Questions from Anon on Whole Track Sec Checks, Gang checks etc

denvanon

New Member
Would this passage, written about a CIA interrogation technique used to break the will of recalcitrant subjects, accurately describe the practice of wholetrack sec checks and gang sec checks?

"The aim of the Alice in Wonderland or confusion technique is to confound the expectations and conditioned reactions of the interrogatee. He is accustomed to a world that makes some sense, at least to him: a world of continuity and logic, a predictable world. He clings to this world to reinforce his identity and powers of resistance.

The confusion technique is designed not only to obliterate the familiar but to replace it with the weird. Although this method can be employed by a single interrogator, it is better adapted to use by two or three. When the subject enters the room, the first interrogator asks a double-talk question -- one which seems straightforward but is essentially nonsensical. Whether the interrogatee tries to answer or not, the second interrogator follows up (interrupting any attempted response) with a wholly unrelated and equally illogical query. Sometimes tow or more questions are asked simultaneously.

Also, my understanding is that gang sec checks were an RPF phenomenon specifically. Is this accurate?

I'm finding a lot of odd parallels between Hubbard's brainwashing techniques and some of those pioneered by intelligence agencies in the 50s and 60s. And I figure being able to break it down to "Scientology uses brainwashing tactics similar to those developed by the CIA" makes it a lot harder to dismiss them as just a hokey celebrity cult.

Any input is appreciated, as well as leads on other stuff to read besides the CIA interrogation manuals. Thanks.

edit: I'm also running this past a number of ex-SO members, Arnie Lerma and a few others who might have some research and perspectives to share
 

Feral

Rogue male
OK, So there is a distinction between confessional for case gain, Justice type sec checks ans these gang bang sec checks.

The meter was origionally used to detect crimes etc, back around 62(?) it was a tool to vet out any disturbing elements in the recruitment of the group. The story goes that people experienced great relief from this 'fessing up. It then became a therapeutic tool and part of auditing. It occurs on the grade chart and is used to benefit the parishioner. Hence the whole track confessional

It continued to be used as a political tool, HCO confessionals and eligibility sec checks are examples of that. The auditor usually starts it with "I am not auditing you" Then proceeds to audit you following all the rule of auditing. The difference is that your crimes are actionable, and you go to the ethics department with a write up of everything you confessed to. You can be ordered to such an action by being recalitrent around the group. It is at your own expense. I know several instances where these were meted out unjustly. Like a couple who were long time scilons. they got upset when their kid was being recruited, and they were being lied to while he was held in a gruelling interview well into the wee small hours. They were both ordered to an HCO sec check. The church wanted $30,000 to do it.

Gang bang sec checks have nothing whatever to do with any lron wrote. They are an abuse of an already abusive system.

RPF would mostly get the HCO sec check type.

Hope this helps
 

denvanon

New Member
Thanks for the clarification. Do any of the bizzare questions that make up the whole track check find their way into the gang checks or the HCO checks?

If the gang checks weren't predominately used in RPF, where were they used?

Is it your personal opinion that the bizzare questions of the Whole Track Check served any sort of purpose to disarm, confuse or brainwash people? Or were they solely the product of an already wacky backstory?

The situation I'm faced with is that if bizarre questions are presented in concert with gang sec checks and those in turn are used on people in the RPF, you practically have a perfect snapshot of CIA tactics to break the will of recalcitrant interrogation subjects.

If they were used separately and for different purposes, the similarities are less pronounced and it's a less damning, but certainly more comforting, picture of Hubbard as someone who developed a lot of his brainwashing operation by accident and trial & error
 

Andrew

Patron with Honors
There are others here that would know more than me.


(It's tempting to leave it at that...)

Anyway, I never came across any Sec checks that used bizarre or off-beat questions.

For the most part the format is just to phrase the question to address the subject and then vary the enquiry. i.e "Regarding denvanon, is there anything you are hiding?", "Regarding denvanon, is there something you would not like others to know?"

I only had a couple in my time (I was a lucky one) and the end result is actually quite uplifting.

Used correctly (ie ONLY for the good of the person), this is probably one of the good activities Scn can offer.

Of course if abused it's a total head-f*ck.

I'm not confident that you'll find a solid link between what occurs and your theory.
 

Feral

Rogue male
Thanks for the clarification. Do any of the bizzare questions that make up the whole track check find their way into the gang checks or the HCO checks?

If the gang checks weren't predominately used in RPF, where were they used?

Is it your personal opinion that the bizzare questions of the Whole Track Check served any sort of purpose to disarm, confuse or brainwash people? Or were they solely the product of an already wacky backstory?

The situation I'm faced with is that if bizarre questions are presented in concert with gang sec checks and those in turn are used on people in the RPF, you practically have a perfect snapshot of CIA tactics to break the will of recalcitrant interrogation subjects.

If they were used separately and for different purposes, the similarities are less pronounced and it's a less damning, but certainly more comforting, picture of Hubbard as someone who developed a lot of his brainwashing operation by accident and trial & error

Answers

1- No. Those seem to be outlandish accusations of present time crimes, eg. Whos paying you? FBI? CIA? etc In gang sec checks.

Hco type sec checks are sometimes wacky, but never deliberately.They are an earnest attempt to uncover out-ethics. Not to overwhelm or harass, it is usually pretty civil and requires the cooperation of the 'pc'.

2- Gang sec checks seem to be a DM tool, though during the mid 90s RTC was getting pretty close to that kind of operation in their 'ethics missions'

3- No. The offbeat questions are truly supposed to uncover whole track overts. If a question reads on the meter it is tracked down to an incident in the memory of the pc, he then confesses his sin.Wacky backstory, but the religious beliefs of many FZ and scilons include the belief that beings have been around a long time and experienced many different civilizations.

4- The RPF, scilon "justice" including HCO confessions, The "ethics" codes, are their own unique way of molding obedient culties. I do not believe there is any connection to the CIA methodology. It is it's own unique situation. They are not trying to break recalcitrant subjects, scilons are often willingly participating in their own mind control, paying for HCO sec checks etc.

Remember, once a scilon is hooked he has bought the idea that we have been trapped in this universe for more than 75 trillion years, each worse than the one before and if we miss getting out of the trap now there may not be another chance. So when ordered to do whatever, his cooperation is secured by threat of denial and exclusion from the bridge to total freedom.

So without knowing the whole dogma you risk missing the boat in your questions, which are astute enough in themselves but you have to look into the wacky backstory, read KSW 1, the reason people go through the duress of this can not be understood without a knowledge in the subject.
 
Last edited:

Pitbull

Patron with Honors
What about this zinger from the Joburg?

"Have you ever had anything to do with a baby farm?"
 

Björkist

Silver Meritorious Patron
What about this zinger from the Joburg?

"Have you ever had anything to do with a baby farm?"


Whenever I see that question I think of:

matrix-pod.jpg
 

Div6

Crusader
Gang Bang sec checks were instituted by Lenin, I mean DM in the early part of his pustch. They are of his own "invention" and have NOTHING to do with "standard LRH confessional tech".

And yes, I would say that they are designed to break people, and get them to confess to just about anything.

The Whole Track sec check is just one of many sec checks. Done in session, per the Auditors code, it can have some startling results. The auditors code includes having the person well rested and fed, so it is likely that that no one in the SO has ever recieved "standard tech".
 

thetanic

Gold Meritorious Patron
Also, my understanding is that gang sec checks were an RPF phenomenon specifically. Is this accurate?

No, they were not. They were used to bust missions in 1982. Some people I knew were on the receiving end of them, and one mission's staff kept enduring it until the mission turned over ALL their cash reserves.
 

ozzie

Patron with Honors
Gang bang sec checks were instituted before the old man died. I bet you anything he knew about them if not ordered it.

It wasn't just a DM thing. And it definitely was not just an RPF thing - everyone and their mother who stood on anyones toes for anything got one of those.

I know- was on the receiving end of one myself along with the then CO IMO.

They were meant to intimidate and put the fear of god into anyone who would question anything management ordered.

And I was told by those giving it that it was based on an LRH order though I don't know if that is true or not.

Ozzie
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
I'm totally in favor of whole track and other sec checks. I'm not in favor of gang bang sec checks, which, as previously pointed out, aren't "LRH tech" anyway.

There is nothing wrong with running out someone's past misdeeds according to an ideology that posits a belief in previous lifetimes.
 
Top