What's new

Hubbard on sex with little boys

Bill

Gold Meritorious Patron
That Aint Scientology
Yeah, it is. If it's written/spoken by Hubbard from his position as Founder then it is Scientology. You might not like that part of Hubbard's ethics/admin/auditing "tech" but you don't get to decide which part of Scientology is "real Scientology". It's all of a package -- and it's a very bad package.

Yes, of course you can choose which bits of Scientology you use and which you ignore, that's your privilege, but you CANNOT dictate to others what "Scientology" is. Scientology is specifically EVERYTHING Hubbard wrote and said. That's Scientology and there's nothing you can do about it.
 

F.Bullbait

Oh, a wise guy,eh?
Outside of myself and a few other people, and some who were part of the Clearwater Commission on Scientology of decades ago, I don't know anyone who's read the complete affidavit. Some people, such as yourself, have read brief excerpts.

OSA has done a pretty thorough job of making this and certain other affidavits disappear. If anyone can find a link to the complete affidavit, that would be appreciated.

In its place, here's some content (scroll slightly down) from Professor Steven Kent's Brainwashing in Scientology's Project Force. It also describes some events in the basement under the Blue building complex around that time.

Besides Scientology's litigious nature - and it being designed and operated as a deceptive and ruthless psychological-political operation which "asserts and maintains dominion over thoughts and loyalties" - fraudulently asserted religious cloaking is a large part of the reason why Scientology escapes being held accountable for its actions.

There's a news story from southern California, from some years ago, about a family that kept another family member chained to a bed and imprisoned in the house. At some point the police discovered this and intervened.

This, in Scientology, is called "baby watch," and the people doing it at their home were Scientologists. To make a long story short, once the police learned that these were Scientologists, and Scientologists emphasizing that Scientology is "their religion," etc., the police became instantly meek.

The police asked that the people not doing it anymore and slinked away.

Perhaps someone can find this story as all I have is my recollection of it, but it's an example of Scientology's "religion angle" being applied.

___________​


'Leaving and leaves' by L. Ron Hubbard, 1976:

"...informing fellow staff members that one is leaving is properly labelled a suppressive act."

http://www.tampabay.com/news/scientology/article1048136.ece

From Professor Steven Kent's notes in his 'Brainwashing in Scientology's Rehabilitation Project Force', under the category of 'forcible confinement', addressing events mostly from the 1970s:

"[Former Sea Org members]... spoke about either being forcibly confined themselves... or seeing others who were... Jesse Prince insists that he saw metal cages in the RPF's RPF in the basement of the [Los Angeles] Cedars Sinai building [Blue Buildings] where inmates 'were locked up at night to ensure that they wouldn't try to escape'. On the east coast, Dennis Erlich [while on the RPF] joked about his RPF assignment and, in accordance with Hubbard's policy [against joking about the RPF], wound up in the RPF's RPF in Fort Harrison's basement. Guarded down there for ten days, Erlich states that he spent the first two or three days locked in a cage... Tonja Burden swore, 'under pains and penalties of perjury' that she personally observed a person chained to pipes in the boiler room in the Fort Harrison building for a period of weeks... Likewise Hana Whitfield swore that, while she was on the RPF at the Fort Harrison [in Clearwater, Florida], Lyn Froyland was assigned to the RPF's RPF and was chained to a pipe down there [in the basement] for weeks, under guard. She was taken meals and allowed toilet breaks but no other hygiene'."

My first experience, as a non-staff "public person," with someone being involuntarily held in a Scientology organization was second hand and occurred in the early 1970s. I heard about it from a still upset - and very naive - (Class IV, these days it's called Class V) Org staff member (I was naive too) who had encountered someone handcuffed to a large metal table in a part of the Org off-limits to the public.

In those days, being in any way "on lines," and - suddenly and visibly - deciding to leave the premises of an Org was taboo. Why? It was explained that people who wanted to leave were becoming the effect of their reactive minds and that it was compassionate to restrain them from leaving ("blowing").

As Hubbard had explained, "reactive minds do not have rights."

Even auditing rooms were supposed to have the auditor seated nearer to the door in case the person decided to leave, so the auditor could stop the person from leaving.

One was supposed to handle the person attempting to (visibly and suddenly) leave.

Around the same time, there was also a minor PR flap around an incident where someone in the Org had suddenly "blown," and two staff members followed him out of the Org on to the street, and dragged him back into the Org. (Since the Org was in a large hotel - The Martinique Hotel in Manhattan - some "wogs" had complained to the hotel's management.) To the Scientological mind, this was an application of "8-C" or "good control." The person's reactive mind had forced him to blow, and Scientologists, connected to Source, the savior of the galaxy L. Ron Hubbard, etc. were applying the tech, and putting ethics in, by 8-Cing him back, so that he could be properly handled, and saved from the dwindling spiral, and eventually travel up the Grade Chart to Total Freedom.

Scientology and false imprisonment:

http://www.scientology-lies.com/imprisonment.html

_______________​

L. Ron Hubbard saw himself as a master of psychology.


From Hubbard's 1946 (to himself) 'Affirmations':


Your writing has a deep hypnotic effect on people and they are always pleased with what you write...
Your psychology is advanced and true and wonderful. It hypnotizes people. It predicts their emotions, for you are their ruler.

__________


bro-human-eval-2005.jpg


_________​


A few years later the book 'Science of Survival' was written, where the Hubbard Chart of Human Evaluation and Tone Scale were presented. One little twist was that placement of the person on the Tone Scale could be easily ascertained by noting the person's opinion of Dianetics, the Hubbard Chart of Human Evaluation, and the book 'Science of Survival', and, of course, its author.


Wrote Hubbard in 'Science of Survival' of 1951:

Those chronically below 2.0 on the Tone Scale should have "no rights of any kind," and, ideally, be "disposed of quietly and without sorrow," or at least be quarantined or isolated from society.

___________


From 'Science of Survival: Prediction of Human Behavior' - by L Ron Hubbard, 1951:

The reasonable man quite ordinarily overlooks the fact that people from 2.0 down have no traffic with reason and cannot be reasoned with as one would reason with a 3.0. There are only two answers for the handling of people from 2.0 down on the tone scale , neither one of which has anything to do with reasoning with them or listening to their justification of their acts. The first is to raise them on the tone scale by un-enturbulating some of their theta by any one of the three valid processes .

The other is to dispose of them quietly and without sorrow. Adders are safe bedmates compared to people on the lower bands of the tone scale. Not all the beauty nor the handsomeness nor artificial social value nor property can atone for the vicious damage such people do to sane men and women. The sudden and abrupt deletion of all individuals occupying the lower bands of the tone scale from the social order would result in an almost instant rise in the cultural tone and would interrupt the dwindling spiral into which any society may have entered. It is not necessary to produce a world of clears in order to have a reasonable and worthwhile social order; it is only necessary to delete those individuals who range from 2.0 down, either by processing them enough to get their tone level above the 2.0 line — a task which, indeed, is not very great, since the amount of processing in many cases might be under fifty hours, although it might also in others be in excess of two hundred — or simply quarantining them from the society.

A Venezuelan dictator [Juan Vincente Gomez] once decided to stop leprosy. He saw that most lepers in his country were also beggars. By the simple expedient of collecting and destroying all the beggars in Venezuela an end was put to leprosy in that country.

This was an early expression of what, years later, would be formalized as Disconnection and the Fair Game Law.

__________​

However, it wasn't until 1955, in his 'Manual on Dissemination of Material', that Hubbard began, formally, in writing, instructing Scientologists on such things as "attacking" and "ruining utterly."

And his instructions in this area continued, with Hubbard developing special "tech" for various forms of attacking, overwhelming, dominating, influencing, deceiving, and manipulating.

Much of this "tech" was directed at outsiders ("wogs") and at former members of Scientology who "squirreled," but much of it - in various forms - was also directed at members of Scientology in good standing.


A question from Hubbard's Security Check for Scientologists of 1961:

"Have you ever had unkind thoughts about L. Ron Hubbard?"


Hubbard remained concerned with what he called "SPs," and wrote extensively on the subject. He wrote in 'Discipline. SPs and Admin' in 1969:

"I am not interested in wog morality... I can make Captain Bligh look like a Sunday School teacher."


Also in the late 1960s, Hubbard wrote about "taking over political guidance" by "taking over absolutely the field of mental healing."


Those who were in a position to decide (and police) who is to be classified as "sane" or classified as "insane," and who had control over "mental healing," would rule, so the idea went.


And From an LRH Executive Directive of 24 November 1968:

"We're going to take over mental hospitals and political guidance and the whole field of mental healing [which includes criminal rehabilitation] It may take us years, but we've got the years. We've got the tech..."

And finally, from Hubbard's 1969 'Intelligence Actions, Covert Intelligence Data Collection':

"...take over absolutely the field of mental healing on this planet in all its forms...

"Our total victory [over the 'psychs' and 'wogs'] will come when we run his organizations, perform his functions, and obtain his financing and appropriations."

_________​


Then, one day in 1973, Hubbard made an announcement [Hubbard in red]:


THE TECHNICAL BREAKTHROUGH OF 1973!
THE INTROSPECTION RD
I have made a technical breakthrough which possibly ranks with the major discoveries of the twentieth century. It is certainly the greatest achievement of 1973 and is now being released after a final write-up of the research. It is called the Introspection Rundown.
....
In 1970 the actual cause of PSYCHOSIS was isolated... In the ensuing years this has been proven beyond doubt to be correct.
But what is a psychotic break?
Man has never been able to solve the psychotic break. In fact, human beings are actually afraid of a person in a psychotic break and in desperation turn to psychiatry to handle.
[And here Hubbard goes on about psychiatry, ice picks, electric shocks, etc., then...]​
THIS MEANS THE LAST REASON TO HAVE PSYCHIATRY AROUND IS GONE.
[Then there are the steps of the RD, and the HCOB ends with...]​
THIS PLANET IS OURS.
[Then there's the HCOB of February 1974, titled...]​
INTROSPECTION RD
ADDITIONAL STEPS
....​
ISOLATION
In a person in a psychotic break, it is necessary to isolate them for them to destimulate and to protect them and others from possible damage...
There comes a point where the C/S must decide to release the person from isolation. To do this the C/S must know if the person can take responsibility for his actions...
The C/S's action is a direct comm line to the person by notes. The person is provided with paper and pen to reply. The C/S must determine the person's responsibility level. Example: "Dear Joe. What can you guarantee me if you are let out of isolation?"... "Dear Joe. I'm sorry but no go on coming out of isolation yet..."
______​

Randomly located on the Internet, here's Eileen Vernjack's SP Declare from 1972:


2012708708-sp-declare-eileen-vernjack.jpg

"...they cannot be granted the rights and beingness ordinarily accorded rational beings..."

There are many more "SP Declares."

Now imagine being regarded as a "Suppressive Person," or its equivalent, while being INSIDE a Scientology organization.


Hope this helps. :)
No doubt people in RPF were confined. Not a secret. I spent much time in the basement labyrinth at Cedars, 1977-1978, never saw cages or people confined there. Doesn't mean it didn't happen. I am more interested in the tales told by your source as I think they are a concoction. I wish I could recall the name of the book I read. It was in the public library so it was big at the time.

Add: There were rooms in the basement that consisted of 3 sides concrete wall and one side floor-to-ceiling metal fence construction with a door. Could have been used as a cage. Not when I was there though
 
Last edited:

Bill

Gold Meritorious Patron
As far a LRH, well, he was human and I forgive him for his errors and short comings. I think what he has put forth far out weighs his foibles.
This head-in-the-sand attitude disgusts me. Granted, it was my attitude for decades, and that disgusts me as well.

The failures, abuses and crimes of Scientology are well documented. The policies dictating such activities are written in stone by Hubbard in policies and lectures. The well-designed trapping mechanisms of Scientology are well documented -- ethics "tech", confessionals, sec-checks, reviews, ad nauseam. Hubbard's personal involvement and knowledge of some of the worst parts of Scientology in orgs and the Sea Org are well documented.

And you dismiss all that as mere "foibles". That's disgusting.

I understand you can't help it because you are still a True Believer -- and that's what True Believers must do, but it really is time to wake up. Accept reality and go from there -- don't continue to hobble your mind.
 
Last edited:

Bill

Gold Meritorious Patron
No doubt people in RPF were confined. Not a secret. I spent much time in the basement labyrinth at Cedars, 1977-1978, never saw cages or people confined there. Doesn't mean it didn't happen. I am more interested in the tales told by your source as I think they are a concoction. I wish I could recall the name of the book I read. It was in the public library so it was big at the time.

Add: There were rooms in the basement that consisted of 3 sides concrete wall and one side floor-to-ceiling metal fence construction with a door. Could have been used as a cage. Not when I was there though
In Scientology, the prison is in the mind, self-constructed by True Believers -- and that is more powerful than any physical cages.
 

guanoloco

As-Wased
I recall reading this story many years ago. Struck me as a kook fabrication. Still does. A silent Ron? Ha!

I go back and forth on this. Here's why...could Hubbard have done this? Without a doubt. But with all the pictures and busts of Hubbard what Scientologist let alone a SO member couldn't recognize Hubbard with total certainty?
 
Last edited:

Veda

Sponsor
-snip-

with all the pictures and busts of Hubbard what Scientologist let alone a SO memeber couldn't recognize Hubbard with total certainty?
On the contrary, an honest account could only contain what a person experienced. No words were spoken. The young woman was given no prior explanation or introduction.

A fabrication would have positively identified Hubbard.


Read the entire affidavit - not thirty years ago, but now - then express an opinion.
 

Koot

Patron with Honors
It looks as though it pretty much says what YOU want it to say by taking my words out of context so as to more closely fit your narrative.

To be clear (no pun intended ), I have zero antagonism towards Scn or Scientologists, and have friends who practice Scientology.

My issue is with those who commit human rights abuses, utilize fraudulent representations to recruit members as well as when selling their services, etc.

I would be opposed to ANY organization of any nature if it did those things on a routine basis, not because of their beliefs, but because of their abusive and criminal practices.
Sounds like we are on the same page. sorry for any mis-communication on my part.
 

Koot

Patron with Honors
Most of Hubbard's writings (instructions to Scientologists) are not in books, they are found in the secretive LRH orders database of Scientology's INCOMM computer system.
I would disagree. Anything in the "secretive" section is purely out of context and is JUNIOR to HCOBs, PLs, LRH EDs and Basic books.
 

Koot

Patron with Honors
You are woefully naive regarding Hubbard. Those tactics ALL came directly out of his very deranged and paranoid mind. It's called policy, which is written and MUST be followed. "If it isn't written it isn't true". Ever hear of that little slogan?
Policy is green on white. Tech is red on white. All else is junior to that. In an org, If it isn't written in policy or tech don't follow that order, is the meaning there. Nice try.
 

Koot

Patron with Honors
OK, thank-you for responding ... I don't forgive hubbard for conning so many people out of their money, their precious time and often their relationships or for the fear and introversion he caused (and continues to cause) in so many.

I rarely think about him at all these days and haven't since that wonderful day when I finally walked away from the cult but when I do I think of him just as a mad tyrant who doesn't deserve the gracious respect of people like yourself.
I am sure you have valid complaints. I just don't think Ron intended most of the horrendous mis-applications and suppressive sales actions that have and still do occur. May your future be bright.
 

Koot

Patron with Honors
Yeah, it is. If it's written/spoken by Hubbard from his position as Founder then it is Scientology. You might not like that part of Hubbard's ethics/admin/auditing "tech" but you don't get to decide which part of Scientology is "real Scientology". It's all of a package -- and it's a very bad package.

Yes, of course you can choose which bits of Scientology you use and which you ignore, that's your privilege, but you CANNOT dictate to others what "Scientology" is. Scientology is specifically EVERYTHING Hubbard wrote and said. That's Scientology and there's nothing you can do about it.
It IS written that policy(green on white) and tech(red on white) are SENIOR to all other issues. Much of what has gone on and still goes on in the various orgs is OFF POLICY and OUT TECH. IMHO.
 

F.Bullbait

Oh, a wise guy,eh?
On the contrary, an honest account could only contain what a person experienced. No words were spoken. The young woman was given no prior explanation or introduction.

A fabrication would have positively identified Hubbard.


Read the entire affidavit - not thirty years ago, but now - then express an opinion.
Have a link to the affidavit??
 

Jim Dandy

Patron with Honors
Policy is green on white. Tech is red on white. All else is junior to that. In an org, If it isn't written in policy or tech don't follow that order, is the meaning there. Nice try.
Clearly you've never read the green on white. Or you have read it and you're just a Ron cock sucking moron after all. I suspect the latter.
 
Last edited:

Jim Dandy

Patron with Honors
I think if you asked Tony he might disagree with Lone Star's take on what Tony was saying in his articles about hubbard's comments on children.
The issue wasn't what Tony said about Hubbard's "comments on children", whatever you mean by that. The issue was his taking out of context a short passage in Dianetics and saying that Hubbard and Scientologists are okay with pedophilia. (Leah on her show acted like she discovered this for the first time and agreed with him).

He defended this repeatedly in tweets and on his blog quite strenuously, even though he had admitted that the first time he read Dianetics that this passage didn't jump out at him, or get his attention with regards to: "Oh My God!! He's down with pedophilia!". No one did. I certainly didn't when I read it. I'm sure Leah didn't either when she read it the first time. I bet you didn't get that impression either, if you yourself read it many years ago when you were in.
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
I would disagree. Anything in the "secretive" section is purely out of context and is JUNIOR to HCOBs, PLs, LRH EDs and Basic books.
You can have whatever considerations you wish regarding what policy is senior to what.

Here's the facts of life, though, if you are a Scientologist: DM has absolute power to have you declared under whatever pretext he chooses. All else follows from this one datum. You have no right of appeal to any court over the Church hierarchy not following whatever policy you think they should be following. If DM issues an order, that's that. Obey or be declared. If DM chooses to re-issue green-on-white and red-on-white yet again, making whatever revisions he chooses in order to "correct errors made in the past by suppressives alter-ising LRH's original notes", then that's that. And no, you will have no right to look at the "original notes" to see for yourself.

Of course, if you choose to form your own independent Scn group and decide that only the pre-1985 policies and bulletins will be followed, then that's cool by me.
 
Top