas tun muss, um den Zustand zu handhaben. Bei einer Person aus der Öffentlichkeit ist es vielleicht notwendig, dass sie in ihr Büro oder nach Hause gehen muss, um eine Formel abzuschließen. Nun, Sie lassen sie das direkt durchführen, nachdem Sie festgelegt haben, dass es das ist, was es braucht, und dass sie weiß, was sie tun wird. Sie will vielleicht Wiedergutmachung leisten, mit jemandem in Kommunikation gehen oder etwas in Ordnung bringen. Offensichtlich muss sie die notwendigen Schritte durchführen, um durch den Zustand hindurchzukommen. In the 1982-issue the step 5 is this: “If it was a correct condition, the person must now complete that incomplete formula. He is applying the formula to … unhandled condition, not a present time situation or anything else. He is completing an old incomplete formula. Have the person do each step of the formula.
275. Thanks to the RONS Org, they made available a German translation of the 1968 version of this book: /LRH TECH PRIMÄR/Bücher und Kurse/Bücher-deutsch/BUCH DER FALLABHILFEN.DOC But just this preface was left out!!! Also no hint to the fact, that they left this preface out. Of course this is not by mischance, as the RONS Org let people attest Clear without any Clearing Course on a regular basis. But they claim to deliver "100% Standard Tech by LRH"!
276. Contrary to the rest of this text here I have no LRH-quotes, as I don’t have access to a transcript of this tape.
277. a big error by Mike: that was actually in 1973, during the 10 missing months. So obviously this was not written by LRH. Mike was part of the GO in the 1970ies, so he still has not confronted, how he and others were duped into cooperation with the enemy. Instead he prefers to blame LRH, whereas LRH was already gone. Commentary by Andreas Gross
278. comment by Andreas Gross: this was the stable data for Mike, given by CBR. He did not question this, although all his data collection hints to a different viewpoint: Ron was imprisoned in December 1972. Thus the way was free for the US-intelligence to take over Scientology. They mocked up LRH with a Doppelgänger, with faked signatures, with faked production, with photoshopped Photos, even with faked audio lectures and a faked death in 1986 - How can one not see all these outpoints!!!
279. right!
280. Yes, that was intruduced in the last decades by RTC with the help of the "LRH Comm". Issue Authority (IA)is needed for publications of an org by its local LRH Comm. But today they demand IA for comm by publics too or for publications of CCHR-groups or other public activities: even when you want to do a press release against psychs in Germany, you have to translate that into English, send it to OSA Int and wait for an answer. Stopps! Not supported by LRH-Policy
281. false and suppressive application, not based on LRH-Policy
282. false and suppressive application, not based on LRH-Policy. This may be correct in the Academy, that you avoid discussions and use word clearing instead, but of course outside of that you can discuss as much as you want.
283. created 1979 by RTRC
284. newly introduced by RTC, as LRH cancelled the disconnection policy.
285, 286, 287. not based on LRH-Policy
288. not based on LRH-Policy. You should not mix Scn-Tech with other practices, but you can even do other practices beside Scientology
289. RPF is not by LRH but by the takeover team to suppress Sea Org members with false accusations
290. as the "LRH-lectures" for this Intro RD are not available, I do not believe, that they are from LRH. They are dated 1975, after LRH was imprisoned
291. supressive, but not based on Policy
292. during the time LRH was in control, we had lot of secondary literature, i.e. the book "Emotions" by RUTH MINSHULL was part of HQS
293. no reach & withdraw as a salesperson learns in Scientology: only reach, reach, reach. That is out tech and leads to the intended reaction: withdraw by the public
294. that was by intent
295. Everyone in the Orgs knows lots of examples of this black-Scientology behaviour