John W. Galusha, Founder of Idenics

gomorrhan

Gold Meritorious Patron
Hi Everybody!
I was reading the Journal of Scientology, Issue 39-G from 1954 and found this on page 4 under the section "headquarters news":
"John W. Galusha, Jr., D.Scn., D.D., President of the Board of the HASI, was born in Pueblo, Colorado and has lived a very varied and interesting life. His introduction to Dianetics and Scientology was through an article in "Fate" magazine called:"Dianetics: One Year Later." This roused his interest and he decided to find out more about it. He attended the foundation at Wichita and was there when Ron and Don Purcell dissolved the partnership. John, of course, followed Ron and took the Doctorate Course in Philadelphia in 1952. Later, he taught this course. John was on the First Clinical Unit in Camden, and, after graduating, ran a very successful practice in Camden in partnership with Marcus Tooley who has since returned to New Zealand.
In April this year he came to Phoenix and since has worn many hats. He will be best known to the field at large, though, as the author of both volumes of the Group Auditors Handbook which is now a best seller.
Just recently he applied for, and was granted, three months well earned leave of absence to attend to urgent family affairs. We wish him every success in his ventures and look forward to his return."
Smitty
Smitty, thanks for the info/dialogue. I called Mike just now, and have set up my intro-session for a week from Wednesday. I've been putting it off "until the right time" for a while. Now is the right time, as I'm not presently on any other action, and have a few items to blow.

Best.
 

nw2394

Silver Meritorious Patron
Which offshoots are you referring to, Nick? CBR vs. Pilot? Or Standard Scientology (which version? 1966? 1972? 1978? 1984? GATT? 1952? are these all "offshoots"?)

Ah, I've just noticed your question Kev.

My question was a little tongue in cheek. However it was referring to the interchange between one or two proponents of Idenics and Alan.

Its no big deal.

Nick
 

Smitty

Silver Meritorious Patron
My question was a little tongue in cheek. However it was referring to the interchange between one or two proponents of Idenics and Alan.

Its no big deal.

Nick
That is true, it was no big deal. Just an offhand, non-sequitur comment.
Smitty
 

nw2394

Silver Meritorious Patron
That is true, it was no big deal. Just an offhand, non-sequitur comment.
Smitty

You really are spoiling for a fight, aren't you Smitty.

This is now the second time you've interjected in an unnecessarily personal fashion on a comm from me which was not directed at you.

Try clearing non sequitur. You seem to be applying it inappropriately.

Nick
 

Smitty

Silver Meritorious Patron
reply to Nick

You really are spoiling for a fight, aren't you Smitty.

This is now the second time you've interjected in an unnecessarily personal fashion on a comm from me which was not directed at you.

Try clearing non sequitur. You seem to be applying it inappropriately.

Nick

Nick, I think you have confused personal messaging or email with a forum or message board. If you wish to not have your non-sequitur postings commented on by others, then please direct them to the intended parties privately. Doing otherwise is communicating inappropriately.
Smitty
 

nw2394

Silver Meritorious Patron
Nick, I think you have confused personal messaging or email with a forum or message board. If you wish to not have your non-sequitur postings commented on by others, then please direct them to the intended parties privately. Doing otherwise is communicating inappropriately.
Smitty

You still haven't cleared non-sequitur have you.

If you choose to mess your own threads with your HE&R based on false data, carry on.

Nick
 

Smitty

Silver Meritorious Patron
Reply to Nick

You still haven't cleared non-sequitur have you.
I learned that definition almost thirty years ago. Your posts provide prime examples of non-sequitur.
If you choose to mess your own threads with your HE&R based on false data, carry on.

Nick

Nick, the human emotion and reaction, and false data that you mention is your own. You are talking about yourself. Please do not carry on, here at least.
Smitty
 

nw2394

Silver Meritorious Patron
I learned that definition almost thirty years ago. Your posts provide prime examples of non-sequitur.

Like your posts on the OT Powers thread that are 100% about OT Powers and not "non-sequitur" arguing with Case?

Don't make everyone laugh pal.

Or perhaps your Idenics technology could do with some enhancement! Pity, John Galusha was a nice man.

Nick
 

nw2394

Silver Meritorious Patron
Actually Smitty, on second thoughts, I'm done matching terminals with you. Whatever you say, peace and love man. :hattip:
 

Smitty

Silver Meritorious Patron
Reply to Nick

Like your posts on the OT Powers thread that are 100% about OT Powers and not "non-sequitur" arguing with Case?
Nick,
It is a pity that you don't have a clue about the difference.
Don't make everyone laugh pal.
Nobody is laughing.
Or perhaps your Idenics technology could do with some enhancement! Pity, John Galusha was a nice man.
Nick

And I don't appreciate your veiled attack on John Galusha. Frankly, I don't think anything would do much for you. You come across to me as being quite insane.
Smitty
 
Last edited:

Emma

Con te partirò
Administrator
Because it seems that one of Nick's main agendas here is to be a smartass.

I didn't take it as sincere either.
 

Smitty

Silver Meritorious Patron
Post of relevant section of another post from Mike Goldstein

John Galusha started working with Hubbard in Wichita in 1952, and continued working with him in Phoenix, Camden, DC, and at Saint Hill. The majority of the time, John was Ron's right-hand tech person. He was Ron's DofP and DofT, supervised the first Philadelphia Doctorate Course, as well as helped Hubbard to supervise most of the ACCs and Congresses. John was also Ron's research auditor throughout the 1950s. John worked with Ron on the research and development of many different processes and techniques, including, but not limited to, Creative Processing.
 
Top