L's Tech

[Terril park]

The L's are done by specially trained stuck down the track 2 1/2%ers!

The special type of assessment is intended to bypass reactive mechanisms, and directly address the being.

L-10 and L-12 use that type of assessment.

L-11 uses a metering technique not used anywhere else.

What is truly so deadly is that the L's are an "enforced Reality" done by a group or gang of parked down the track SP's.

BTW any change of characteristic of a needle is a read - rise, falls, sticks, floats, latent reads - all indicate something. (But what?) :confused2:

The L's can be deadly - as I am finding out right now, 35 years later!

Alan

Hi Alan,
This is not the first time you've commented adversely on the L's.

In the FZ I've heard no bad results from Ls. However their are few who
deliver it.

I've posted many success stories for those doing L's.

I'm not much of a techie but know many who are.

In the grand tradition of ESMB, its perhaps a useful idea to discuss L's tech.

I reject completely that those who deliver Ls are SP, at least those I know in the FZ.

Not sure exactly when you did your L's or the circumstances.

I have a friend, Nicky Mendosa class VIII , who was on the experimental 1961 SHSBC with you. Verifies the problems, residual unhandled case and also the OT abilities attained. It seems that the resolution of GPMs was at least in part carried on with the L's. Thus seems overun was a possibility.

Directly addressing the being would align with your viewpoint that one should address the PC in PT.

You have apparently completed your " Games matrix" tech, as I understand it a completion of GPM tech.

So why are you still effect of long ago L's auditing?

What I know is that those on the FEBC on Apollo were given L's and was told even if they were not set up for it.

You have the stage.

 

[dr3k]

wouldn't this have been easier to send in a message to him rather than make a thread

 

[Alan]

LRH was my C/S.

http://forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=2364&page=2&highlight=Solo+Comm+Ev

 

[Carmel]

wouldn't this have been easier to send in a message to him rather than make a thread

I'm glad it was put on a thread and not just pm'd. There's already a similar thread which Alan gave a link to, and for some of us it's data we're interested in.

All good, just sayin'.

 

[Alan]

Hi Alan,
This is not the first time you've commented adversely on the L's.

In the FZ I've heard no bad results from Ls. However their are few who
deliver it.

I've posted many success stories for those doing L's.

I'm not much of a techie but know many who are.

In the grand tradition of ESMB, its perhaps a useful idea to discuss L's tech.

I reject completely that those who deliver Ls are SP, at least those I know in the FZ.

TECH DICTIONARY: SUPPRESSIVE PERSON: 4. the person is in a mad, howling situation of some yesteryear and is “handling it” by committing overt acts today. I say condition of yesteryear but this case thinks it’s today.(HCO PL 5 Apr 65)

When a group or gang of people attempt to convince you that your long ago yesterdays are the source of your problems - that fits the above definition!

The figures are 2 1/2% SP's - yet Scio has managed to make 100% SP's - Quite a stat!

97 1/2% of people live somewhat in PT - process them on positive PT type procedures and they make spectacular gains.

Life and livingness turns into a winning process.

Not sure exactly when you did your L's or the circumstances.

I have a friend, Nicky Mendosa class VIII , who was on the experimental 1961 SHSBC with you. Verifies the problems, residual unhandled case and also the OT abilities attained. It seems that the resolution of GPMs was at least in part carried on with the L's. Thus seems overun was a possibility.

Are you trying to fit your insanity to make yourself right?

You have the stage.

As a person dedicated to getting people to believe the past is what is controlling them now - you should get some positive PT type processing

Back in the early days '63 - '64 before the GRADES - All sessions were done with the EP of the session was: "a pc in PT."

I had several 1,000 hours of that type of processing - plus I designed my life and livingness to follow my main goals lines and dreams.

Life became the senior process.

Alan

 

[Terril park]

TECH DICTIONARY: SUPPRESSIVE PERSON: 4. the person is in a mad, howling situation of some yesteryear and is “handling it” by committing overt acts today. I say condition of yesteryear but this case thinks it’s today.(HCO PL 5 Apr 65)

When a group or gang of people attempt to convince you that your long ago yesterdays are the source of your problems - that fits the above definition!

From this you seem to be taking the view that anyone running any form of Dianetics, including book 1, and most mainstream psychotherapists are suppressive.

Are you trying to fit your insanity to make yourself right?

No, I'm actually curious as to your very strong statements as to
very unhappy experiences on L's and I saw a possible reason. I've not studied L's or had them, or done the 1961 SHSBC materials. However all the people I know who've done them in the FZ have very positive statements about them. Trying to figure that all out.

Life became the senior process.

Alan

I run that one 24/7.

 

[uniquemand]

Terril, I don't see what Alan is saying as being that Book One is inapplicable.

I think his point is that it isn't what happened long ago that is bothering you now, it's your RELATION of what is going on now to what happened long ago, that you haven't resolved, as being the problem. In other words, you handle the TRIGGER, in PT, and perhaps trace it back along it's developmental path, as needed. You don't go LOOKING IN THE PAST, you look at the TRIGGER in the present. You look at it a lot. From lots of perspectives. Then, if it doesn't resolved THEN you look to see if there was something similar in the past that is unresolved. You don't start in the past.

If this is what Alan meant, then I agree. Digging around in the past, or in the conjectured past, is kind of nuts. But if you have something going on AT PRESENT, and it won't resolve after lots of looking, then you look at similar events in the past, etc. Very helpful to do a then and now on it, also, if you find such incidents. (TROM, or UCP, "tell me something about that which is similar to now", "tell me something about that which is different from now").

 

[tookmeawhile]

TECH DICTIONARY: SUPPRESSIVE PERSON: 4. the person is in a mad, howling situation of some yesteryear and is “handling it” by committing overt acts today. I say condition of yesteryear but this case thinks it’s today.(HCO PL 5 Apr 65)

When a group or gang of people attempt to convince you that your long ago yesterdays are the source of your problems - that fits the above definition!

Alan

Holy Crap, Alan. This has to be one of the most interesting things I've read on the boards. Very, very interesting.

And sort of related; I'm not sure who said this in a different thread, something like it's easier to confront the past [to me, the whole track in particular] rather than present time.

In handling my "yesteryears" in Scio auditing, I had some auditing that wasn't very good, some that was good and a whole bunch that was really, really good - excellent really.

This kind of makes sense, Alan. After all, with all these spectacular gains from Scio sessions (at times for many people), you'd think most people's lives would be flourishing and prospering - spectacularly. To me, auditing "gains" don't always seem to translate into current life and livingness gains, too.

What an interesting perspective. I love these kinds of threads. Thanks, Alan and Terril.

 

[xseaorguk]

Freezone on here

Every time I log into this site recently I seem to get the Freezone shoved down my throat and how wonderful it is mainly by one person.
May I ask:
Is this where you do your recruiting for members?

I have no other wish than to express my personal opinion on this here as most of the posts have to do with some kind of abuses with this 'oh so wonderful tech' by $cientology.

Apart fom that Mr. T. Park often stated that he has also not done alot of these 'processes' himself.
I dont want to get too personal Mr. Park, but the London protests where you often stand with you big sign saying ' google Freezone' I would like to carefully state that you would not be a good PR advertising anything.
An umkempt personal aprearance is an understatement to say the least.

I'm sorry Emma if this a personal matter, for which I may get banned, but I just have to say it.
So there, I've said it.

Hubbard was a schizophrenic, paranoid compulsive liar which has been said again and again by various people on here.
Did you not read the stories?

The abuses, of which I personally can tell a story or two must stop.
Please stop praising this evil legacy of a lunatic.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Well, for one thing, Emma did create an FZ and independent Scn section on ESMB. Terril sure didn't create those sections. Now, I'll grant you that this thread is not in those sections, but it is about something on which some people have opinions. Not all opinions are the same. We really should all be able to tolerate diversity. (isn't that what Liberals are always saying?)

Terril does post success stories on many forums and always has. He has been eager and anxious, however, to not go against the wishes of individuals posting, though, obviously one cannot please all the people all the time. On OCMB he posted a LOT of success stories. So someone created a thread for him and asked him to only post the success stories there. He graciously complied. But complaints still continued with vicious JPGs showing him in a pimp suit (isn't it nice when critics indulge in fair game while bitching about the cult doing it?) and so forth. So finally, on OCMB, Andreas said that Terril could post his point of view, sure, but no cut and paste. Terril not only complied but he even posted a thread where he asked people for feedback. He did NOT have to do that.

Terril and I have had conversations where I was frustrated with certain (incredibly nasty) things being said and he defended the critics. He's a champion for the critical cause. When I was first on a.r.s., convinced I was an OSA agent (I wasn't), Terril posted a number of things to me in debate and NONE OF THEM were about how kewl the Freezone is. No, they were about CofS' abuses.

Critics discount Terril way too much in my opinion.

We need to live together and tolerate viewpoints of other people. We're not CofS culties who do not know how and are not willing to do that.

 

[Terril park]

I dont want to get too personal Mr. Park, but the London protests where you often stand with you big sign saying ' google Freezone' I would like to carefully state that you would not be a good PR advertising anything.
An umkempt personal aprearance is an understatement to say the least.

This of course is deliberate so as not to show up the rest of the " Old Guard" critics.

Were I to dress like an OSA PR flack no doubt you'd comment " ...some city slicker togged up to the nines thinking that would persuade the caek eating mask and fancy dressed anons to bow down to my every utterance."

Next protest come and explain what I need to look like to not give you any offence.

Advice on haircut, aftershave and attire welcome.

 

[Terril park]

Terril, I don't see what Alan is saying as being that Book One is inapplicable.

I think his point is that it isn't what happened long ago that is bothering you now, it's your RELATION of what is going on now to what happened long ago, that you haven't resolved, as being the problem. In other words, you handle the TRIGGER, in PT, and perhaps trace it back along it's developmental path, as needed. You don't go LOOKING IN THE PAST, you look at the TRIGGER in the present. You look at it a lot. From lots of perspectives. Then, if it doesn't resolved THEN you look to see if there was something similar in the past that is unresolved. You don't start in the past.

If this is what Alan meant, then I agree. Digging around in the past, or in the conjectured past, is kind of nuts. But if you have something going on AT PRESENT, and it won't resolve after lots of looking, then you look at similar events in the past, etc. Very helpful to do a then and now on it, also, if you find such incidents. (TROM, or UCP, "tell me something about that which is similar to now", "tell me something about that which is different from now").

However one asks in a D of P for life repair, " What to you want to address?" or looks at a read on a dianetics assessment or whatever. Its really the client who determines where the session goes. Timewise or otherwise. Well in theory.

Hopefully Alan wishes to comment on how what he does is different, and/or better.

Hopefully in standartd scientologese.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

As a person dedicated to getting people to believe the past is what is controlling them now - you should get some positive PT type processing

That is certainly a provocative idea you advance, Alan, but I wouldn't agree that belief that "the past is what is controlling ... now" is a fair statement of the subject of scientology.

The key to pc betterment seems to be the pc's recognition of decisions, postulates, thoughts, etc., for which the pc is responsible yet presently unaware. It involves no great stretch to see the relevance of the presence of "unconcious decision-making". The scientology approach of "pulling the strings" on subjectively apparent outpoints until locating the onset of such "inappropriate" or "no longer relevant" decisions IS an effective one.

What techniques do you suggest that achieve the same objective without recourse to the apparency of "past track"?


Mark A. Baker

 

[Mark A. Baker]

p.s.

Back in the early days '63 - '64 before the GRADES - All sessions were done with the EP of the session was: "a pc in PT."

An ep of "pc in PT" is certainly not inconsistent with utilizing "past track" to resolve questions of confusion and the "decisions" made to resolve past confusions.

Your comments seem to me to be a bit ambiguous. Do you audit your pcs in "present time" only? or, do you simply assure that they are IN pt at the conclusion of the session?


Mark A. Baker

 

[Mark A. Baker]

This of course is deliberate so as not to show up the rest of the " Old Guard" critics.

Were I to dress like an OSA PR flack no doubt you'd comment " ...some city slicker togged up to the nines thinking that would persuade the caek eating mask and fancy dressed anons to bow down to my every utterance."

Next protest come and explain what I need to look like to not give you any offence.

Advice on haircut, aftershave and attire welcome.

Or come to LA and see what GENUINE slackers look like!


Mark A. Baker

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Sure, people aren't controlled by the past. But they ARE sometimes controlled by their thoughts and decisions about the past. It therefore can be said that the past does matter.

 

[Lovesnightsky]

I have no idea about the Ls, but I do know that 90% of what I studied while on the TTC had to do with the past. It was very much past oriented. Whole track was king. Present time should be king instead, imho.

 

[Smitty]

comment to Lovesnightsky

I have no idea about the Ls, but I do know that 90% of what I studied while on the TTC had to do with the past. It was very much past oriented. Whole track was king. Present time should be king instead, imho.

I am with you LNS. How about nominating the past as the joker? (not joker and degrader).

 

[Lovesnightsky]

I am with you LNS. How about nominating the past as the joker? (not joker and degrader).

LOL

oooh, but the joker is actually the king's council.

 

[dr3k]

"You see, what you get here when you have two auditors who are well trained auditing each other is you get them arguing over things." "One of them will say (Well Ron mentioned so/so in SHSBC #239 and the other will say something to the effect of: Well, LRH said so/so in HCO 227 that contradicts that statement) and it goes on and on for hours until they find a Course Supervisor to tell them they're both wrong because he just read something in in a policy from last night"

...I think Alan may be the only one who gets this joke ...