Birth of the Sea Org

[AlphOhm]

Welcome Joe !

I loved reading your story, thank you.

 

[Telepathetic]

Thank you so much for sharing this great story!

You should write a book, PLEASE!!

Oh and welcome

TP

 

[Blue Spirit]

You Hit the Nail On the Head

You said, "He announced that it was time the Sea Org came out of non-existence – it was time to make an impact on the orgs out there beginning with St Hill. It was mission time. The mission’s purpose was mainly to assert and affirm SO authority and presence. "

When someone makes an error at the center of a circle, let's say a deviation by a few degrees, as they get further and further out from the center that error is further and further from where they should be--think of where the astronauts would be if they aimed at the moon and could not change course. The tolerance would have to be incredibly small at the start point.

The above quote showed me that the error on trying to get the SO into power was 180 degrees , because the way to get out of non-existence does NOT say, go show them who is boss! What would have happened if the SO had actually tried to find out what was needed and wanted and produce it?

Would we now have a relationship of creative interaction where we, the parishioners, were thought of as valuable beings instead of just cash cows?

Thank you for your story and the datum above.
M6

Such simple realizations. Why didn't I ever see that !

 

[Enthetan]

I had, for example, been uncertain as to what
extent one could trace back the current violence
in the Sea Org to Hubbard. I knew that some of
the people who had worked alongside him subsequently
behaved appallingly -- that this had not started with
the Miscavige era.

But now you relate this incident of him taking a swing
at you. It seems then that physical violence was Source
too.

Up until the confidential materials, LRH had lots of influence, but no real power. The bad behavior came from the power that "confidential materials" gave LRH. Before, LRH HAD to be charming, because people could tell him to get stuffed, while still having access to Scientology materials.

Now, LRH had this big carrot he could dangle in front of people, namely the OT levels, something he could grant or withhold from individuals as the whim struck him. It was the SO monopoly on access to the OT levels that gave them the power to act like thugs if they were in the mood, and LRH's character could safely show through.

 

[Type4_PTS]

Joe,

Welcome to ESMB!

Loved the story.......ready for more whenever you are.

 

[Veda]

Up until the confidential materials, LRH had lots of influence, but no real power. The bad behavior came from the power that "confidential materials" gave LRH. Before, LRH HAD to be charming, because people could tell him to get stuffed, while still having access to Scientology materials.

Now, LRH had this big carrot he could dangle in front of people, namely the OT levels, something he could grant or withhold from individuals as the whim struck him. It was the SO monopoly on access to the OT levels that gave them the power to act like thugs if they were in the mood, and LRH's character could safely show through.

What's so difficult to accept is how Hubbard could have been aware of so much wisdom, yet still proceeded with his self-aggrandizing objective, first described in his 1938 "real goal" statement.

By 1965 Hubbard had the bare essentials of his own fan(antic) club & totalist (totalitarian) cult in place, and functioning: non-confidential counseling in which the person was (primarily) asked, leading to confidential counseling in which the person was (primarily) told ("Implantology"); and internal and external use of "ethics" to police thoughts ("any unkind thoughts about L. Ron Hubbard?"), to intimidate ("Your next endless agonized trillions"), etc. ('KSW'), to overwhelm ('Fair Game Law').

There was no Sea Org but there was "HCO," and a year later there would be the "Guardian Office."

Over the next several years, the subjects of "Intelligence" (Scientology Intelligence tech, including spying and covert attack), and then "Public Relations," would be developed further, becoming part of the "tech," along with "Hard Sell tech," and the Sea Org and its "tech," including the "RPF" and the "RPF's RPF."

1965: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=381568&postcount=13

 

[lkwdblds]

Great Story! A couple of Comments to It.

Joe, an absolutely great post and a vital record filling in gaps in a key era in Scientology History!

I had a couple of topics to comment on:
1. Pioneers and Consolidators - I ran into this phenomena in the early 70's. I believe it was mentioned in a Policy letter. LRH says something to the effect that certain people are unorthodox, don't obey conventional rules and are prone to ethics problems but he states that they can be used successfully in opening up new territories. There is actually a pretty well defined tech which was developed by LRH covering this, it was the "Product Officer, Organizing Officer System" I was training on this at CCLA just before I was plucked from CCLA to leave for the Apollo. I heard 8 tapes on this series and thought they were excellent. There was going to be both a Product Officer and an Organizing Officer for every Division on the Org Board. The Product Officer was deemed the Senior of the two. Unfortunately, this system never went into effect and this area was left to random handlings which helped ruin the Sea Org.

[B2. ]Bypassing the French port of Brest and lying to the British Port Authorities about it[/B]. This is another characteristic of LRH management and living life. Ignore the existing authorities and lie like Hell. Of course this odious procedure being deeply ingrained into Sea Org operations from there on out.


3. Wrong Targeting Your being yelled at by LRH getting right in your face and being kicked off of your post for something you had no connection to is all too typical. This plus carelessly refering to people as DB's, incompetents and insane for no other reason than that they did not agree 100% with some manifestation of LRH's game is totally sick and psychotic. In the extreme case, declaraing people to be SP's for political reasons when they have none of the 12 SP characteristics is a criminal act punishable in courts in most countres, Slander for oral abuses, Libel if they are written. No Organization who engages routinely in these activities as its normal matter of course will ever grow and prosper. This can be seen in the S.O.'s current condition in today's world.

4. Discarding your best People as if they were worn out socks or worse This insanity requires some kind of False Data and Fixed Ideas to be existing for it to flourish. You have to assume that all people are pretty much robots, just bodies with feeble minds who can learn orders verbatim and carry them out. Any thinking ability or personal initiative is actually a NEGATIVE WHICH MUST BE STAMPED OUT! Hence people who have valiantly helped to build the place are thrown out out in disgrace with lies and crimes manufactured against them. David Mayo is probably the most stellar example. No group who engages in this type of activity will amount to anything as current S.O. management is living testimony to.

5. Bending information in the direction of desired conclusions. In science and mathematics, proofs and theories which do this are referred to as ad hoc. Your theory that one's mind is doing this continuously is quite novel. I can't accept such a radical departure from my current belief system but I do not rule your theory out as totally implausible either. One thing that I do agree on is that if a person mocks up an ad hoc case which is able to explain current circumstances and then runs out that ad hoc case with glorious wins and full recovery, then that is valid tech and should be incorporated into one's technical arsenal of proven and valid tech.

6. Veda's comment about how could LRH have become aware of so much wisdom and yet carried forward with his self aggrandizement?

Wow, this is a tough one to explain! Maybe, LRH set self aggranizement and hammering his name into the history books as his number one goal. He stumbled into Dianetics unexpectedly, not realizing it would be as widely accepted as it was, and then took up the challenge to actually uncover more data about the mind, mainly as a means to make it more possible to assure his permanent aggrandizement in the hisistory books of the world. After all, what is the accumulation of some actual wisdom got to do with derailing his original goal. I have been told by someone that LRH said that the hardest part of being SOURCE and being the number 1 guy is that there is no one or nothing higher to which he can appeal to put in his ethics on him so he had to do it himself and he was finding this a difficult task.
Lakey

 

[Zinjifar]

In the extreme case, declaraing people to be SP's for political reasons when they have none of the 12 SP characteristics is a criminal act punishable in courts in most countres, Slander for oral abuses, Libel if they are written.

Uh, I doubt that calling someone an 'SP' would be counted as libel/slander *anywhere*, much less be considered 'criminal'.

However, calling someone a Scientologist might well be.

Zinj

 

[Ladybird]

Thank you Joe!

 

[lkwdblds]

How about mailing written material to ones employer.

Uh, I doubt that calling someone an 'SP' would be counted as libel/slander *anywhere*, much less be considered 'criminal'.

However, calling someone a Scientologist might well be.

Zinj

How about mailing written material to one's employer accusing some one of being evil and being a suppressive person. The alleged untruths turn out not to even be true but the accused is fired from his job anyway. I think that would be a slam dunk case for an attorney representing the accused to file Libel charges against the accuser.

A Suppressive person is said to have a majority of 12 odious characteristics, that means at least 7, If someone speaks negatively about someone else suggesting that they have at least 7 undesirable personalty conditions to another person or worse yet prints it and distribute the printing, those certainly are criminal acts which can be and are routinely litigated in court. They are considered tort actions. A tort is a wrongdoing for which damages can ge brought. Character assassintion is a serious tort, it is a serious crime. If a person is libeled in print, they can lose their reputation, their family their business, their home and so forth. This is very serious business and C of S published these Goldenrod charges with wide distribution, almost always manufactured falsehoods, about people on a routine basis.

The fact that you do not think that this is criminal behavior and could not be brought to trial really amazes me. Just Google "slander" and "libel" in a legal dictionary as I just did and you will see that these are crimes (torts actions).
All you have to do is to provide the Scientology definition of "Suppressive" person and show that 12 specific types of non desirable behavior are listed and that you are being accused of having 7 or more of those characteristcs and the connection for the slander or libel lawsuit is immediately established. Welcome to planet Earth!
Lakey

 

[Zinjifar]

How about mailing written material to one's employer accusing some one of being evil and being a suppressive person. The alleged untruths turn out not to even be true but the accused is fired from his job anyway. I think that would be a slam dunk case for an attorney representing the accused to file Libel charges against the accuser.

A Suppressive person is said to have a majority of 12 odious characteristics, that means at least 7, If someone speaks negatively about someone else suggesting that they have at least 7 undesirable personalty conditions to another person or worse yet prints it and distribute the printing, those certainly are criminal acts which can be and are routinely litigated in court. They are considered tort actions. A tort is a wrongdoing for which damages can ge brought. Character assassintion is a serious tort, it is a serious crime. If a person is libeled in print, they can lose their reputation, their family their business, their home and so forth. This is very serious business and C of S published these Goldenrod charges with wide distribution, almost always manufactured falsehoods, about people on a routine basis.

The fact that you do not think that this is criminal behavior and could not be brought to trial really amazes me. Just Google "slander" and "libel" in a legal dictionary as I just did and you will see that these are crimes (torts actions).
All you have to do is to provide the Scientology definition of "Suppressive" person and show that 12 specific types of non desirable behavior are listed and that you are being accused of having 7 or more of those characteristcs and the connection for the slander or libel lawsuit is immediately established. Welcome to planet Earth!
Lakey

I'm sure this is getting frustrating for you Lakey; it is for me too Thanks for bearing with me, but, I do think it's something worth clarifying.

What I'm saying is that calling someone a 'Suppressive Person' seems practically impossible to successfully sue for as libel (or slander.) Primarily because *no such thing as a Suppressive Person as defined by L. Ron Hubbard exists*. And, that's talking about a civil action; a tort claimed to recover damages. Criminal is even more straightforward, but, I was surprised to see this reference:

http://www.rcfp.org/handbook/c01p10.html

Yes, you *can* sue for anything, if you've got the funds and the inclination, but, you'll be unlikely to prevail or even get the suit to court without being thrown out.

Say, for example, some paranoid schizophrenic with his own cosmology invents a magic creature he calls a 'Goomphat' and he calls you a Goomphat. You're not going to get anywhere suing him for libel, although, I suppose if he defines a goomphat as someone who molests children and steals pennies out of wishing wells you might get laughed out of court somewhat later in the game. On the other hand, if he claims that you specifically molested 'child A, in the library with the candlestick'. However, it'd be up to you to show that him calling you a Goomphat was calling you a child molester. And, his attorney would say 'My client's delusional critter of Goomphat includes numerous criteria, not all of which are necessary to being an actual Goomphat'.

Much like Scientology's 'SP Characteristics', most of which would be brushed off as purely opinion no matter how odious the charge. Would be considered a personal opinion. Why, Ron even goes so far as to say that anyone below 2.0 on the Tone Scale has bad breath and body odor. But, I can accuse you of both or either (not that I would) with impunity because the court would see it as pure opinion.

Could you sue the 'Church' for tortuous interference if their SP Declare interfered in your business dealings with Scientologists? Very likely, whether the accusation of being a 'Suppressive Person' was libel or not.

And, criminally, if I told our previously mentioned nutjob that you were a Goomphat because I thought he would then harm you, well, I would possibly be criminally guilty of trying to harm you. But, not of libel.

Zinj

 

[cakemaker]

Joe, an absolutely great post and a vital record filling in gaps in a key era in Scientology History!

6. Veda's comment about how could LRH have become aware of so much wisdom and yet carried forward with his self aggrandizement?

Wow, this is a tough one to explain! Maybe, LRH set self aggranizement and hammering his name into the history books as his number one goal. He stumbled into Dianetics unexpectedly, not realizing it would be as widely accepted as it was, and then took up the challenge to actually uncover more data about the mind, mainly as a means to make it more possible to assure his permanent aggrandizement in the hisistory books of the world. After all, what is the accumulation of some actual wisdom got to do with derailing his original goal. I have been told by someone that LRH said that the hardest part of being SOURCE and being the number 1 guy is that there is no one or nothing higher to which he can appeal to put in his ethics on him so he had to do it himself and he was finding this a difficult task.
Lakey

This is the really interesting part. I never met LRH so I can only offer opinion based on having read and listened to a huge amount of issues and tapes, not to mention reading on the internet as many first hand stories as I can find.

It seems to be true that from his earliest days LRH was a driven man. He certainly was marching to his own drummer, but what the beat was is sort of confusing. At various times he behaved in an apalling, selfish and not so sane way. At other times he was truly a caring, brilliant and intensely charismatic individual. At all times he was certain - right or wrong.
It may be that his various goals were all true for him, even when they contradicted each other - and perhaps that's what finally made him lose control and the organization became what it is now.

I read one interesting perspective that a lot of the seeds of the eventual non-survival path of Scientology were planted in the early 60's, i.e. ethics policies, knowledge reports and sec checking, the SO, the GO, heavy conspiracy theories, etc. At the time LRH was busy exploring goals and goals packages and was running all kinds of experimental processes on himself. Much of it went nowhere and much of it was left in restimulation. For a driven personality like his, this must have been like throwing gasoline on the fire. I can only imagine the conflict between the goals of "to control others" and "to set others free".

In his Affirmations, any number of those goals would create horrendous GPMs.

Anyways, I've always remembered something he said (it was either in the FEBC or ESTO tapes) that as the creator of an organization, you get to tell others what and how to do things, but you get to go and do whatever you want.

 

[lkwdblds]

I am not a lawyer but crazier cases have been tried...

I'm sure this is getting frustrating for you Lakey; it is for me too Thanks for bearing with me, but, I do think it's something worth clarifying.

What I'm saying is that calling someone a 'Suppressive Person' seems practically impossible to successfully sue for as libel (or slander.) Primarily because *no such thing as a Suppressive Person as defined by L. Ron Hubbard exists*. And, that's talking about a civil action; a tort claimed to recover damages. Criminal is even more straightforward, but, I was surprised to see this reference:

http://www.rcfp.org/handbook/c01p10.html

Yes, you *can* sue for anything, if you've got the funds and the inclination, but, you'll be unlikely to prevail or even get the suit to court without being thrown out.

Say, for example, some paranoid schizophrenic with his own cosmology invents a magic creature he calls a 'Goomphat' and he calls you a Goomphat. You're not going to get anywhere suing him for libel, although, I suppose if he defines a goomphat as someone who molests children and steals pennies out of wishing wells you might get laughed out of court somewhat later in the game. On the other hand, if he claims that you specifically molested 'child A, in the library with the candlestick'. However, it'd be up to you to show that him calling you a Goomphat was calling you a child molester. And, his attorney would say 'My client's delusional critter of Goomphat includes numerous criteria, not all of which are necessary to being an actual Goomphat'.

Much like Scientology's 'SP Characteristics', most of which would be brushed off as purely opinion no matter how odious the charge. Would be considered a personal opinion. Why, Ron even goes so far as to say that anyone below 2.0 on the Tone Scale has bad breath and body odor. But, I can accuse you of both or either (not that I would) with impunity because the court would see it as pure opinion.

Could you sue the 'Church' for tortuous interference if their SP Declare interfered in your business dealings with Scientologists? Very likely, whether the accusation of being a 'Suppressive Person' was libel or not.

And, criminally, if I told our previously mentioned nutjob that you were a Goomphat because I thought he would then harm you, well, I would possibly be criminally guilty of trying to harm you. But, not of libel.

Zinj

Wow, this must be important to you. This is the longest post I have ever seen you make. Okay, I have no dog in this race. I get the gist of what you are saying, no problems there for me. I would just comment a lttle more for my position. First, isn't there a term, "The anti-social personality which is actually part of the vocabulary of psychology and psychiatry? Doesn't Hubbard say that his suppressive person is nearly analgous to the anti-social personality but he gives the 12 points to look for while they don't?

Zinj, it would really be a plaintiff's choice if they wished to pursue being called an SP as slander in a court of law and here is the key to me....I think it would be an individual lawyers decision to make as to whether to take on such a case. Some lawyers might take such a case on and many will not. If the case was taken and tried and a decision was rendered then one of us would be proven correct. Unless something like that has happened, what you or I think is simply our opinion. Just for the sake of peace, I would say that more times than not, your take on the subject would hold sway over mine. I believe this would be true.

Do a long post like this every once in a while, you do a nice job at it.
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

Some clever observations you made.

This is the really interesting part. I never met LRH so I can only offer opinion based on having read and listened to a huge amount of issues and tapes, not to mention reading on the internet as many first hand stories as I can find.

It seems to be true that from his earliest days LRH was a driven man. He certainly was marching to his own drummer, but what the beat was is sort of confusing. At various times he behaved in an apalling, selfish and not so sane way. At other times he was truly a caring, brilliant and intensely charismatic individual. At all times he was certain - right or wrong.
It may be that his various goals were all true for him, even when they contradicted each other - and perhaps that's what finally made him lose control and the organization became what it is now.

The part I underlined is really a brilliant use of the English language and a nice metaphor!! The entire paragraph is well organized and makes sense!

I read one interesting perspective that a lot of the seeds of the eventual non-survival path of Scientology were planted in the early 60's, i.e. ethics policies, knowledge reports and sec checking, the SO, the GO, heavy conspiracy theories, etc. At the time LRH was busy exploring goals and goals packages and was running all kinds of experimental processes on himself. Much of it went nowhere and much of it was left in restimulation. For a driven personality like his, this must have been like throwing gasoline on the fire. I can only imagine the conflict between the goals of "to control others" and "to set others free".

In his Affirmations, any number of those goals would create horrendous GPMs.

Anyways, I've always remembered something he said (it was either in the FEBC or ESTO tapes) that as the creator of an organization, you get to tell others what and how to do things, but you get to go and do whatever you want.

He sure lived by the above credo, namely doing whatever he wanted. The main fault I have with him is not that he did whatever he wanted but that if and when people got hurt or trampled on he seemed to not care one damn about the pain or suffering which he caused them. That trait of his is the fork in the road from which I part company from him. Thanks for your fine comments on my post.
Lakey

 

[Enthetan]

Joe, an absolutely great post and a vital record filling in gaps in a key era in Scientology History!

I had a couple of topics to comment on:
1. Pioneers and Consolidators - I ran into this phenomena in the early 70's. I believe it was mentioned in a Policy letter. LRH says something to the effect that certain people are unorthodox, don't obey conventional rules and are prone to ethics problems but he states that they can be used successfully in opening up new territories. There is actually a pretty well defined tech which was developed by LRH covering this, it was the "Product Officer, Organizing Officer System" I was training on this at CCLA just before I was plucked from CCLA to leave for the Apollo. I heard 8 tapes on this series and thought they were excellent. There was going to be both a Product Officer and an Organizing Officer for every Division on the Org Board. The Product Officer was deemed the Senior of the two. Unfortunately, this system never went into effect and this area was left to random handlings which helped ruin the Sea Org.

The problem that totalitarians face is that they need people with independence and personal drive to get things done, yet these people are more comfortable independently following a goal than being a minion. Thus they need to be eliminated as soon as the current problem has been solved.

After the Russian Revolution, the original Bolsheviks were the first to be liquidated. Lenin and Stalin were uncomfortable with them -- people who knew how to plan a revolution could be effective in ousting THEM.

Thus the fate of anybody that DM is afraid might be a more effective leader than DM.

 

[Zinjifar]

The unspoken secret is that Scientology since David Miscavige is *far* more 'successful' than Ron managed.

Depending on how you define 'success' of course. But, if it's by flying ashtrays or OT Powerz, it's a wash.

Zinj

 

[lkwdblds]

As usual these days, I don't agree with you on this.

The unspoken secret is that Scientology since David Miscavige is *far* more 'successful' than Ron managed.

Depending on how you define 'success' of course. But, if it's by flying ashtrays or OT Powerz, it's a wash.

Zinj

You correctly mention the correct item, of course, which is how success is defined. Some differences between the LRH and DM administrations are as follows; This is going to look something like a Helluva Hoax "Shtick"

Ron said, "If it's not fun, it"s not Scientology." DM says "If it's fun it's not Scientology.

Ron says the second dynamic is the sexual dynamic, both the act itself and the rearing of children. DM changed the dynamic from sex to creativity.

Ron fought off government attacks and attacks from organized medicine and psychiatry, DM got into bed with the IRS with a clandestine secrete deal plus has a former IRS chief on the Board of one of his major Corporations.

Ron taught the best form of exchange was to exchange in abundance. DM tries to figure out ways to obtain monies from the public without any exchange at all by seeking donations such as over 100 million for the Super Power Building with no exchange whatsoever given to anyone in return. Same for most of the "Ideal Orgs" which lie unused because their design and furnishing phase can not get going because the public extended their credit to the limit in the frist phase of acquiting the building.

Ron stressed the Training Method as better than just receiving auditing and urged staff and public without large incomes to go about moving up the Bridge by taking the training route. Now, this emphasis has been completely dropped. I do not think staff are expected to move up the bridge anymore and co auditing one's way up the bridge is totally de emphasized. The bridge is designed for only the extremely rich receiving professional auditing while coming on staff is no longer a viable way of obtaining auditing for very little cost, nor is the training route viable for public.

This is only the tiniest scratching of the surface of things which are different. Probably to list all the changes which have occurred would require perhaps 25 pages of text.

As to the difference in OT abilities, read the Advanced mgazines from the 60's or 70's and in particular read the success stories. Its all about leaving one's body and using tractor and pressor beings and preventing cars from going off mountain roads and crashing or sci fi type of stories in the 70's while today's OT stories are more like the wins from the lower grades back in the 70's. By removing the old OT 4, 5, 6 from the grade chart and placing old OT 7 between OT III and OT III Expanded (thank you Veda) and replacing the upper bridge with various levels of NOTs and then having NOTs render OT IIIX superflous, all the old OT Levels which had something to do with doing exercises to develop and improve OT abailities were were completely removed from the grade chart or watered down so much that they might as well not exist.

There are enormous changes, all for the bad, unless you like walking around inside of near empty palatial style buildings and enjoying the Sultan of Dubai or Prince of the United Arab Emerites type of furnishings in the few Orgs which were able to fund their phase 2's and the Archtecturally Award wining facades of empty buildings. That would be the only improvement existing today that I can see.
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

Outstanding Post Enthetan

The problem that totalitarians face is that they need people with independence and personal drive to get things done, yet these people are more comfortable independently following a goal than being a minion. Thus they need to be eliminated as soon as the current problem has been solved.

After the Russian Revolution, the original Bolsheviks were the first to be liquidated. Lenin and Stalin were uncomfortable with them -- people who knew how to plan a revolution could be effective in ousting THEM.

Thus the fate of anybody that DM is afraid might be a more effective leader than DM.

Enthetan - I sort of knew all this stuff but never connected the dots. This seems to present a completely plausible reason why LRH ran things as he did. When DM got in, he stepped on the gas pedal and speeded up getting rid of those with independent goals and independent thoughts.
Lakey

 

[Veda]

-snip-

Ron said, "If it's not fun, it"s not Scientology."

-snip-

Really? Assuming this is so, was this before or after his 1951 "dispose of quietly and without sorrow" statement, his 1955 "ruin utterly" statement, his 1959 "There are men dead because they attacked us" statement, his introduction of Security Checking in 1961, and the "deadly serious activity" 'Keeping Scientology Working', SP Doctrine and 'Fair Game Law' in 1965?

 

[scooter]

Joe and thanks for the story.

Any more?