Bill Frank's story about blackmail

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
Silly wog question #18459820435082

Would it be fair to say that "Knowledge Reports" contribute to the general atmosphere of blackmail and persuasion within Scientology? Anyone have a good policy reference in regard to Knowledge Reports?
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Fair enough. But your "explanation" was neither even vaguely accurate (in terms of what Hubbard said) or clearly some piece of Hoax humour where accuracy would be irrelevant. I could imagine many people accepting what you said at face value.

I don't like it when a poster who is respected misrepresents facts which could well be taken as accurate by many. Which is why I get nitpicky sometimes, even when the errors aren't intentional, as they usually aren't (I assume). If some trash-talking idiot misrepresents facts I often ignore it as I don't feel like correcting every single error I see on ESMB. But *you*, Hoaxie, I hold to a higher standard.

And I hope rightfully so. :)

-----

If perchance, you really believe that the true basis of O/Ws is transgression against an ideal state, that is a different subject. For myself, I find Hubbard's stated basis more accurate in terms of how to take charge off O/Ws.

Paul


Thanks Paul, you are 100% correct. What I wrote is neither:

* What Hubbard said in his theory of O/W's

* A parody, send-up or hoaxilicious comedic treatment.​

Understandably, one reading my take on O/W's would expect it to be one of those two. And it could seem troubling or puzzling that it is neither.

What I wrote was yet a 3rd way of viewing Scientology.

At first, it might seem like an eccentric way of thinking to some, but over much time I have found it to be quite invigorating in its ability to simplify and decipher the crazily mixed signals that Scientology sends out about itself. The best way I can describe it is "wait and see what grows". For example:

Let's say that one day a fledgling Scientologist hears about Ron Hubbard's tech which is capable of growing enormously large and beautiful prizewinning tomatoes.

l-ron-hubbard-tomato.jpg

So, the excited person reads everything they can get their hands on that Hubbard said about growing tomatoes, auditing them, watering them "and so forth".

And, once fully hatted and filled with great expectations, they go out and buy a seed packet.

Tomato+Seed+Packet.jpg

Up to this point everything is making perfectly good sense.

Hubbard talks about the right amounts of sunlight and water and proper use of fertilizer and a trellis is nicely detailed.

The joyful moment arrives that it is time to open the packet and take out the tomato seeds so they can be planted.

tomato-seeds-140810.jpg

From that moment forward, everything is done by the book.

And with great patience, skillful gardening & time...eventually the plants begin to break above the soil.

And with such good care, one day a lovely green plant blossoms forth--but quite surprisingly it is not tomatoes! However, it is quite lovely pink flowers.

Oleander.jpg

After the initial shock wears off the person goes back and re-reads the seed packet and sure enough it said "tomato" right below the lovely picture of a juicy red tomato.

The person makes the best of it, fashioning a beautiful bouquet of flowers to set atop the dining room table. They even make good use the green leafy parts of the plant to throw in the dinner salad.

And after a lovely dinner with friends everyone is dead.

Because they just ate Oleander, one of the most poisonous plants in the world.

So, how does this all relate to Hubbard's O/W tech?

I am not reading what is on the seed packet or looking at the brightly-colored tomato pictures. I am not concerned with what Hubbard says about tomatoes.

I just watch the seed that is planted grow.

Whatever springs forth out of the ground is what was in the dna of that seed.

What grew is what was planted.

O/W tech does not grow free beings or OTs.

It grows something else.

I am simply observing what grew from the seeds that Hubbard planted.
 
Last edited:

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
Extract from Affadavit of one Andre Tabayoyon from 13 - 19 August 1994 in regard to Auditors obtaining PC "hot bottons" for use by Regs in the extraction of money:

. . . <snip> . . . 9. Various forms of coercive persuasion are used in all areas of Scientology. A working term in Scientology is registration ("reg") cycle. During a reg cycle, parishioners are coercively persuaded to do something which a senior Scientologist believes will be good for Scientology. In my 21 years of membership in Scientology, I personally observed how auditors and others identify a person's "hot button." I saw how auditors used many individual's hot buttons in the various types of interviews (ethics, chaplin, registration, counseling, etc.) to coerce the parishioner into donating money, doing the next service, joining the Sea Org, going to the RPF and agreeing to forego spending time with their children and families in order to devote greater time and effort to the good of Scientology . . . <snip> . . .
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
:goodposting::goodposting::goodposting:

I couldn't stop reading that HH, beautifully put ... what grew is what was planted.

How true.

I like this 3rd way of viewing things!


:yes:

Thanks Panda & Trouble!

Whatever Scientologists or Indie Scientologists say about their tomato tech (O/Ws), it doesn't change the fact that....

PINK FLOWERS = PINK LEGS STICKING OUT

No OT phenomena except Oleander Tech.

:D
 

IMMORTAL

Patron Meritorious
On this:


L. Ron Hubbard
EXECUTIVE DIRECTIVE

ED 149 INT 2 December 1966

Applies to
HCO Exec Secs
Intelligence Appointees
Guardian
Asst Guardians C O N F I D E N T I A L

BRANCH 5 PROJECT
PROJECT SQUIRREL

1. The Guardian's Intelligence Officer for the Western
U.S. should make further appointments to execute "Project
Squirrel".

2. The project consists of the following:

(a) Listing all SPs engaged in Squirrel actions
or anti-Scientology actions.

(b) Get each one investigated (proper evidences and
witnesses, not rumour).

(c) File a complete file on the person with evidences,
affidavits, etc.

(d) Take appropriate actions to bring any crimes to
police attention.

(e) Bring any suit necessary to cause their activities
to cease.

3. It will be found uniformly (despite first view there is no evidence of it) that anti-Scientologists have in their background this life crimes for which they could be arrested.

4. When one finds such a crime one must get documents or witnesses and evidences sufficient for prosecution.

5. The evidences should be turned over to the police.

6. When the person is arrested, one then sues the person for anti-Scientology libels and slanders.

7. If we do the above as our pattern, we will successfully bring the following facts into public consciousness:

(a) People who attack Scientology are criminals.

(b) That if one attacks Scientology he gets investigated for crimes.

(c) If one does not attack Scientology, despite not being with it, one is safe.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


Yea, so see. Here's the thing. Whenever I said, "Oh, someone took my wallet".... "I was struck by a car"...."My dog died", it was ALWAYS a motivator on one dynamic or another and I had to look for my overts/crimes.

Seems to me that the "church" is not applying this LRH tech to itself. Instead of cry-babying about people attacking them, they should be applying LRH's "overt/motivator sequence tech" and looking for their own crimes. Maybe they would find some and be a better "church". Maybe they wouldn't have "pulled this all in" on themselves. OMG. That gagged me. But I am glad to see them going down.

And oh, Rex Fowler? I looked at his completions online and it looks to me like he did an OT8 in 1989, then went back to do Solo Nots Certainty Course Part 1 in 1998. Here's the link:

http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats/by-name/r/rex-fowler.html

I didn't see where he completed Part 2 and was sent home auditing. It looked to me like he had to complete Part 1 yet again. I did see where he did his academy levels in 2004. Maybe I didn't find the correct information on this, but if I understood this information correctly, it seems to me that he was not auditing on the level at time of his murder and suicide attempt.

 

RogerB

Crusader
IMMORTAL,

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

It is amazing, when you look at it, that they cannot actually apply their own tech to themselves . . . not that it's infallible "tech" mind you, but if they believe it and they assert it's perfect truth, you'd think they and Hubbard before them would apply it to themselves!

But no, history is demonstrating Hubbard was not that honest.

Even any sane "wog" operation looks to see where they are screwing up if they are being "attacked" by their customers or community . . . give or take a bit of deceitful legal advice from their attorneys :duh:.

R
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
IMMORTAL,

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

It is amazing, when you look at it, that they cannot actually apply their own tech to themselves . . . not that it's infallible "tech" mind you, but if they believe it and they assert it's perfect truth, you'd think they and Hubbard before them would apply it to themselves!

But no, history is demonstrating Hubbard was not that honest.

Even any sane "wog" operation looks to see where they are screwing up if they are being "attacked" by their customers or community . . . give or take a bit of deceitful legal advice from their attorneys :duh:.

R

But . . . but . . . they *are* applying the tech. All the "blows" are as per OW/ARCX and the continuing attacks are the work of the evil psyches. L Ron Hubbard said so, it must be true and if you doubt that, get thee hence to the class room and commence word clearing on KSW!!!
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
There's a rich history of allegations of blackmail by Scientology used against us poor wogs. From the FBI Files:

Hubbard5.jpg

. . . I'm beginning to wonder if expecting the FBI to actually do anything about the cult is just a pipe dream.
 

Jachs

Gold Meritorious Patron
There's a rich history of allegations of blackmail by Scientology used against us poor wogs. From the FBI Files:



. . . I'm beginning to wonder if expecting the FBI to actually do anything about the cult is just a pipe dream.

The FBI and the CoS are brothers in arms, J edgar Hoover would have delighted in El Rons tactics..esp the deviousness of getting confessions and keeping those files.Unless guns are drawn or a mass public protest, its business as usual.

Saying that, the church is shrinking and the abundance of groups plotting attcks is increasing dramatically, the fear has been evaporated.
How long can the minions slug away to pay DMs legal bill.
 

SchwimmelPuckel

Genuine Meatball
<snip> An individual is ALWAYS responsible for what he himself understands no matter what effort is applied by others to influence him in his understanding. It's the only way a person ever actually learns anything for himself. Otherwise what exists is simply another 'dittohead'. :eyeroll:
This would seem to give clever hoaxters some divine right to fool those less clever?

Intellectual darwinism?

Hmm.. There's always the 'risk' that the fool grows wise, and clobbers the living shit outta the hoaxter!

Well, there's some truth to it all the same. We do have that responsibility for our own understanding. But I do think that the clever has an obligation to be 'ethical'.. It's really pretty sick to 'fool the less clever'.

'Responsibility' is a recurrent subject.. I suspect Hubbard of infusing this very important concept with some carefully designed mindboggeling!

:yes:
 

Atalantan

Patron with Honors
That is possibly true Atlantan in some groups, but scientology is a group that prides itself on it's study tek and the full understanding of materials ... there is no (upfront) approval of dittoheads though it is of course tacitly approved and indeed necessary for full indoctrination to occur.

I haven't observed that happening to any great degree at ESMB, I have observed people by honest communication gradually dumping the cultic indoctrination of scientology though.


:yes:

I quite agree that there are few dittoheads on ESMB, and that the CoS has a very high percentage. The CoS has actually been selecting for dittoheads for over 30 years and have driven freethinkers out almost completely out at this point in time.
I saw it starting to happen in the 1970s. They apply a lot of pressure to be a dittohead.

I think the approval is totally up front and has been for some years, in that it is not even allowed to blink at "Command Intention".

Understanding of the materials was abandoned long ago except in the outlying orgs; the closer you get to Flag, the less understanding there is. And the less ethical people are, in every sense of the word. They pay lip service to those things, but their belief that they actually understand those things is a delusion.
 

Atalantan

Patron with Honors
Scientology tech is Scientology tech. Sure, there's Admin Tech, Study Tech, PTS/SP Tech, and OSA Tech - but *all* of it is Scientology tech. The fact that parts of it run contrary to each other does not remove it from the Scientology basket. There may be individual specific intents for each part of the tech but, overall, the encompassing intent is the aggrandisement of L Ron Hubbard and the personal enrichment of his successors. Each piece of the tech aids and abets that overall intention.


Some of the connections you make are arbitrary, not logical. For example, Hubbard's intention in putting together the auditing tech
could have been completely different from his intention in creating any of the other parts of what you call "scientology". The basket is
not it's contents, the contents are not the basket. The same basket can contain nourishing food and poison both, or a gun. The baby is not
the bath water is not the bathtub. The auditing tech could have been created with a benign intent, while the other parts, for other
purposes, including selfish ones. Failure to differentiate is, well, failure to differentiate. Also you have no way of being certain what the overall intention was,unless you are omniscient. So what you wrote is conjecture, or your theory or thesis or opinion, your own personal "take" on whatever of it you experienced and researched.

And even if his "overall intention" was100% selfish, including desires for money,fame and power, that still does not preclude him first developing a good product(the auditing technology) in order to have something to sell. How he chose to bring it to market, and the kind of organizations he built around it are separate issues.
Do you think Bill Gates created Windows software out of altruism? Or Steve Jobs, his products?
Extracting bits and pieces here and there is not, by its own definition, Scientology.

This is an arbitrary opinion as far as I can tell.
I have read every definition of "scientology" I could find. There are 14 entries in the Technical Dictionary alone. None of them even remotely say what you claim it is "by it's own definition". Of course I exclude anything that was written by others, as that is not necessarily scientology, anymore than what you say is scientology.


Nope. It is hugely relevant how L Ron Hubbard built the house. He built it with many different types of tech. The "house" that L Ron Hubbard built is *exactly* the same one David Miscavige manages today. Yes, probably, the house can be razed but given that the foundation was a lie about healing war injuries jumbled up with a plethora of half-understood plagiarisms, the results would be just the same.

This is obviously not true, that the house Hubbard built is exactly the same one DM manages today. Nothing in the world is exactly as it
was 40 years ago, or 25 years ago, or even 5 years ago. Moreover, the changes Miscavige has made in both the church structure, management,
and the auditing tech are very well documented all over the Internet.

I take it you believe the auditing tech doesn't work in the sense of helping anyone; Well, speak for yourself. You sound very bitter. I assume you are an "ex" scientologist and are therefore speaking from your own experience; I would be interested to know how long you were in, what years you were in, what training you did and what auditing you received. If this blows your cover I of course don't expect you to answer these questions. I bring them up because we used to say "Don't trust anyone over30", back in the 70s. Now my personal feeling is don't trust anyone who was in the CoS post about 1985, and especially post GAT. Nearly everyone who has been receiving training or "auditing', especially at Flag, is an overt product to a greater or lesser extent. That's because the "training" and "auditing" delivered at Flag nowadays are themselves non-standard overt products. As you correctly state, they are "poisoned".

I was connected peripherally to the world of scientology in the 1970s and a bit into the early 1980s, and it is very obvious to me that it has changed a lot over the years.
And it is academic, how Hubbard built the house or the basket or the bathtub, because he is gone and what happens to his structure is no
longer in his hands, hasn't been for sometime. And on the basis of the philosophy alone, a thousand different houses could be built, just as has happened with other philosophies. Come back in 1,500 - 2,500 years and see, how many hundreds or even thousands of different "baskets" and "houses" have been built around the basic notions of the scientology philsophy. Who is to say the dozens of differing outgrowths of Buddhism, for example, are "not really Buddhism"?

Or Christianity? The fact of The People's Temple atrocity does not indict the whole world of Christian churches and other Christian organizations.



I'm sure that's what Scientologists would like us to believe but it is, clearly, a nonsense. Sure, the entire first floor may be given over to auditing tech, but upstairs there's offices for executive, treasury, dissemination, qualification, and, of course, blackmail.

The above was your reply to this of mine: "The house is only there as a place for auditing tech to be delivered."

Yes, I did not qualify it enough, I stated an Ideal Scene, which we all know we don't have.


The shape of the bottle might not matter but the fact that it is labelled "wine" yet carries "poison" is relevant.

This is also true; the current contents are mislabeled. That needs to be dealt with and of course people here and else where are doing what they can to deal with it. We all know it is bad.

One of my overall points is that you and some others seem to feel and insist, even, that the way it is, is the way it must be, as though we are just helpless victims of some kind of deterministic Fate making it all happen the same way over and over again, like the movie "Groundhog Day." I don't subscribe to the notion that there's nothing we can do about any of it.

The way things are is not necessarily the way things will be, or the way things must be. That's not a rational or scientific view.
PS: In future, if you're going to quote me, I would be grateful if you'd indicate where you have "snipped" or just quote the entire passage to which you are responding. kthnxbai.
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
I quite agree that there are few dittoheads on ESMB, and that the CoS has a very high percentage. The CoS has actually been selecting for dittoheads for over 30 years and have driven freethinkers out almost completely out at this point in time.
I saw it starting to happen in the 1970s. They apply a lot of pressure to be a dittohead.

I think the approval is totally up front and has been for some years, in that it is not even allowed to blink at "Command Intention".

Understanding of the materials was abandoned long ago except in the outlying orgs; the closer you get to Flag, the less understanding there is. And the less ethical people are, in every sense of the word. They pay lip service to those things, but their belief that they actually understand those things is a delusion.


Mmmmm, I think the closer one gets to Flag, the closer one is to source and the people there are probably more understanding of what scientology is really all about than you think they are (it's just a business flogging services in the guise of a religion and not to be taken too seriously). They are mainly salespeople and the only thing that continues to surprise me is why they tolerate the conditions they work under when they could be in the real world doing the same job with way less stress and earning a good income!

I truly do not understand why you say that a person that was clearly a nutter with the morals of a sewer rat could have also created a good and decent thing in the tek ... have you read any of Veda's posts and references? Do you know of how Tubs treated those that he cared for (ie his own family)? Why would such a person be taken seriously as a saviour of planets?

Tubs was very much alive in the 70's when you say you saw the (so called) decline starting, so why are you letting him off the hook?

Do you think that Tubs (or his disciples) would have accepted any other response to his OT3 materials for instance, other than pure dittohead? I would like to have seen the result of someone in an OT3 course-room (in the 70's or earlier) having just been introduced to Xenu and who had the audacity to stand up and say "sorry, I am a free thinker and this really isn't quite working for me because I don't believe it " ... we both know that he would have been handled or booted whichever came first (and that applies to any of the courses and at any time since the inception of scientology).

The term dittoheads is not mine but it certainly describes anyone that has bought into the lies of scientology pre or post Tubs, it is and always was a con job and any gain was incidental and could probably be achieved in many other ways and with little or no money changing hands.

IMO.



:yes:
 
Last edited:
Top