The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[CarmeloOrchards]

Running 8C by telephone

tonight, on a PC on a different continent, in the morning for him, I got him line charging where we couldn't continue. I have never done CCHs by phone before. I have to say it works real well.

here is the success story he sent to a list he's on:

Recently there was quite a correspondence on the list about telephone auditing, which astounded me, both because I have received very good results from telephone auditing, so I have no doubt it can get results, and it seemed a bit as though the basics of auditing are no longer taught (or perhaps remembered).

I got a surprise today, which I am glad to report. As a pc I was floundering around, sort of depressed, with masses of ptps that would not lie down ( ). So we dropped down to objectives, namely Open Procedure by 8c. It was pleasant to follow the auditors commands (cordless phone in one hand), in a room I was familiar with, and noticeably, all those ptps went out of awareness. After about half an hour I had a line charge. Lasted at least five minutes. So strong I could not talk to the auditor, and there were also tears running out of my eyes.

It would have been impossible to go on with the session Happy me!

 

[Veda]

I think that it was DM who took out Mayo because he was a threat to his power structure. LRH seemed to look to Mayo as a technical asset who would be the senior tech terminal for several decades until LRH came back. When DM got control of LRH's incoming and outgoing communications it seemed to be extremely simple for DM to oust anyone who was a threat to him. Mayo, Jane Kember, Pat Broeker, Captain Bill Robertson, Diana Hubbard, Mary Sue Hubbard and others seemed firmly entrenched in Scientology Management with strong bases of power and yet DM was able to instantly get rid of any and all of them with surprising ease.

Here again is another example of LRH not making things go right at his life's end. All of his closest family, friends and tech and management leaders were easily gotten rid of right before LRH's eyes and LRH was not able to stand up for or protect any of them from DM.

Lakey

Firstly, Pat Broeker was ousted after Hubbard was dead. Secondly, Hubbard was able to stand up and protect anyone he pleased, if he cared to.

Not giving the "Old Man" bad news (so as to keep him from exploding and making life miserable for the bearer of that bad news) didn't start with Miscavige. Many people around Hubbard told Hubbard what he wanted to hear, or softened or modified a message to protect themselves in one way or another.

With few exceptions, the people closest to Hubbard - from 1950 forward - were attacked and disposed of by Hubbard. (remember when Hubbard made John McMaster the "Pope" of Scientology?) Sometimes he would use another person to do it and keep his distance. None of these patterns were new with Miscavige.

Hubbard was not "in a coma" or "under house arrest" in 1980, 81, or 82. There was nothing keeping him from picking up a telephone and calling any of the named parties (and also any of the Mission Holders) and talking with them. He choose not to because he didn't really care.

His priorities were 1) his own safety and 2) getting the money, and he created a buffer (of a handful of people) between himself and the rest of Scientology and the world.

The rest of Scientology didn't understand that the "buffer" was an extension of Hubbard, and that an attack on the buffer (usually) would be regarded by Hubbard as an attack on himself, and on his 1) Safety and 2) schemes to get the money. Other things were important to Hubbard but these two were paramount.

David Mayo's views evolved over time. The cult-conditioning took years to wear off.

For example, it took years before David Mayo could confront what he - deep down - must have known (since 1978/79), that Hubbard's "discovery" of (ubiquitous) "Dianetic Clears" was PR and money-motivated. In 1983, the thought had not yet occurred to him. No, at that point (at least it appeared) that he regarded Hubbard as still being his leader and his friend, and that the problem was others had contaminated his comm line with Hubbard.

When I spoke with Mayo in 1984 and 1985 his views had already begun to shift somewhat.

Mayo wrote "The Harmonics of Clear" HCOB in 1980 or 1981, and Hubbard saw that as an attack on his using the "Almost everyone is already Clear!"-gimmick to create a flood of new "Clears" who would go "up lines" (and out of the Missions) with their money.

It didn't require a false report to Hubbard to make him explode. He just needed to be shown that HCOB written by Mayo, an HCOB which undermined the Clear-gimmick that Hubbard was using (and that Mayo would recognize, finally, years later.)

If someone cares about David Mayo's views, then that person should take the time to examine all his available comments, mindful of when these comments were made.

(I know the Freezone loves to quote Mayo from '83, when Mayo was still largely under Hubbard's spell, but it's misleading if taken by itself.)

Changing the subject slightly, do you really think that Mary Sue was removed against her husband's wishes? Hubbard couldn't have picked up a phone and called her?

And the first Mission Holder's Conference - As I recall - Ray Kemp (who also, mistakenly, thought Hubbard was his "friend"), was then suing the Church of Scientology, and was an invited guest. At that time also, the FBI raid docs had been released by court order, and some of the Mission Holders were reading them. People were still connecting the dots at that time, and Hubbard knew this, and his - to put it mildly - "withholds were missed." It didn't require false reports to make Hubbard see the first Mission Holder's Conference as a "mutiny." And it didn't require false reports to make Hubbard decide to loot the Missions at the 2nd Mission Holder's Conference.

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

What nostalgia that film clip brings back. 1941, all those 1930's and early 40's cars. We had a 1941 Chevy, a green four door. Toddler Lakey was driving around in those type of cars on those streets as a 1 1/2 year old in L.A. in 1941.

We had a 1946 DeSoto. I remember sleeping on the backseat transmission hump on long drives.

I loved the movie the Producers with Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder as Max and Leo. Was it Dick Shane or something like that who played Hitler in the musical.

Dick Shawn. He was in a Mad Mad Mad Mad World too.

"Baby, the Führer never said 'Baby'"

What a riot that was! Springtime for Hubbard, somebody could play the Commodore in a full Navy Dress Commodore's uniform.... Just think,

"Springtime for Scientology,
Winter for psychiatry in France
We're going to stomp out those mind altering drugs
and kick the Christians in the pants."

Great start on the words! Would you like to write the songs?

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

a column I copied and pasted

Barney: TV theme songs have sadly become relics of the past

By Chuck Barney
Contra Costa Times
Posted: 04/29/2010 12:38:00 AM PDT

"Ode to TV Theme Songs"
(To the tune of "The Ballad of Gilligan's Island")
Just sit right back and you'll hear a tale
a tale of an artful craft
that started out so long ago
but then got the shaft
TV theme songs were a hit with fans
The lyrics fun and shrewd
They got us all to sing along
as they set the mood
as they set the mood
But prime time started getting rough
The TV songs were tossed
If not for the efforts of a fearless few
the theme songs would be lost
They'd all sound like "Lost"

Excuse my lyrical hack job, but I was inspired to write that wan little
ditty after being bummed out by some recent news: The TV Academy is dumping the Emmy Awards category that honors main title songs, effective next year.

It's a move that, as Michael Schneider of "Variety" wrote, essentially drives the "final nail in the TV theme song coffin."

And how do we respond to this bit of Emmy buzz kill? By posing the same question that the "Family Guy" theme song raises: "Where are those good ol' fashioned values on which we used to rely?"

Of course, the Academy is simply reflecting current reality. TV theme songs, once a vibrant piece of pop culture, have been on the wane for years as networks experimented with ways to keep viewers from switching channels. Their mission? Get into and out of shows as quickly as possible and create a seamless blend of programming. (Oh, and cram as many commercials in there while you're at it).

So that leaves no time to melodically run down the story of "a lovely lady who was bringing up three very lovely girls," or of a hardworking family movin' on up "to a deluxe apartment in the sky."

Consequently, shows began ditching their theme songs, or chopping them to bits. The latter trend was taken to the extreme by "Lost," with a theme "song" consisting of exactly one ominous, drawn-out note.

It's sad. Just sad. Anyone who grew up on television knows that theme music is an inextricable part of the experience. An opening line, or just a stanza or so, immediately gets us singing or humming and transports us to someplace special.

Deftly rendered, a good theme song can reveal insights into a beloved character. Before meeting Mary Richards, for example, who knew that she had a magical power to "turn the world on with her smile" — or that she could "take a nothing day and suddenly make it all seem worthwhile"?
Some theme songs struck emotional chords, appealing to basic human needs. "Cheers" had a hunch that we wanted to take a break from our frazzled lives and get away to a place "where everybody knows your name." And "Friends" realized that, when it seems like we're stuck in second gear, we want someone special to declare, "I'll be there for you when the rain starts to pour."

Several themes offered a quick plotline refresher course, just in case we forgot. To wit: the "Gilligan's Island" ballad told of a "tale of a fateful trip that started from this tropic port aboard this tiny ship," and then proceeded to run down each stranded castaway. Can you imagine "Lost" trying the same thing?

A few theme songs could be downright silly, mangling the language — I'd never heard my home state referred to as "Califor ny," as in "The Beverly Hillbillies" opener — or pouring forth crazy talk. I'm still trying to figure out what Laverne and Shirley were gabbing about when they uttered, "Schlemiel, schimazel, hasenpfeffer incorporated."

But many theme songs of the past exerted a powerful pull without saying a word. The Ventures' opening strains of "Hawaii Five-O" had me wanting to jump aboard a plane to McGarrett's tropical turf ("Book it, Danno"). And the instantly recognizable title tune of "The X-Files" can still send chills down my spine.

TV theme songs aren't entirely a lost art. You just have to look hard to find them. The best these days are usually on premium cable. A standout example: the wickedly dark "True Blood" title song (Jace Everett's "Bad Things") brilliantly sets the tone for HBO's vampire drama.

Mostly, though, TV theme songs are dusty relics of the past. When played back now, they conjure up amazingly warm memories and have us echoing the title of a little tune once croaked out by Archie and Edith Bunker.
"Those Were the Days."

Contact Chuck Barney at [email protected]. Read his TV blog at http://blogs.mercurynews.com/aei/category/tv and follow him at http://twitter.com/chuckbarney.

What TV show had the best theme song?
Cheers
All in the Family
The Brady Bunch
The Jeffersons
Golden Girls
Friends
Gilligan's Island
X-Files
Dragnet
Twilight Zone
Happy Days
The Flintstones
The Sopranos
Green Acres
Mary Tyler Moore
Other
None of the above. I hated them all
online
What TV show had the best theme song? Take our poll at ContraCostaTimes.com or InsideBayArea.com.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYrsDT02OcE&feature=related

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

TGIF

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLxObV22gf8&feature=related

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Firstly, Pat Broeker was ousted after Hubbard was dead. Secondly, Hubbard was able to stand up and protect anyone he pleased, if he cared to.

Not giving the "Old Man" bad news (so as to keep him from exploding and making life miserable for the bearer of that bad news) didn't start with Miscavige. Many people around Hubbard told Hubbard what he wanted to hear, or softened or modified a message to protect themselves in one way or another.

With few exceptions, the people closest to Hubbard - from 1950 forward - were attacked and disposed of by Hubbard. (remember when Hubbard made John McMaster the "Pope" of Scientology?) Sometimes he would use another person to do it and keep his distance. None of these patterns were new with Miscavige.

Hubbard was not "in a coma" or "under house arrest" in 1980, 81, or 82. There was nothing keeping him from picking up a telephone and calling any of the named parties (and also any of the Mission Holders) and talking with them. He choose not to because he didn't really care.

His priorities were 1) his own safety and 2) getting the money, and he created a buffer (of a handful of people) between himself and the rest of Scientology and the world.

The rest of Scientology didn't understand that the "buffer" was an extension of Hubbard, and that an attack on the buffer (usually) would be regarded by Hubbard as an attack on himself, and on his 1) Safety and 2) schemes to get the money. Other things were important to Hubbard but these two were paramount.

David Mayo's views evolved over time. The cult-conditioning took years to wear off.

For example, it took years before David Mayo could confront what he - deep down - must have known (since 1978/79), that Hubbard's "discovery" of (ubiquitous) "Dianetic Clears" was PR and money-motivated. In 1983, the thought had not yet occurred to him. No, at that point (at least it appeared) that he regarded Hubbard as still being his leader and his friend, and that the problem was others had contaminated his comm line with Hubbard.

When I spoke with Mayo in 1984 and 1985 his views had already begun to shift somewhat.

Mayo wrote "The Harmonics of Clear" HCOB in 1980 or 1981, and Hubbard saw that as an attack on his using the "Almost everyone is already Clear!"-gimmick to create a flood of new "Clears" who would go "up lines" (and out of the Missions) with their money.

It didn't require a false report to Hubbard to make him explode. He just needed to be shown that HCOB written by Mayo, an HCOB which undermined the Clear-gimmick that Hubbard was using (and that Mayo would recognize, finally, years later.)

If someone cares about David Mayo's views, then that person should take the time to examine all his available comments, mindful of when these comments were made.

(I know the Freezone loves to quote Mayo from '83, when Mayo was still largely under Hubbard's spell, but it's misleading if taken by itself.)

Changing the subject slightly, do you really think that Mary Sue was removed against her husband's wishes? Hubbard couldn't have picked up a phone and called her?

And the first Mission Holder's Conference - As I recall - Ray Kemp (who also, mistakenly, thought Hubbard was his "friend"), was then suing the Church of Scientology, and was an invited guest. At that time also, the FBI raid docs had been released by court order, and some of the Mission Holders were reading them. People were still connecting the dots at that time, and Hubbard knew this, and his - to put it mildly - "withholds were missed." It didn't require false reports to make Hubbard see the first Mission Holder's Conference as a "mutiny." And it didn't require false reports to make Hubbard decide to loot the Missions at the 2nd Mission Holder's Conference.

Veda, You Rock!

 

[Enthetan]

With few exceptions, the people closest to Hubbard - from 1950 forward - were attacked and disposed of by Hubbard. (remember when Hubbard made John McMaster the "Pope" of Scientology?) Sometimes he would use another person to do it and keep his distance. None of these patterns were new with Miscavige.

Hubbard was not "in a coma" or "under house arrest" in 1980, 81, or 82. There was nothing keeping him from picking up a telephone and calling any of the named parties (and also any of the Mission Holders) and talking with them. He choose not to because he didn't really care.

His priorities were 1) his own safety and 2) getting the money, and he created a buffer (of a handful of people) between himself and the rest of Scientology and the world.

The rest of Scientology didn't understand that the "buffer" was an extension of Hubbard, and that an attack on the buffer (usually) would be regarded by Hubbard as an attack on himself, and on his 1) Safety and 2) schemes to get the money. Other things were important to Hubbard but these two were paramount.

David Mayo's views evolved over time. The cult-conditioning took years to wear off.

I agree with your viewpoint. Hubbard was getting crazier and more paranoid with every passing year, and less able to maintain an amiable "front" persona. This, I think, was a major contributing reason for his seclusion.

On the subject of "theme songs" elsewhere in this thread, how does this sound as a candidate for the ESMB theme song?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrd2xf5DIlU

 

[lkwdblds]

Vintage Veda!!

Firstly, Pat Broeker was ousted after Hubbard was dead. Secondly, Hubbard was able to stand up and protect anyone he pleased, if he cared to.

Not giving the "Old Man" bad news (so as to keep him from exploding and making life miserable for the bearer of that bad news) didn't start with Miscavige. Many people around Hubbard told Hubbard what he wanted to hear, or softened or modified a message to protect themselves in one way or another.

With few exceptions, the people closest to Hubbard - from 1950 forward - were attacked and disposed of by Hubbard. (remember when Hubbard made John McMaster the "Pope" of Scientology?) Sometimes he would use another person to do it and keep his distance. None of these patterns were new with Miscavige.

Hubbard was not "in a coma" or "under house arrest" in 1980, 81, or 82. There was nothing keeping him from picking up a telephone and calling any of the named parties (and also any of the Mission Holders) and talking with them. He choose not to because he didn't really care.

His priorities were 1) his own safety and 2) getting the money, and he created a buffer (of a handful of people) between himself and the rest of Scientology and the world.

The rest of Scientology didn't understand that the "buffer" was an extension of Hubbard, and that an attack on the buffer (usually) would be regarded by Hubbard as an attack on himself, and on his 1) Safety and 2) schemes to get the money. Other things were important to Hubbard but these two were paramount.

David Mayo's views evolved over time. The cult-conditioning took years to wear off.

For example, it took years before David Mayo could confront what he - deep down - must have known (since 1978/79), that Hubbard's "discovery" of (ubiquitous) "Dianetic Clears" was PR and money-motivated. In 1983, the thought had not yet occurred to him. No, at that point (at least it appeared) that he regarded Hubbard as still being his leader and his friend, and that the problem was others had contaminated his comm line with Hubbard.

When I spoke with Mayo in 1984 and 1985 his views had already begun to shift somewhat.

Mayo wrote "The Harmonics of Clear" HCOB in 1980 or 1981, and Hubbard saw that as an attack on his using the "Almost everyone is already Clear!"-gimmick to create a flood of new "Clears" who would go "up lines" (and out of the Missions) with their money.

It didn't require a false report to Hubbard to make him explode. He just needed to be shown that HCOB written by Mayo, an HCOB which undermined the Clear-gimmick that Hubbard was using (and that Mayo would recognize, finally, years later.)

If someone cares about David Mayo's views, then that person should take the time to examine all his available comments, mindful of when these comments were made.

(I know the Freezone loves to quote Mayo from '83, when Mayo was still largely under Hubbard's spell, but it's misleading if taken by itself.)

Changing the subject slightly, do you really think that Mary Sue was removed against her husband's wishes? Hubbard couldn't have picked up a phone and called her?

And the first Mission Holder's Conference - As I recall - Ray Kemp (who also, mistakenly, thought Hubbard was his "friend"), was then suing the Church of Scientology, and was an invited guest. At that time also, the FBI raid docs had been released by court order, and some of the Mission Holders were reading them. People were still connecting the dots at that time, and Hubbard knew this, and his - to put it mildly - "withholds were missed." It didn't require false reports to make Hubbard see the first Mission Holder's Conference as a "mutiny." And it didn't require false reports to make Hubbard decide to loot the Missions at the 2nd Mission Holder's Conference.

Thanks Veda for your outstanding post!! I missed making the distinction that when DM got rid of Pat Broeker, LRH was already dead. My Bad! - that was really stupid of me.

I have a lot of attention on the time period from the first Mission Holders' meeting to the period when LRH's death was announced (an event which I attended with my wife) and then onward to when DM got rid of Broker. It seems to me that these were the years which hold the key to the operations and motives of today's C of S. When I first arrived on ESMB I knew nothing and still believed that LRH was a force for good. That naive notion was soon debunked and then I realized that LRH was complicit in a lot of the chicanery. perhaps all of it.

CHICANERY - "TO DECEIVE SOMEONE (USUALLY TO EXTRACT MONEY FROM THEM). - If ever one word described the workings of an Organization or a Church, the word "chicanery" describes C of S "to a tee."

Your post really helped clean up this area for me. The first document which started to open my eyes was Mike Goldstein's 18 chapter story having to do with the Mission Holders' conferences. One area which is still a bit fuzzy to me is, how severely were LRH's thinking processes messed up with the various strokes which he had from 1979 on. If I understand you correctly, you are implying that LRH's thinking processes were basically intact pretty much up until at least 1983. Am I correct in making this assumption?

Applying your corrections to my post, it seems to me that before his death, LRH was using chicanery against everyone in C of S, staff and public, trying to distance himself from various events and using DM to forward this illusion. After his death, DM picked up the ball and became a Master of Chicanery in his own right and used the ability to make a copy of LRH's signature plus his decision to become a Notary. A Notary is someone legally empowered to witness signatures and certify a document's validity.

The simple and inexpensive step of becoming a Notary can circumvent all checks and balances in a system which is being run as a dictatorship. The only defence against the simple tools of forging a signature and then notarizing the signature is to bring in a handwriting expert to verify said signature and while this is possible in a democracy, in a dictatorship, the dictator will simply kick the person demanding the signature verification out of the group and if that presents difficulties, he can apply leverage and force a legal settlement with the person.

Oh yes, why am I so interested in all this. I, probably like Veda and many others on ESMB, have a compulsion or a command or some sort of basic purpose to know how things came about. The force driving this has curiousity in it as a component but it is more than that and represents some sort of need to get to the bottom of things.
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

We had a 1946 DeSoto. I remember sleeping on the backseat transmission hump on long drives.

Yea, the De Soto, now that brings back memories! It was a Chrysler product, above the Dodge in price but a little below the Chrysler. It was kind of a rival for the Buick. I know that most taxi cabs in the late 40's and early 50's were De Soto's You see all these Yellow De Soto taxi cabs in the old Movies such as that Christmas movie from 1948 which is often showed on TV during the Christmas season. Of course, it became Groucho's sponsor for many years on his TV quiz show of the 50's "You Bet Your Life".

Dick Shawn. He was in a Mad Mad Mad Mad World too.

Dick Shawn would high five his, "Little Joe" who was propaganda minister Joeseph Goebbles.

My Brother, one of the funniest comics I ever saw came up with a line which was a riot. There should have been a scene where Premiere Tojo comes all the way from Japan to discuss war tactics with Dick Shawn and Dick Shawn, in his Hitler costume greets him with the line, "Tojo, give me some Mojo!" and they slap palms in some kind of hip handshake.


"Baby, the Führer never said 'Baby'"

Yes, the author of the play, wearing his Nazi helmut kept saying that line.

Great start on the words! Would you like to write the songs?

Well, the Springtime for Hubbard song would be the exact same melody as Springtime for Hitler. Of course those beautiful female Broadway dancers would change from their Nazi like uniforms, except with short skirts, to Sea Org uniforms and instead of forming a Swastika in the course of their dance, they would form the ARC Triangle.

Since there is no Goebbles, I would write in a part for DM. Hubbard and DM both in Navy attire would high five and discuss tactics but instead of a war map, they would have a map of all the Ideal Orgs. They could be doing a Battle Plan as to how they would send in reinforcements to retake Germany for Scientology.
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

TV theme Songs .......

Barney: TV theme songs have sadly become relics of the past

By Chuck Barney
Contra Costa Times
Posted: 04/29/2010 12:38:00 AM PDT

"Ode to TV Theme Songs"
(To the tune of "The Ballad of Gilligan's Island")
Just sit right back and you'll hear a tale
a tale of an artful craft
that started out so long ago
but then got the shaft
TV theme songs were a hit with fans
The lyrics fun and shrewd
They got us all to sing along
as they set the mood
as they set the mood
But prime time started getting rough
The TV songs were tossed
If not for the efforts of a fearless few
the theme songs would be lost
They'd all sound like "Lost"

Excuse my lyrical hack job, but I was inspired to write that wan little
ditty after being bummed out by some recent news: The TV Academy is dumping the Emmy Awards category that honors main title songs, effective next year.

It's a move that, as Michael Schneider of "Variety" wrote, essentially drives the "final nail in the TV theme song coffin."

And how do we respond to this bit of Emmy buzz kill? By posing the same question that the "Family Guy" theme song raises: "Where are those good ol' fashioned values on which we used to rely?"

Of course, the Academy is simply reflecting current reality. TV theme songs, once a vibrant piece of pop culture, have been on the wane for years as networks experimented with ways to keep viewers from switching channels. Their mission? Get into and out of shows as quickly as possible and create a seamless blend of programming. (Oh, and cram as many commercials in there while you're at it).

So that leaves no time to melodically run down the story of "a lovely lady who was bringing up three very lovely girls," or of a hardworking family movin' on up "to a deluxe apartment in the sky."

Consequently, shows began ditching their theme songs, or chopping them to bits. The latter trend was taken to the extreme by "Lost," with a theme "song" consisting of exactly one ominous, drawn-out note.

It's sad. Just sad. Anyone who grew up on television knows that theme music is an inextricable part of the experience. An opening line, or just a stanza or so, immediately gets us singing or humming and transports us to someplace special.

Deftly rendered, a good theme song can reveal insights into a beloved character. Before meeting Mary Richards, for example, who knew that she had a magical power to "turn the world on with her smile" — or that she could "take a nothing day and suddenly make it all seem worthwhile"?
Some theme songs struck emotional chords, appealing to basic human needs. "Cheers" had a hunch that we wanted to take a break from our frazzled lives and get away to a place "where everybody knows your name." And "Friends" realized that, when it seems like we're stuck in second gear, we want someone special to declare, "I'll be there for you when the rain starts to pour."

Several themes offered a quick plotline refresher course, just in case we forgot. To wit: the "Gilligan's Island" ballad told of a "tale of a fateful trip that started from this tropic port aboard this tiny ship," and then proceeded to run down each stranded castaway. Can you imagine "Lost" trying the same thing?

A few theme songs could be downright silly, mangling the language — I'd never heard my home state referred to as "Califor ny," as in "The Beverly Hillbillies" opener — or pouring forth crazy talk. I'm still trying to figure out what Laverne and Shirley were gabbing about when they uttered, "Schlemiel, schimazel, hasenpfeffer incorporated."

But many theme songs of the past exerted a powerful pull without saying a word. The Ventures' opening strains of "Hawaii Five-O" had me wanting to jump aboard a plane to McGarrett's tropical turf ("Book it, Danno"). And the instantly recognizable title tune of "The X-Files" can still send chills down my spine.

TV theme songs aren't entirely a lost art. You just have to look hard to find them. The best these days are usually on premium cable. A standout example: the wickedly dark "True Blood" title song (Jace Everett's "Bad Things") brilliantly sets the tone for HBO's vampire drama.

Mostly, though, TV theme songs are dusty relics of the past. When played back now, they conjure up amazingly warm memories and have us echoing the title of a little tune once croaked out by Archie and Edith Bunker.
"Those Were the Days."

Contact Chuck Barney at [email protected]. Read his TV blog at http://blogs.mercurynews.com/aei/category/tv and follow him at http://twitter.com/chuckbarney.

What TV show had the best theme song?
Cheers
All in the Family
The Brady Bunch
The Jeffersons
Golden Girls
Friends
Gilligan's Island
X-Files
Dragnet
Twilight Zone
Happy Days
The Flintstones
The Sopranos
Green Acres
Mary Tyler Moore
Other
None of the above. I hated them all
online
What TV show had the best theme song? Take our poll at ContraCostaTimes.com or InsideBayArea.com.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYrsDT02OcE&feature=related

In the late 50's, a lot of TV Westerns sprouted up, probably initially spawned by Gunsmoke but then really spawned by Maverick. All of these had theme songs, most of which were very catchy.

Of them all, I liked Johnny Yuma starting Nick Adams the best. - It started out:
"Johnny Yuma was a rebel, he roamed through the West"

"Palladin" staring Richard Boone had a great song, "Palladin oh Palladin oh where do you roam, a kinght without ARMOR, far far from home."

"Wyatt Earp" starring Hugh O'Briend had a great song.

"Batt Masterson" had a decent jingle

Of the ones you list above I like the Twilight Zone theme, Gilligan's Island and Happy Days.

Hey, I just thought of something, CLASSICAL MUSIC WAS REPRESENTED IN THE THEME SONGS OF SHOW:

THE LONE RANGER - The Willian Tell Overture by Rossini.
THE MILTON BERLE COMEDY SHOW way back when TV first started out around 1950 used the Hungarian Rhapsody #2 by Liszt for the Texaco Commercials...."Fire Chief, fill up with Fire Chief...."
A show called TERRY AND THE PIRATES on radio used Wagner's Valkyrie theme, as used by the nude skydivers.
A show on radio called the "FBI IN PEACE AND WAR" used Bizet's L'arlesienne suite as its theme. In fact that theme was used for several shows having to do with war or crime. It is a well knows march like theme.
Lakey

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

VWD!

tonight, on a PC on a different continent, in the morning for him, I got him line charging where we couldn't continue. I have never done CCHs by phone before. I have to say it works real well.

here is the success story he sent to a list he's on:

Recently there was quite a correspondence on the list about telephone auditing, which astounded me, both because I have received very good results from telephone auditing, so I have no doubt it can get results, and it seemed a bit as though the basics of auditing are no longer taught (or perhaps remembered).

I got a surprise today, which I am glad to report. As a pc I was floundering around, sort of depressed, with masses of ptps that would not lie down ( ). So we dropped down to objectives, namely Open Procedure by 8c. It was pleasant to follow the auditors commands (cordless phone in one hand), in a room I was familiar with, and noticeably, all those ptps went out of awareness. After about half an hour I had a line charge. Lasted at least five minutes. So strong I could not talk to the auditor, and there were also tears running out of my eyes.

It would have been impossible to go on with the session Happy me!

Cool, Carmelo

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

Yes!

Veda, You Rock!

Yeah, Veda Rocks!

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

Conceit

I think that it was DM who took out Mayo because he was a threat to his power structure. LRH seemed to look to Mayo as a technical asset who would be the senior tech terminal for several decades until LRH came back. When DM got control of LRH's incoming and outgoing communications it seemed to be extremely simple for DM to oust anyone who was a threat to him. Mayo, Jane Kember, Pat Broeker, Captain Bill Robertson, Diana Hubbard, Mary Sue Hubbard and others seemed firmly entrenched in Scientology Management with strong bases of power and yet DM was able to instantly get rid of any and all of them with surprising ease.

Here again is another example of LRH not making things go right at his life's end. All of his closest family, friends and tech and management leaders were easily gotten rid of right before LRH's eyes and LRH was not able to stand up for or protect any of them from DM.

Hey Facey, I thought we were friends. Do you really think I am conceited? I am not really that way, it is an act I put on when I write under the name Lakey. Lakey has to appear cocky and egotistical or no one will read his stufff, I am actually very humble.
Lakey

Conceit is a permutation of greed and, as El Ron taught us (and Gordon Gekko affirmed), “Greed is good!”

Don't worry, Lakey...no matter what Alex says--or I say, for that matter--I still wuv u.

 

[Enthetan]

"Palladin" staring Richard Boone had a great song, "Palladin oh Palladin oh where do you roam, a kinght without honor, far far from home."

Not to be picky, but the line was "a knight without armor"

Have Gun Will Travel reads the card of a man.
A knight without armor in a savage land.
His fast gun for hire head's the calling wind.
A soldier of fortune is the man called Paladin.

Paladin, Paladin Where do you roam?
Paladin, Paladin, Far, far from home.

He travels on to wherever he must;
A chess knight of silver is his badge of trust.
There are campfire legends that the plainsmen spin
Of the man with the gun,
of the man called Pa-l-l-l-l-a-din

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

To Be Picky

It was "Have Gun Will Travel" not "Paladin".

 

[lkwdblds]

Thanks for the correction

Not to be picky, but the line was "a knight without armor"

Have Gun Will Travel reads the card of a man.
A knight without armor in a savage land.
His fast gun for hire head's the calling wind.
A soldier of fortune is the man called Paladin.

Paladin, Paladin Where do you roam?
Paladin, Paladin, Far, far from home.

He travels on to wherever he must;
A chess knight of silver is his badge of trust.
There are campfire legends that the plainsmen spin
Of the man with the gun,
of the man called Pa-l-l-l-l-a-din

Thanks for the correction. I just decided to do some of those songs from memory and not Google them, but some I did Google. It sounds like Johnny Cash singing the Johnny Yuma song. When you look at it, "a Knight without honor' does not make any sense because Paladin had honor as one of his major traits. He was a hired killer but was selective as to which cases he would accept. A knight without armor makes a lot more sense. On the show being called, "Have Gun will Travel", that did come to my attention and I decided to ignore it. In those old days, whenever someone mentioned the show we almost always referred to it as Paladin. For example, friend asks, "What are you doing tonight and I answer, "I am going to stay home and watch Paladin." On fun stuff like this, I don't feel a need to be a total stickler for accuracy. What do you think, am I wrong?"
Lakey

 

[Blue Spirit]

Good History

Veda, You Rock!

I agree. Veda does real good history writeups which indicate as true, aligning
fully with what I have learned on the net and observed myself.

I would love to get the word to LRH of the extent of what is known about his
secrets. He must know some of it, but not all of it.

 

[Blue Spirit]

Nice Win

tonight, on a PC on a different continent, in the morning for him, I got him line charging where we couldn't continue. I have never done CCHs by phone before. I have to say it works real well.

here is the success story he sent to a list he's on:

Recently there was quite a correspondence on the list about telephone auditing, which astounded me, both because I have received very good results from telephone auditing, so I have no doubt it can get results, and it seemed a bit as though the basics of auditing are no longer taught (or perhaps remembered).

I got a surprise today, which I am glad to report. As a pc I was floundering around, sort of depressed, with masses of ptps that would not lie down ( ). So we dropped down to objectives, namely Open Procedure by 8c. It was pleasant to follow the auditors commands (cordless phone in one hand), in a room I was familiar with, and noticeably, all those ptps went out of awareness. After about half an hour I had a line charge. Lasted at least five minutes. So strong I could not talk to the auditor, and there were also tears running out of my eyes.

It would have been impossible to go on with the session Happy me!

Carmelo, nice to hear about that big win. Thank you.

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

from Business Week

Your Office Chair Is Killing You


Fri Apr 30, 8:08 am ET
If you're reading this article sitting down -- the position we all hold more than any other, for an average of 8.9 hours a day -- stop and take stock of how your body feels. Is there an ache in your lower back? A light numbness in your rear and lower thigh? Are you feeling a little down?
These symptoms are all normal, and they're not good. They may well be caused by doing precisely what you're doing -- sitting. New research in the diverse fields of epidemiology, molecular biology, biomechanics, and physiology is converging toward a startling conclusion: Sitting is a public-health risk. And exercising doesn't offset it. "People need to understand that the qualitative mechanisms of sitting are completely different from walking or exercising," says University of Missouri microbiologist Marc Hamilton. "Sitting too much is not the same as exercising too little. They do completely different things to the body."

In a 2005 article in Science magazine, James A. Levine, an obesity specialist at the Mayo Clinic, pinpointed why, despite similar diets, some people are fat and others aren't. "We found that people with obesity have a natural predisposition to be attracted to the chair, and that's true even after obese people lose weight," he says. "What fascinates me is that humans evolved over 1.5 million years entirely on the ability to walk and move. And literally 150 years ago, 90% of human endeavor was still agricultural. In a tiny speck of time we've become chair-sentenced," Levine says.

Hamilton, like many sitting researchers, doesn't own an office chair. "If you're standing around and puttering, you recruit specialized muscles designed for postural support that never tire," he says. "They're unique in that the nervous system recruits them for low-intensity activity and they're very rich in enzymes." One enzyme, lipoprotein lipase, grabs fat and cholesterol from the blood, burning the fat into energy while shifting the cholesterol from LDL (the bad kind) to HDL (the healthy kind). When you sit, the muscles are relaxed, and enzyme activity drops by 90% to 95%, leaving fat to camp out in the bloodstream. Within a couple hours of sitting, healthy cholesterol plummets by 20%.

The data back him up. Older people who move around have half the mortality rate of their peers. Frequent TV and Web surfers (sitters) have higher rates of hypertension, obesity, high blood triglycerides, low HDL cholesterol, and high blood sugar, regardless of weight. Lean people, on average, stand for two hours longer than their counterparts.

The chair you're sitting in now is likely contributing to the problem. "Short of sitting on a spike, you can't do much worse than a standard office chair," says Galen Cranz, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley. She explains that the spine wasn't meant to stay for long periods in a seated position. Generally speaking, the slight S shape of the spine serves us well. "If you think about a heavy weight on a C or S, which is going to collapse more easily? The C," she says. But when you sit, the lower lumbar curve collapses, turning the spine's natural S-shape into a C, hampering the abdominal and back musculature that support the body. The body is left to slouch, and the lateral and oblique muscles grow weak and unable to support it.

This, in turn, causes problems with other parts of the body. "When you're standing, you're bearing weight through the hips, knees, and ankles," says Dr. Andrew C, Hecht, co-chief of spinal surgery at Mount Sinai Medical Center. "When you're sitting, you're bearing all that weight through the pelvis and spine, and it puts the highest pressure on your back discs. Looking at MRIs, even sitting with perfect posture causes serious pressure on your back."

Much of the perception about what makes for healthy and comfortable sitting has come from the chair industry, which in the 1960s and '70s started to address widespread complaints of back pain from workers. A chief cause of the problem, companies publicized, was a lack of lumbar support. But lumbar support doesn't actually help your spine. "You cannot design your way around this problem," says Cranz. "But the idea of lumbar support has become so embedded in people's conception of comfort, not their actual experience on chairs. We are, in a sense, locked into it."

In the past three decades the U.S. swivel chair has tripled into a more than $3 billion market served by more than 100 companies. Unsurprisingly, America's best-selling chair has made a fetish of lumbar support. The basic Aeron, by Herman Miller, costs around $700, and many office workers swear by them. There are also researchers who doubt them. "The Aeron is far too low," says Dr. A.C. Mandal, a Danish doctor who was among the first to raise flags about sitting 50 years ago. "I visited Herman Miller a few years ago, and they did understand. It should have much more height adjustment, and you should be able to move more. But as long as they sell enormous numbers, they don't want to change it." Don Chadwick, the co-designer of the Aeron, says he wasn't hired to design the ideal product for an eight-hour-workday; he was hired to update Herman Miller's previous best-seller. "We were given a brief and basically told to design the next-generation office chair," he says.

The best sitting alternative is perching -- a half-standing position at barstool height that keeps weight on the legs and leaves the S-curve intact. Chair alternatives include the Swopper, a hybrid stool seat and the funky, high HAG Capisco chair. Standing desks and chaise longues are good options. Ball chairs, which bounce your spine into a C-shape, are not. The biggest obstacle to healthy sitting may be ourselves. Says Jackie Maze, the vice-president for marketing at Keilhauer: "Most customers still want chairs that look like chairs."

Recently Levine talked to Best Buy (NYSE:BBY - News), Wal-Mart (NYSE:WMT - News), and Salo accounting about letting him design their offices and keep people walking and working as much as possible. Levine jerry-rigged an old 1- to 2-mph treadmill to stand under a desk and put a handful of them in conference rooms. Those who wanted could have walking desks in their offices, and he partnered with Steelcase to manufacture a $4,500 version of the machine. "Within two weeks, people basically get addicted to walking and working," says Levine. "You just need to give them the chance."

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

Admin "Tech"

I’ve been trying find the time to follow up my post recently regarding some thoughts stimulated by a comment by Blue Spirit…unfortunately I’m afraid the response will nearly be a treatise if I ever find the time to do it and, unfortunately, no one will pay enough for me to spend the time to do the "fullblown" version. So I’m gonna dribble out a "Readers Digest" version over time so there may be some “sweeping” statements on my part that, over time, I will attempt to substantiate my reasoning (Man I can be pedantic sometimes, can’t I?).

I made this statement in my response to Blue Spirit’s post:

"My premise is all that “edifice” above is the artifact of El Ron’s desperate solutions to a horrid continuing PTP—“How do I continue to keep getting all the money and admiration I want for something I stole, continue to steal, lied about and can't actually personally do without being found out or going to jail?” And yes, I’ll agree that El Ron was absolutely "brilliant."

Here’s how I see it…it’s gonna take me a few posts to get there:

Anyone that has read, at the very least, Deming and Drucker knows that many of El Ron’s “Admin Tech Breakthroughs” were rehashed, reworked and “squirreled" concepts from the work of others. Although El Ron had to go wholetrack to come up with the “Qual” concept, Deming was apparently able to come up with it over a decade before El Ron and nowhere in his works is any credit given to the Confederacy. “Management by Statistics” was new and revolutionary to us neophytes but was an established subject and practice long before El Ron “discovered” it. El Ron “tailored” the subject for Hisself’s Empire and the generalized over simplifications and their emphasis that El Ron rendered had, in my opinion, a deleterious effect in application—as did a significant amount of the OEC/FEBC Model.

The OEC Model is fundamentally flawed for a number of reasons of which two major ones are:

It is a massive Monolithic Command and Control Organization system and MCCO’s are terrible models for Personal Service Organizations. There are innumerable reasons why this is so, however, one of the “biggies” is that MCCO’s are oppressive of individuals, individual action. individual creativty and independent expression and thought. It all looked good in print, sounded wonderful in theory but the actuality was an absolute Cluster F in practice. Take the concept of staff member reports; it was a bastardization of the "Standard" MCCO Model and an homage to Himmler. All chits roll down hill, people can get all messed up and have chit fits, every ones chits stink, and when you’re the Interested Party at a Comm Ev your Fans hit you with the Chits.

El Ron loved to talk about “not acting on a single report”—a well established datum in all MCCO Models throughout the 20th Century (such as the US Navy..unless under fire). However, El Ron continually acted on single reports from sources that were questionable. Through all the OEC Vols there is one after another of systems hardwired in that ensure that the MCCO El Ron “thunked up” stifles independent and creative thought and action and provides numerous ways to “tool the system”.

I knew MSH personally. I am convinced that a large section of Vol 3 and Vol 4 policy came from her. I personally have experienced (as I explained earlier in this thread) El Ron taking my written detailed explanation of how to do a difficult new position to a high standard of production with excellent products. El Ron bastardized my write-up and issued it as an HCOPL. The thrust of El Ron’s editing was to remove any vestige of the predominant concepts of my write up—which had been made by using references, extrapolations and passages from Hisself’s own works, i.e.: 1. Never sacrifice long term viable valuable products for short term upstats; 2. Taking the time to understand the viewpoint of another and truly enlightening them in terms of their own reality fosters and channels their own willingness, yielding greater viable production over time. The post of which I speak was a new one that, after I had piloted it and written up how to do it with effective results, El Ron it added to all the Service Org’s Org Boards—with Hisself’s HCOPL as the Admin “Tech” of how to do it. That experience was one of a number of things that festered in my “craw” and lead to my eventually walking away.

As time went forward El Ron added on top of his MCCO Model a Rube Goldberg series of whistle’s and bells like the Flag Rep Network, the FBO Network, etc. But his ne plus ultra add on “tech” was the vaunted FEBC with the Production Officer/Organizing Officer System, which was later “reconciled” with his other “Breakthrough” the Establishment Officer System.

The net effect of the FEBC system was to inject “Steroids” into an inherently flawed MCCO Model. The name of that “Steroid” was ACT—Artificially Compressed Time.

I’m gonna end off here for now and pick things up in a day or so and for anyone that feels that interested. “Not everything in the Admin 'Tech' is wrong or bad"…I agree. I’ve got a few thoughts regarding that also that I’ll cover later.


Face