Bill Frank's story about brainwashing (thread merge)

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Hey everybody, it's time for a pop tek quiz! There's only one question, but nobody has ever passed it.

1. Per LRH, the ONLY reason for a student of scientology to blow, is:

a) missed withholds
b) misunderstood words
c) overts

Take your time!

I took my time. Bad things happened (more answers).

a) Missed Withholds
b) Misunderstood Words
c) Overts
d) ARC breaks
e) PTS (per PTS/SP tech)
f) Out Int (per C/S Series)
g) No Results (per KSW)
h) Too Much Results (cognition that Scn is a hoax)


 

Auditor's Toad

Clear as Mud
This topic of Ron & responsibility is really the ultimate in hilarity !

<snip> There is a section of Hubbard text in which he talks about "responsibility" (I don't remember what HCOB or PL) but most staff or ex staff are aware of it. In this text Hubbard states that every person must take responsibility for every destructive act which occurs. For example, if a car accident occurred in Keokuk, Iowa the previous night where a drunk motorist killed a bicycle rider, the person reading about this must assume responsibility for the event.

Hubbard goes on to say that for most people this statement is "out gradient" but at the top of the "Bridge" the person will look at things in this manner. We staff members sometimes discussed this topic in the coffee shops. Pretty much we all agreed that none of us were at the level where this was true for us but we believed that Hubbard had reached this level and that all of us would some day reach it as well. We were naive, very, very naive to accept this as being true.

<snip>

It is so revealing and ironic that LRH would knowingly perpetrate a lie and false data as a major building block in his supposedly pure tech so that he could allegedly keep control of his Staff and Orgs.
<snip>

Lakey

One could spend countless time pondering the single mind fuck of Hisself attempt at introverting all into responsible for all the destructive acts ( nevermind there might also have to be responsible for all the good in his universe of op terms - LOL ! ) by either over analizing (<-- spelling is correct ) or garden variety answer hunger.

But, one could ask just a simple question about responsibility :
What, that was truely worthwhile, did Hisself ever take responsibility for ?

Was it the condition he was in?

What is the honest answer?
 

ClearedSP

Patron with Honors
I took my time. Bad things happened (more answers).

a) Missed Withholds
b) Misunderstood Words
c) Overts
d) ARC breaks
e) PTS (per PTS/SP tech)
f) Out Int (per C/S Series)
g) No Results (per KSW)
h) Too Much Results (cognition that Scn is a hoax)



The first three were ones where I could cite a reference where he said, very explicitly, that it was the ONLY reason such a person would blow. Apparently he believed none of them, and was using overts, withholds and MUs as control mechanisms.

I just thought that it was amusing that he said all of those were the ONLY reason, and reissued some of those HCOBs later, so that there was regular shuffling of what was the newest issue. No single answer could ever win.

There was never a time when I was in, that tech and policy weren't thick with contradictions. I just didn't realize (until this thread) that he'd give multiple answers, considering ALL of them to be a crock.
 

Auditor's Toad

Clear as Mud
Just joking Lakey, I'm not a tech expert, and I think people leave for all kinds of personal reasons.

It just dawned on me that there are people who were never in scn that are so far more expert on the "tech" than those who have & are spending (spent) either most or all of their life ( 3 or 4 decades !) devoted to the study & / or "correct application" of the "tech" !

Why ? They, the never ins or very early outs, never bought the bullshit in the first place or tasted the turd & spit it out pretty dang quickly while the rest of 'em ( me so included ) drank deeply long and hard of the BS based KoolAid.

It is "we" who didn't understand the "tech"!

I got old on that stuff.
 
Last edited:

Smilla

Ordinary Human
Trying to boil down the reasons someone left to one single magic reason, is ridiculous. It's like asking someone why they joined the army, and thinking that everyone you ask will give the same answer.
 

Auditor's Toad

Clear as Mud
Trying to boil down the reasons someone left to one single magic reason, is ridiculous. It's like asking someone why they joined the army, and thinking that everyone you ask will give the same answer.

scn is based on one-size-fits-all ( aka " bank is bank, all the same )!
 
Last edited:

Boojuum

Silver Meritorious Patron
I spent the morning reading this amazing thread and have reached some conclusions:

Bill Franks was exposed to a great deal of Scientology and LRH and has an amazingly small amount to say about it. BILL, MAY I HAVE SOME MORE PLEASE? Crikey, I'm dying here.

HH is a very talented wit but funny because a lot of his stuff is too true. The ne plus ultra of JandD. Thanks!

Chuck Beatty needs to write the full history of Scientology. So much drama! He has a love of the real reasons behind much of the crap while showing a true appreciation for the many who did so much.

RogerB has one of most objective insights into the mental tech of Scientology--the good and the bad but always attentive to what makes sense. So many exes experienced great auditing but ended up getting severely overrun on O/W write-ups or processing. I'm grateful that RogerB pointed this out. The overuse of OW is one of the biggest crimes of Scientology IMHO.

ARC breaks cause people to leave. Well, that's nice to know. What other tech basic truths can be exposed as false?
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
Lakey I tend to believe a great part of the SP & disconnection BS had to do with L Con TheTurd's deep desire to keep the group from hearing the true circumstances as to why the person was dispatched.

Now are there some people one does better by cutting ties & not being around ? Of course ! And as Hisself pointed out ( having most probably stolen from elsewhere ) that for a lie to 'work" it needs a grain of truth in it.

Both you & I - and most likely the great majority of people here - have seen people "declared" by Hisself" ( many "fair gamed") for purely political reasons. ( More thousands than any of can ever name!)

The Mini Me's of Hisself did their best to carry on the traditional of shattered people to the best of their ability.

He damn well "got" what he was doing. and as , I believe it, lived in stark terror of being his con being found out by his followers and/or the law.

Just my 1/2 cents reply :)

Yes, Toady, I agree with you completely. A technology which is advertised to encourage and further communication actually prevents its member from communicating with one another. As you say, in that way each one of us was prevented from hearing the true circumstances surround any conflict.

Hubbard's Mini Me's did a pretty fair job of carrying on L. Ron's tradition of shattered people. In fact, the current head Mini Me is perhaps even better at it than Hubbard was!

Yes, we both saw people's heads put on a pike for political reasons only. Look what happened to Mayo, he was the best and most loyal tech man Hubbard ever had, saved Hubbard's life and then had his head put on a pike for only political ends. The way David Mayo was treated after such loyal service hit an all time low, even for C of S.
Lakey
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
Trying to boil down the reasons someone left to one single magic reason, is ridiculous. It's like asking someone why they joined the army, and thinking that everyone you ask will give the same answer.

I agree that there is not one single reason but the various reasons can be categorized. Using your joining the army example there could be numerous answers but in summary they might be categorized into just a few boxes.

Category 1 could be - Those who want to serve their country to be patriotic.

Category II could be - Those who want the training which the army can offer them and the monetary assistance they can receive to attend college when they get out.

Category III could be - Those whose family members made their careers in the army and so the person wants to continue the family tradition.

Categary IV might be - The person doesn't have any specific plans and nothing better to so he/she enlists in the army.

In this way, the infinity of reasons for joining the army can be condensed into just a few categories.

So it is for leaving staff in Scientology. The particulars of each person's experience are all quite different but a common thread runs through them all. That is why the "My Story in Scn" section on a board such as ESMB is so interesting and enlightening to read. Many of us have shared similar terrible experiences on staff in Scn but each experience is unique and has its own quirks and twists.

Hubbard told everyone that the only reason a person leaves is because he has committed overts against Scientology.

Also, he revealed to Bill Franks that the above was untrue and a person leaves only because he has an ARC break with Scientology.

Smila then suggested that the main reason for leaving was being over inflated, having too much pressure put upon you.

I offer two more categories which seem to run through many of the exit stories: The first category concerns "Promises Made but not Kept" and the second has to do with "Out Exchange" where a person is busting his balls giving everything he's got to support Scientology and in return he gets almost nothing in exchange or even negative exchange by being yelled at, humiliated and degraded.

I am suggesting that Smila's category and my two categories will cause ARC breaks so they fall broadly under the definition which Hubbard gave to Bill Franks. However, they are very large categories which run through many of the exit stories and seem large enough and common enough to justify separate categories. It's all subjective and just my opinion but it is usually helpful in attempting to understand some large phenomena to categorize it into generalized boxes.
Lakey
 

Auditor's Toad

Clear as Mud
One of the true beautys of the cult is that sooner or later is going to ( caution : highly technical word to be used here --- > ) piss off everybody that ever had anything to do with it or ever heard of it - and they'll leave it.

That is a good thing that it is it's own built in self-destruction.

Yeah, that old Ella Ritz was a smart one wasn't he !
 

ClearedSP

Patron with Honors
I think that almost all people leave scientology due to a specific reality break.

It doesn't work as advertised.
 

Smilla

Ordinary Human
I can give you my reason for leaving:

I'm wasting my time here.

That was all there was to it at the time, but obviously other issues surfaced later. It's very basic to my character that I refuse to spend any time on things I don't want to do. Not a second, no way :omg:
 

XenusChild

Patron with Honors
I can give you my reason for leaving:

I'm wasting my time here.

That was all there was to it at the time, but obviously other issues surfaced later. It's very basic to my character that I refuse to spend any time on things I don't want to do. Not a second, no way :omg:

Time AND money! :duh:
 

ClearedSP

Patron with Honors
I can give you my reason for leaving:

I'm wasting my time here.

Well, yeah, but if we'd all been throwing away our glasses, getting our IQs into the Guinness Book, and knocking off hats at 50 yards, you wouldn't have felt like that, would you? :biggrin:

I left primarily because I thought the organization wasn't being run sanely, but if scientology delivered what Hubbard promised, that would not have been the case.
 
Well, yeah, but if we'd all been throwing away our glasses, getting our IQs into the Guinness Book, and knocking off hats at 50 yards, you wouldn't have felt like that, would you? :biggrin:

I left primarily because I thought the organization wasn't being run sanely, but if scientology delivered what Hubbard promised, that would not have been the case.

actually, i just passed the eye exam renewing liscence and no longer required to wear corrective lenses

and i got some WILD "OT" stories even though i'm just an ARC straightrazor release

i probably picked the "OT" abilty from the LSD but the scn training helps me control it

and if any children are passing through:

LSD is very DANGEROUS!!!

don't touch it
 

Loohan

Am I Mettaya?
Why yes, I even recall that the GO line was to blame it on George Orwell :eyeroll: Thanks for your answer.

(Re: who said the way to get rich is start a church)
Around the early to mid-80s LRH gave an interview to some wog paper. The interview was shown around the org. I remember this was not long after the STCC(?) came out with its modified TRs such as a no-answer TR. LRH did this no-answer thing a few times in this interview (basically just changing the subject in one's reply as I recall). Like, wogs are too dumb to notice.:whistling:

One of the questions was, had he not said this about getting rich? To which LRH replied that some other famous SciFi author had said that. Not Orwell but one of the big-name SciFi old cronies of LRH. Maybe Heinlein.
 

mischief

Patron with Honors
I have always hated that term 'wog' and stomped on anyone who said it when I was 'in'.
Can we just NOT use it, especially now that we are out..please?
 

Loohan

Am I Mettaya?
One of the questions was, had he not said this about getting rich? To which LRH replied that some other famous SciFi author had said that. Not Orwell but one of the big-name SciFi old cronies of LRH. Maybe Heinlein.

Then again, maybe it was Orwell he mentioned. This was 30 years ago.
But it was Ron saying it, not just the GO.
 

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
Richard Leiby quoting Vaughn young
in The Washington Post Dec 25th 1994 LINK

Question: Did L. Ron Hubbard state that
the way to make money was to start a religion?
Answer... No. , This is an unfounded rumor.
The rumor got started in 1948; according to the
church, when "one individual" claimed
he heard Hubbard make such a comment
during a lecture. "The only two people who
could be found who attended the very lec-
ture in 1948 denied that Mr. Hubbard ever
made the statement," says the media guide?

But the man who invited Hubbard to
speak, Sam Moskowitz, a 74-year-old sci-
ence fiction editor in Newark, swears to this
day that Hubbard made the remark in front
of 23 members of the Eastern Science Fic-
tion Association, most of whom are now
dead.

The church also ignores a 1983 book by
Lloyd Arthur Eshbach, 'Over My Shoulder.
Reflections of the Science Fiction Era."
Eshbach recounts a 1948 meeting with Hubbard
and two others in New York-

"The incident is stamped indelibly in my
mind because of one statement that Ron
Hubbard made. What led him to say what he
did I can't recall-But in so many words
Hubbard said- -'I'd like to start a religion,
That's where the money is"

Two other Hubbard contemporaries quote
him similarly in the unauthorized 1987 biog-
raphy "Bare-Faced Messiah." And two sci-
ence fiction experts contacted for this story
confirm -that Hubbard made such remarks
before be wrote his treatise on Dianetics,
which was first published in the magazine
Astounding Science Fiction. But church offi-
cials maintain that these people are sorely
confused. The church says another famous
writer said the exact same thing----George
Orwell, who wrote to a friend in 1938 that
there might be a lot of cash in starting a
new religion-

"It seems that Orwell's comment has been
misattributed to Mr. Hubbard," the church
media guide tells reporters.

Only one problem: The Scientology opera-
tive who says he came up with the Orwell
explanation is Robert Vaughn Young, who
quit the central church in 1989 after 20
years as a spokesman. While researching the
life of the Founder, Young says he talked to
three Hubbard associates from the fiction days who remembered Hubbard talking about getting out of the penny-a-word
game for the more lucrative field of religion.
Young ignored those comments, of course.
and by a stroke of luck came up with the
Orwell quote.

The irony is beyond Orwellian. But the
man 'who wrote '1984" would certainly relish
the scenario. The Hubbard quote gets sent
down the memory tube, replaced by another,
more suitable source. Over time, as Orwell
understood. a lie can become the truth. Who
will dispute it?
 
Top