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

[FoTi]

I'd rather have the truth over "good roads and good weather" any day.

May I throw out an idea or three?

Some years ago, on a list long since gone, I invited people to co audit by telephone. i got a lot of people co auditing.

Auditing is very easy. It is not (unless we're talking listing and nulling), difficult the way the Co$ made it out to be.

Why not find someone to run processes on and who can run you on stuff?

I've been auditing others by phone for a couple of decades. It is child's play. I can be auditing a guy in Denmark during his morning, while walking my dog in the surf of the Pacific Ocean at 10 PM at night. It is no harder than talking to someone else on a phone.

A friend and I, in the 60s, used to just sit for hours looking at one another, not talking. We would get huge as beings. We did that 3 - 5 times a week for a couple of years. We had never heard of Scientology at that time. Can you find someone, who might want to do that?

When my youngest daughter was in college, she was in the play "Rent." Before each show, she'd grab another cast member, sit them down, explain just sitting there, being present to them, and then do that for fifteen minutes or so. They both, would then, go on stage in a very big way - as beings. It made her projections to the audience much more effective.

Finally, my last suggestion: there is a guy, who I know, who is auditing anyone he can get his hands on, on power and power plus by telephone for free. He is a returnee. He was in Scientology last lifetime. I've talked to him a couple of times. He seems really well qualified to me. If you have interest in this, PM me, and I'll give you his e mail address. Power run quad is dynamite great stuff. I do it, but I charge money, real stiff money.

Thanks for the suggestions. Yes, I'd be interested in talking with him. I'll PM you.

I PMed you.

 

[Leon]

FoTi,

Please don’t think less of your value than is true. While you may not have some of the things that, perhaps, you would prefer to be able to contribute, your actual contributions and participation on the board are magnificent . . . . and I don’t say that just to placate you.

You see, it is because of you and folks like you that I have continued to spend the time posting as I have.

You see, there is a principle involved

To be received, duplicated and understood by good folks is very spiritually empowering. And that is the value and power of the good folks who do receive, duplicate, appreciate and validate . . . the communication exchange becomes a very spiritually empowering exchange for those involved in it.

There is a tech reason behind it, of course. LRH addressed it, nearly got it right, touched on it but didn’t take it to true fruition. Remember in the Axioms of SOP-8? He said: “The basic action of existence is duplication.”

Well, that’s close enough for today. You see, when good folks, harmonious up tone folks duplicate each other . . . that is, when they duplicate the presence, Being, communication of each other, they are actually indulging a co-create and a co-empowerment.

That is why good folks can feel so “up” when they exchange in an up tone way as we have often seen on this thread “Aboard the Apollo—1973”

At that level of co-action all of the finer uplifting characteristics of interchange and relationship obtain: love, mutual respect, honor, appreciation, contribution to each other’s well being and expansion, etc., all these co-empowering virtues and attributes of the spirit manifest. It’s a winning scenario.

Of course the negative types try to demean it as “lovey-dovey” . . . . but it is to be noted they do not duplicate: they only ever challenge and make wrong and work to bring down.

So, my Love, honor your value . . . you are a safe terminal! An empowering, co-creating safe terminal.

And what is more valuable than that!?? (I don’t know what is. )

For, you see, it is a co-created game we are involved in . . . if it was a co-negating, co-destroying game as some attempt; or even a game based on the ignoring of each other, where would we be?

So honor your presence and participation as I do and as it ought be.

RogerB

I'm going to say a few things about this post.

Firstly I certainly do appreciate posts Roger makes like the recent one on John McM. Other posts of his too.

In this post quoted above I note how assertive he is here about the "good folks" and what they do and how they are so different to the "negative types". Methinks he doth protest too much, but the underlying insinuations he makes are noted.

Noted too are the regular digs he makes at LRH, who, so we are told, was a poor researcher, did things in a shoddy manner, and so on. Luckily we have in the Freezone an array of people who saved the day for us, correctyed all the mistakes and goofs Hubbard made, and can now deliver on the broken promises that he left in his wake. We have Geoffrey Filbert, Alan Walters, "Ananda", and a host of others all offering us their version of how to attain what LRH promised but never delivered on. Strange that none of these ever acknowledge LRH for what they did get out of his work. For the wins they did get, the spiritual progress the did make and without which they would never in a million years have cooked up he solutions they offer us as their own. At a price, of course. Equal or more than the CofS's price.

You want acknowledgement and respect for your contributions on this board, Roger. How come you are not generous enough to give to LRH what he gave you and what he enabled you to attain? Or does your loving heart not extend that far?

I've highlighted a portion of the above post of Roger's. There is a very fine line between what he describes here and a person who is seeking, and even needing, praise, approval and validation. A very fine line indeed. And I would suggest that perhaps the reason why Vinaire called Roger an egotist is precisely because of the difficulty in determining which side of the line Roger is on. Perhaps there is much in some of his posts to suggest to one that he sits on the wrong side of that line. No matter.

The info he gives, the advice, the knowledge he shares (and I am not at all being sarcastic in saying what I just have) is, unfortunately, not up for discussion. I don't know why it is so, but there it is. We may accept his words in full as they stand or we can go elsewhere. Most other posters do participate in discussions. After all, this is a discussion board.

 

[RogerB]

I'm going to say a few things about this post.

Firstly I certainly do appreciate posts Roger makes like the recent one on John McM. Other posts of his too.

In this post quoted above I note how assertive he is here about the "good folks" and what they do and how they are so different to the "negative types". Methinks he doth protest too much, but the underlying insinuations he makes are noted.

Noted too are the regular digs he makes at LRH, who, so we are told, was a poor researcher, did things in a shoddy manner, and so on. Luckily we have in the Freezone an array of people who saved the day for us, correctyed all the mistakes and goofs Hubbard made, and can now deliver on the broken promises that he left in his wake. We have Geoffrey Filbert, Alan Walters, "Ananda", and a host of others all offering us their version of how to attain what LRH promised but never delivered on. Strange that none of these ever acknowledge LRH for what they did get out of his work. For the wins they did get, the spiritual progress the did make and without which they would never in a million years have cooked up he solutions they offer us as their own. At a price, of course. Equal or more than the CofS's price.

You want acknowledgement and respect for your contributions on this board, Roger. How come you are not generous enough to give to LRH what he gave you and what he enabled you to attain? Or does your loving heart not extend that far?

I've highlighted a portion of the above post of Roger's. There is a very fine line between what he describes here and a person who is seeking, and even needing, praise, approval and validation. A very fine line indeed. And I would suggest that perhaps the reason why Vinaire called Roger an egotist is precisely because of the difficulty in determining which side of the line Roger is on. Perhaps there is much in some of his posts to suggest to one that he sits on the wrong side of that line. No matter.

The info he gives, the advice, the knowledge he shares (and I am not at all being sarcastic in saying what I just have) is, unfortunately, not up for discussion. I don't know why it is so, but there it is. We may accept his words in full as they stand or we can go elsewhere. Most other posters do participate in discussions. After all, this is a discussion board.

This will be brief. I'll post in more depth on this later.

Poor Leon is so negative he just does not duplicate what is actually there. Everything is given a negative spin, or denied, negated, countered or attempted to be made nothing of by him.

What a downer! Here we have had a bunch of uplifting posts, and in comes the downer!

I have often honored and praised what LRH actually did and accomplished, and also for the wins I did achieve with his tech . . . indeed my earliest posts on ESMB were of them . . . they were posts of my wins and case state advances that occurred pre-1963.

But I am also one who deals with the whole truth, and Hubbard had his faults as well as his accomplishment.

However to remind Leon of my honoring of LRH, I refer him to my presentation to the FZ in Pasadena, a tape we all know Leon has heard/viewed. In it the words I spoke in reference to LRH were: "Bless his heart, for without him I'd have probably ended up as a drunken bum on the beaches of Sydney---if not in jail!"

Now, that's not too hard to duplicate is it?

RogerB

 

[lkwdblds]

Here is your post of July 17 th!

I'm right here, reading the posts on most days.

I didn't really agree with Vin moving the discuaaion over to another thread but went along with it. As it turnd out there wasn't much to say on the subject. Roger is a bit touchy on my comments so I'll leave discussing his posts to you guys

Instead of sticking with what you said a couple of days ago, it looks like you took a seemingly innocuous statement which Roger used to attempt to help FoTi and went out of your way to read some sort of harmful intention into it.

Definitions of innocuous on the Web:

not injurious to physical or mental health
not causing disapproval; "it was an innocuous remark"; "confined himself to innocuous generalities"; "unobjectionable behavior"
innocent: lacking intent or capacity to injure; "an innocent prank"
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Harmless; producing no ill effect; innocent; Inoffensive; unprovocative; not exceptional

I know that I like to be duplicated by the "good people" on ESMB or any "good people" anywhere in the world. On the other hand, if Charles Manson wrote in or had Jeffrey Dahrmer (now deceased) who bombed the Government Building in Oklahoma City years ago duplicated one of my posts, I don't know how I would react. It would start me doing a figure-figure. I would be happy about being duplicated by someone and hope that my comments might lead to reducing their insanity but then I would introvert and suspect that I might be exhibiting some evil intention which had attracted such a person to me.

Roger was giving encouragement to FoTi and that is what his post was all about. Using the term "good people" was totally innocuous. One really has to go out of their way to pick a fight with someone over using that term. You then did exactly the reverse of what you said you were going to do in your post above which I quoted.

As far as acknowledging LRH for his contributions. Roger regularly makes remarks praising LRH for doing what he did do and for what he got right. He gave acknowledgement to LRH in his video lectures last year and does it here regularly. It has been years since I read Filbert's works on the internet but I believe he also has an opening section to his site where he acknowledges LRH's contributions.

BTW - LRH was no poster boy for acknowledging others. There was quite a lengthy list of acknowledgements in the early issues of the Dianetics book, which seemed to connect LRH to the great thinkers of Earth's history but then no follow up and those original acknowledgements quickly shrunk and in later editions disappeared entirely. Also in KSW #1, LRH lies and does us all an enormous disservice when he states that only 20 out of over 100,000 suggestions made to him had any value at all and none of those 20 were basic or fundamental. Now that is a Betrayal of Trust, an absolutely viscious and deceitful act of not acknowledging one's original Sources!!! How can you bash Roger who often acknowledges LRH's brialliance and many of his key contributions and defend LRH who wrote those blatant and viscious lies in KSW #1? Give me a break!

Also, in your reply, you did not even pay lip service to helping FoTi but chose instead to tear into Roger. You have criticized Roger in the past and we all have read your critiques. You have had your say so why don't you let people make up their minds as to whether your comments have merit? I feel that going back on your word, given only 2 or 3 days ago and posting your biggest bash of Roger to date is going to hurt your standing on this board rather than help it.
Lakey

 

[Enthetan]

Additional article for "This is NOT OK !!!!", from Sunday's NY Times:

Last year, two Princeton sociologists, Thomas Espenshade and Alexandria Walton Radford, published a book-length study of admissions and affirmative action at eight highly selective colleges and universities. Unsurprisingly, they found that the admissions process seemed to favor black and Hispanic applicants, while whites and Asians needed higher grades and SAT scores to get in. But what was striking, as Russell K. Nieli pointed out last week on the conservative Web site Minding the Campus, was which whites were most disadvantaged by the process: the downscale, the rural and the working-class.

This was particularly pronounced among the private colleges in the study. For minority applicants, the lower a family’s socioeconomic position, the more likely the student was to be admitted. For whites, though, it was the reverse. An upper-middle-class white applicant was three times more likely to be admitted than a lower-class white with similar qualifications.

This may be a money-saving tactic. In a footnote, Espenshade and Radford suggest that these institutions, conscious of their mandate to be multiethnic, may reserve their financial aid dollars “for students who will help them look good on their numbers of minority students,” leaving little room to admit financially strapped whites.

But cultural biases seem to be at work as well. Nieli highlights one of the study’s more remarkable findings: while most extracurricular activities increase your odds of admission to an elite school, holding a leadership role or winning awards in organizations like high school R.O.T.C., 4-H clubs and Future Farmers of America actually works against your chances. Consciously or unconsciously, the gatekeepers of elite education seem to incline against candidates who seem too stereotypically rural or right-wing or “Red America.”
​

 

[Enthetan]

I think that LRH in his determination that NOTs showed finally that we are all individual, not part of a great unity, showed his lack of understanding of physics. It is clear (at least to me) that it is possible to be both - to be individual and be a union. There is no reason to suppose that the rules which govern physical processes don't have their origin in whatever rules govern the theta universe - presumably they reflect each other. We must therefore expect that quantum proceses operate in theta terms as well, in which case how things are will depend on how they are looked at.

I think that LRH's great fear was of Scientologists bonding together in groups, if those groups were things he did not control utterly.

 

[Ted]

I think that LRH's great fear was of Scientologists bonding together in groups, if those groups were things he did not control utterly.

An aversion to bonding (ARC) would seem to be the case given OT-3, 4, 5, 7 style processing.

The one thing I have observed in scio and out that is most frightening is how a politician, opinion leader, etc. can bind a group with common, stated purpose, then operate that group for another purpose entirely.

Think Judas goat. Think any number of government programs. Says one thing to bind the group; does another for self-serving interests.

 

[lkwdblds]

You threw darts into the bullseye in your 2 posts!

I think that LRH's great fear was of Scientologists bonding together in groups, if those groups were things he did not control utterly.

Very astute. I came to realize that he did not like those who swallowed the Scientology propoganda line. At first I could not figure that out. The big breakthrough for me was when I realized that LRH himself was never a Scientologist. I started to notice that on the Apollo in 1973. He posted people to posts they weren't trained for and he did not provide a hat write up for a brand new post which he created and assigned me to, i.e. Purchasing Officer on the Apollo

Even earlier, I noticed that Yvonne Jentzsch, herself a diehard Scientologist, demanded all staff go to study but she never went herself, taking a page out of LRH's playbook. Furthemore, LRH ripped off several top staff at CCLA, Sam Loria, Qual Sec and Irene Howey second in command to Yvonne were ripped off, Sam sent to be C.O. of AOLA and Irene to be C.O. of ASHO Day. Both of those appointments were made on the same day, just after I arrived on the Apollo. Even pulling me out of Treasury Division to come to Flag dealt CC and Yvonne a big blow.

Look what happen when we bond together, we think clearly and realize LRH was not all that he claimed to be. I am sure you are right and he carefully guarded against that. When Mayo's group broke off, it was very successful and was getting rave reviews from the people who went there. The delivery at Mayo's AAC was superlative according to all the stories I have heard of concerning that Org. Had it not been quickly destroyed by C of S through viscious law suits, there is no telling what the AAC might have accomplished in so far as harming the C of S and reducing their "market penetration" as far as delivering Scio services.

YOUR OTHER POINT ABOUT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND SCHOOL ADMISSIONS.

That is quickly exposed as not being based on minority racial status or being part of a minority group. All you have to look at is that Asians are a minority of a different race and Jews are a minority who some regard as a different race even though they are mostly Caucasion but they are sure a minority group as a persecuted minority religion. Jews and Asians excel academically therefore they are quitely removed from the ranks of those receiving financial help or help in the form of relaxing admission standards or giving credit for after school outside groups.

Can you imagine a Jewish student giving as his extra curricular activiities being the head of the Jewish Youth group in his congregation or doing volunteer work for the Jewish anti-defamation league. Not only would those activities not enhance his qualifications to be admitted to the University but I think those would put a nail in his coffin and he would be immediatley disqualified from any further consideration. Those turning him down may not even be aware that they are denying him on those grounds but deny him they will. Ditto for Oriental scholars. The think from the admissions boards is probably what you say, since they must fulfill a quota of minority students, they choose the ones most in alignment with their own political points of view and the ones who appear the neediest. That way, when visitors come to campus to see the affirmative action program at work, observers will see plainly and in no uncertin terms that the program is being complied with.
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

That one sentence says it all!!!!

An aversion to bonding (ARC) would seem to be the case given OT-3, 4, 5, 7 style processing.

The one thing I have observed in scio and out that is most frightening is how a politician, opinion leader, etc. can bind a group with common, stated purpose, then operate that group for another purpose entirely.

Think Judas goat. Think any number of government programs. Says one thing to bind the group; does another for self-serving interests.

Ted, that last sentence above really says it all. Hitler was an expert in using that technique. Both U.S. major political parties commonly use it. Obama is a master at it, such a smooth and convincing speaker. I think he takes glibness to new heights!
Lakey

 

[Ted]

Ted, that last sentence above really says it all. Hitler was an expert in using that technique. Both U.S. major political parties commonly use it. Obama is a master at it, such a smooth and convincing speaker. I think he takes glibness to new heights!
Lakey

I did not want to use the Hitler reference, but yes, it is a good example.

Each program that the Jews submitted to turned out to be only transfer to a progressively smaller space until finally they were dead.
Wiki German Jews pre-WWII & during WWII

 

[Blue Spirit]

Book and CD

Thank you, Roger. It's kind of hard for me to look at things this way after the experiences I've had with others this lifetime. I've never really been around people like you. I've kind of become a hermit to avoid being smashed by others. Seems like anytime I venture out and trust anybody I end up getting stepped on and don't know how to overcome that. I feel crushed and don't want to go anywhere or do anything anymore and life doesn't seem worth living anymore. I feel like I can't overcome things anymore and I don't have any future. I don't fit in with the people around me and it seems like I'm getting too old to have anything to look forward to anymore. I'm alone, no husband, no family, no job, no friends, no money, no education to work with, no desire to create anymore, no ideas of what to do with my life now, no games I can think of that I want to play. I had an extremely devistating experience about a year ago that really crashed me and I haven't been able to recover from it no matter how I try......maybe I'm just coming to the end of my life. Sorry to stick this here, but I don't have anyone else to talk to. I know this isn't a good post - nothing anyone can benefit from. You can throw me out now, if you want.

A suggestion that will pin down all of the situations spoken of and your
responsibility:

Read "The Vortex - Where the Law of Attraction Assembles All Cooperative Relationships" by Esther and Jerry Hicks.
The CD that comes in the back of the book is particularly excellent.
All for $16.95.

This would of course be in addition to any processing.
Just doing Objectives on yourself daily is valuable too.

 

[Leon]

I have total support for you, FoTi. If I have said anything to offend or hurt you - though I doubt that I have, then I apologise fully.

But t seems as though Roger is willing to discuss something now - which is all that I ask of him.

No offence intended anywhere - I have been very careful to avoid such.

 

[RogerB]

Thank you, Roger. It's kind of hard for me to look at things this way after the experiences I've had with others this lifetime. I've never really been around people like you. I've kind of become a hermit to avoid being smashed by others. Seems like anytime I venture out and trust anybody I end up getting stepped on and don't know how to overcome that. I feel crushed and don't want to go anywhere or do anything anymore and life doesn't seem worth living anymore. I feel like I can't overcome things anymore and I don't have any future. I don't fit in with the people around me and it seems like I'm getting too old to have anything to look forward to anymore. I'm alone, no husband, no family, no job, no friends, no money, no education to work with, no desire to create anymore, no ideas of what to do with my life now, no games I can think of that I want to play. I had an extremely devistating experience about a year ago that really crashed me and I haven't been able to recover from it no matter how I try......maybe I'm just coming to the end of my life. Sorry to stick this here, but I don't have anyone else to talk to. I know this isn't a good post - nothing anyone can benefit from. You can throw me out now, if you want.

Well, FoTi,

I see a process running here

I suppose the smart thing for me to do would be to let it run for a while longer . . . but I have traffic on my lines that might prevent me following up with you later at a more ideal time.

So, here I am now.

Several things revealed in your actually, very good and honest post

So I'll take it from the top.

We have a very well demonstrated piece of tech in Kn; it is this.

When one attempts to use one's powers/abilities or practice one's virtues, one tends to trigger the charge connected to them. That is, when one attempts the positive the negatives often get triggered into involuntary replication . . . and this is so because they, as negative life force charged expressions of their corresponding positives are sitting there with the positive to also be empowered and triggered into manifestation.

Now, you actually have the tech to handle all of that and you also have the spiritual horsepower to handle it . . . I know this because I remember you picking up on the Spiritual Team-mate process I put on Ted's thread on "How Dangerous is New OT 7?".

You simply and smoothly picked up that process and reported a win from using it! That's pretty high-toned and able!

Now, what is indicated in your post above is simply a lot of expressions of the moods you have gone into relative to certain issues. Note I am being specific here . . . . this is not a general and catastrophic scenario . . . it is specific to particular things and endeavours in your life.

Well, I have put the processes to handle these on ESMB And you can run them solo.

You already have the unpleasant sensation and moods handling process . . . it's the "Experience/Create Process". You could also the "Basic Chronic Mood Handling R/D" I posted recently that CarmelO had a win using.

You also expressed some "Thoughts" you have accepted as "belief systems" and limiting paradigms . . . . well, you handle these with the "Thoughts are Things Handling" I posted also on this thread.

All can be done solo

And one begins from where one is

And for the record, I'll tell you that I have been further down than I think you currently are . . . and I had no one to guide and help me but myself and my old tech. But I simply intended to survive, and I gradually lifted myself out.

In some respects, I think it is possible you are quite fortunate to be aware of your "condition" as you are . . . you are right there with it and can do something about it and convert it all to positive.

Compare that to those who are in delusion as to where they're at and what is what. You actually have the right items to now convert to positive!

What a gift!

I would say you are in the fortunate position of being able to correctly lift yourself out . . . and at the very worst massively improve your condition to the extent that you'll be in much better, even wonderful shape for the addressing to your next lifetime. It was one of my old processing goals when I was in rough shape you know. My hope was to at least fit myself out for a better address to my next lifetime . . . . but wonder of wonders, I surpassed that and how!

So yes, My Dear FoTi, some hot key negatives have manifested into sharp reality for you . . . GOOD! Now you have them available to do something about cleaning them up and recovering all that life-force back to positive and under your knowing control.

And all it takes is a little session each day . . . I do mine first thing in the morning. For me they only last 15-60 minutes . . . depends on what I have to handle. And the processes I listed above are among my most regular menu items.



RogerB

 

[Leon]

Posted twice in error

 

[FoTi]

A suggestion that will pin down all of the situations spoken of and your
responsibility:

Read "The Vortex - Where the Law of Attraction Assembles All Cooperative Relationships" by Esther and Jerry Hicks.
The CD that comes in the back of the book is particularly excellent.
All for $16.95.

This would of course be in addition to any processing.
Just doing Objectives on yourself daily is valuable too.

Someone else suggested that I read The Vortex many months ago. I bought it. I read it. I know other people like it. But.....not for me....

 

[Mark A. Baker]

It's nice to find such interesting things on ESMB - I had despaired of it but Mark Baker told me to check out this thread. Thank you Mark!

Roland

I'm just glad you found it to be an enjoyable perusal given all the other things you have to occupy yourself.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Mark A. Baker]

You want acknowledgement and respect for your contributions on this board, Roger. How come you are not generous enough to give to LRH what he gave you and what he enabled you to attain? Or does your loving heart not extend that far?

Leon, among LRH's contributions were the SO, Operation Snow White, & David Miscavige. By now I hope he knows where he can stick them.

Yes, he made positive contributions too. Nowhere near as much as he claimed. His primary contribution was the "write up" & dissemination of scientology development. He did not do that for "gratis". He grabbed all credit - read copyrights - and enforced those copyrights vigorously for the income stream they generated for HIM. LRH's bountiful contributions went substantially to profit himself and ruin those who he perceived to be a threat to his personal "gravy train".

Whatever else LRH may have got up to in his spare time he was all about "Number 1". He got his thanks long ago. Ten times over. In spades. If you need a reminder drop into your local org or mission and look at all the resources being wasted on accolades to a dead man while staff is still struggling to make it day to day and NOT being given what was promised. Then remember "who to thank" for that bounty.


Mark A. Baker

 

[lkwdblds]

Very accurate post!

Leon, among LRH's contributions were the SO, Operation Snow White, & David Miscavige. By now I hope he knows where he can stick them.

Yes, he made positive contributions too. Nowhere near as much as he claimed. His primary contribution was the "write up" & dissemination of scientology development. He did not do that for "gratis". He grabbed all credit - read copyrights - and enforced those copyrights vigorously for the income stream they generated for HIM. LRH's bountiful contributions went substantially to profit himself and ruin those who he perceived to be a threat to his personal "gravy train".

Whatever else LRH may have got up to in his spare time he was all about "Number 1". He got his thanks long ago. Ten times over. In spades. If you need a reminder drop into your local org or mission and look at all the resources being wasted on accolades to a dead man while staff is still struggling to make it day to day and NOT being given what was promised. Then remember "who to thank" for that bounty.


Mark A. Baker

Excellent summary! I believe also worthy of mention is the lie and betrayal to us all which he wrote in KSW #1. In that Bulletin, prominently displayed at the front of every study back he stated that all of the years he kept his comm lines open to suggestions from other people he received only about 20 suggestions of any value out of a total of over 100,000 suggestions and that none of those 20 were basic or fundamental. That is the calibur of individual who we were relying on for truth. His statement was a blatant, viscious and scandalous lie of the highest order of magnitude. Not only did he state that lie in print but he states it over and over as the first thing one reads in any Scio course of study.

It is a viscious, treasoness assertion because he plagerized much. if not most of his tech from others including such fundamental things as TR's, Study Tech, Power Processes, Grade 6, The Way to Hapiness Book, parts of NOTs and OT VIII, Exchange by Dynamics, Conditions by Dynamics, Correction Lists and many other key elements of the tech.

It is not easy to confront the fact that one man plagerized all these elements of "tech" from others and then had the audacity to publicly state in print that only 20 suggestions out of 100,000 given to him had any long term value and that none of them were fundamental or basic. To have everyone "star rate" the bulletin which states that enormous lie at the beginning of every course the rest of our lives so as to rub it in and make us feel that he was superhuman and the rest of humanity was incompetent was an overt against all of us of unimaginable proportions. To think that any one individual could make a claim such as that and enforce it upon all of us and threaten us with Ethics and Expulsion if we challenged it makes me feel like vomitting, I literally feel sick to my stomach knowing that I onced believed that claim and fell for it hook, line and sinker.
A Nauseous Lakey

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Excellent summary! I believe also worthy of mention is the lie and betrayal to us all which he wrote in KSW #1. In that Bulletin, prominently displayed at the front of every study back he stated that all of the years he kept his comm lines open to suggestions from other people he received only about 20 suggestions of any value out of a total of over 100,000 suggestions and that none of those 20 were basic or fundamental. That is the calibur of individual who we were relying on for truth. His statement was a blatant, viscious and scandalous lie of the highest order of magnitude. Not only did he state that lie in print but he states it over and over as the first thing one reads in any Scio course of study.

It is a viscious, treasoness assertion because he plagerized much. if not most of his tech from others including such fundamental things as TR's, Study Tech, Power Processes, Grade 6, The Way to Hapiness Book, parts of NOTs and OT VIII, Exchange by Dynamics, Conditions by Dynamics, Correction Lists and many other key elements of the tech.

It is not easy to confront the fact that one man plagerized all these elements of "tech" from others and then had the audacity to state that only 20 suggestions out of 100,000 given to him had any long term value and that none of them were fundamental or basic. To have everyone "star rate" the bulletin which states that enormous lie at the beginning of every course the rest of our lives so as to rub it in and make us feel that he was superhuman and the rest of humanity was incompetent was an overt against all of us of unimaginable proportions. To think that any one individual could make a claim such as that and enforce it upon all of us and threaten us with Ethics and Expulsion if we challenged it makes me feel like vomitting, I literally feel sick to my stomach knowing that I onced believed that claim and fell for it hook, line and sinker.
A Nauseous Lakey

OMG Lakey, you have grown one pair of cojones.

What would yu say to the Lakester of 1970?

 

[lkwdblds]

What I would tell the Lakester of 1970?

OMG Lakey, you have grown one pair of cojones.

What would yu say to the Lakester of 1970?

Thanks Carmelo! What LRH did by writing that lie in KSW #1 really gets my "Irish" up. I am ready to take him on mano a mano. I thought twice about writing such strong words about a man I once revered but when you look at what he did by false aggrandizement of his own achievements and his negation of the great achievements of others what you see is is neurotic, an "only one" and a narcissist. I agree that in several ways he was brilliant perhaps a genius. A lot of his teachings worked and helped many, including me but the indecent side of him is so odious to me, it makes me sick. He prays on the noblest and most selfless and godlike characteristics of mankind and makes a mockery of them, using them under false pretenses for his own personal gain, all the while playing the part of "mankinds greatest friend."

Going back to the Lakester of 1970, I did real good with Bill Franks and leaving the L.A. Org for CCLA. When the Don Keeler incident hit, I should not have gone into Treasury but just quit and transfered over to ASHO. When the toilet paper incident happened, I should have written Yvonne a letter telling her I refused to be shunned and the real culprit, Tom, should be shunned and not me. When Yvonne posted Kitty as my senior I should have tenedered my resignation and walked out. Ditto when I was passed over for the FBO job. When I became Treasury Org Officer about two months before I went to Flag, I should have demanded to sit at the executive table. When I got to Flag, I should have refused to accept the job talking on the phone in Portuguese because there was no Hat Write Up. Ditto with the CCLA Programs Chief job.

I should have demanded a post that was commensurate with my abilities. Being an auditor was my first choice but if I went into admin, I should have got a more flamboyant job. As the youth say today, I've got "skills". Back in 1970 I already had my encyclopedic memory. and a large fund of knowledge and trivia and I was a very good joke teller, especially of Jewish jokes. It ran in the family, my Dad was good at it and my Brother was world class. My Brother, Dan Linker and I would meet at New York George's near the complex and tell jokes for hours. Also, I was a very good writer, even then. I think I really should have gone into journalism or if in Scientology, I could have got into the Pubs Org. Robert Vaughan Young, whom I greatly admire, had the type of job which I was capable of doing. I believe I have as many skills as he had, I should have achieved at his level.

Here on the Board, there are a lot of extremely gifted people. It is so valuable to interact with people of equal and higher abilitiy than yourself. Yvonne Jentzsch always used to promote doing that with regard to tone scale and I think it also works when applied to ability. Almost no one can lay claim to be the best in important categories of life. As someone recently wrote, seeking to be the best is a losing game. A beautiful woman, a handsome guy, no matter how attractive, there is always someone better looking and the same with intelligence, talents and skills. The real gains are made in being the best you can be but not comparing yourself to others. I believe that is a precept of Buddhism. Perhaps even more important is in being your self. Every person has great internal beauty. If you can succeed in being yourself, I think people will find and recognize your beauty and want to be connected to you.

There are a lot of big Egos on the board here but I believe we on this thread are to an amazing extent not attempting to assert our egos so much but instead we are into exchanging ideas and presenting our concepts of truth, attempting to both teach others something but more importantly to learn from others.

Sure there is a little competition to make an interesting post or show more insight, wisdom or humor than the guy who just posted. Life would be boring if we did not test ourselves and our abilities against those of others.

SUMMARY
I was the same guy in 1970 that I am now in most areas. The main difference is I have learned a lot of the lessons of life in the last 40 years plus I have had a long marriage and helped raise two kids. The one big difference is what Carmelo says I have grown bigger cajones. The biggest reason for that to be honest with y'all is the success I have achieved in starting this thread. I was just a lowly Director of Disbursements at a Class IV Org and left there 37 years ago. Almost no one on ESMB knew of me, just Hector Carmona and Chris Many who do not post here and then there was Rae, aka Sherry Katz, who remembered me a little and Purple Haze who was a Class VIII and very important back in 1970 but had a slight memory of me and my brother and then Gary York just surfaced who I barely knew. No one else ever heard of me and yet our thread is in Power and will soon pass 100K in hits. I look at that and think, "I must have done something right for this to occur" and then I feel a stirring in my jockey shorts and sure enough, my balls have grown a bit bigger.
Lakey