No matching fragments found in this document.
Date: 20 Aug 1999 21:44:28 -0000
Subject: FZ Bible NEW TECH VOL XII 12/17 (1980-4)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology
Message-ID: <2a700f83b5a78f0bb5f7a88898c8b144@anonymous.poster>
Sender: Secret Squirrel <squirrel@echelon.alias.net>
Comments: Please report problems with this automated remailing service to
<squirrel-admin@echelon.alias.net>. The message sender's identity
is unknown, unlogged, and not replyable.
From: Secret Squirrel <squirrel@echelon.alias.net>
Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net
Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net
Lines: 2443
Path: news2.lightlink.com!news.lightlink.com!skynet.be!news.belnet.be!uni-erlangen.de!fu-berlin.de!bignews.mediaways.net!news-lond.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!iol.ie!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!199.60.229.5!newsfeed.direct.ca!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!news.alt.net!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news-x2!mail2news
Xref: news2.lightlink.com alt.religion.scientology:899705 alt.clearing.technology:97236
FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST
NEW TECH VOL XII 12/17 (1980-4)
**************************************************
NEW TECH VOLUME XII 1980-84
(As issued in 1991 by CofS)
==================
[Because of its large size, the complete contents only appears
in part 0 and part 1.]
CONTENTS:
Part 12
100. HCOB 10 MAR 82 CONFESSIONALS - ETHICS REPORTS REQUIRED
101. Book MAR 82 UNDERSTANDING THE E-METER
102. HCOB 20 MAR 82R r. 12 Apr 88 STANDARDS
103. HCOB 25 MAR 82R r. 16 Apr 90 OBJECTIVES NOT BITING
104. HCOB 31 MAR 82R r. 29 Dec 88 BASIC STUDY MISSED WITHHOLD
105. HCOB 11 APR 82 SEC CHECKING IMPLANTS
106. HCOB 13 APR 82 STILL NEEDLE AND CONFESSIONALS
107. HCOB 16 APR 82 MORE ON PTS HANDLING
108. HCOB 26 APR 82 THE CRIMINAL MIND AND THE PSYCHS
109. HCOB 6 MAY 82 THE CAUSE OF CRIME
110. HCOB 10 MAY 82 OT LEVELS
111. HCOB 11 JUL 82 QUESTIONABLE AUDITING REPAIR LIST
112. HCOB 11 JUL 82 QUESTIONABLE AUDITING
113. HCOB 10 AUG 82 OT MAXIMS
114. HCOB 25 AUG 82 Art Series 10 THE JOY OF CREATING
115. HCOB 26 AUG 82 PAIN AND SEX
116. HCOB 28 SEP 82 C/S Ser 115 MIXING RUNDOWNS AND REPAIRS
117. HCOB 13 OCT 82 C/S Ser 116 ETHICS AND THE C/S
118. HCOB 27 DEC 82 TRAINING AND OT
119. HCOB 8 MAR 83 HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS
**************************************************
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.
The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists. It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.
They think that all freezoner's are "squirrels" who should be
stamped out as heritics. By their standards, all Christians,
Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered
to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.
The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judiasm form the Old Testament of Christianity.
We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.
But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old
testament regardless of any Jewish opinion.
We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.
We ask for others to help in our fight. Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.
Thank You,
The FZ Bible Association
**************************************************
==================
100. HCOB 10 MAR 82 CONFESSIONALS - ETHICS REPORTS REQUIRED
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 10 MARCH 1982
(Also issued as an HCO PL, same date.)
Remimeo
All Staff
Ethics Officers
Auditors
Case Supervisors
CONFESSIONALS - ETHICS REPORTS REQUIRED
Refs:
HCO PL 2 Apr. 65 FALSE REPORTS
HCO PL 1 May 65 STAFF MEMBER REPORTS
HCO PL 17 June 65 STAFF AUDITOR ADVICES
HCO PL 7 Mar. 65R III OFFENSES AND PENALTIES Rev. 24.10.75
HCO PL 23 Dec. 65RA SUPPRESSIVE ACTS, SUPPRESSION OF
SCIENTOLOGY AND SCIENTOLOGISTS
HCO PL 5 Mar. 68 JOB ENDANGERMENT CHITS
HCO PL 24 Feb. 69 JUSTICE
It has recently been noticed that there was an omission on
the part of ministers doing Confessionals: They were not
writing reports to Ethics on matters relating to the
offenses of others that were revealed during a
Confessional. Doing so is required per HCO PL 17 June 65,
STAFF AUDITOR ADVICES and is implicit in HCO PL 2 Apr. 65,
FALSE REPORTS and in HCO PL 1 May 65, STAFF MEMBER REPORTS.
Apparently this was due to a failure to differentiate
between a pc "getting off" only other people's withholds
and a pc revealing knowledge of another's overt or crime
against Scientology, its organizations or Scientologists.
A person who only talks about others' overts or withholds
is often withholding an overt of his own or engaging in a
black PR campaign.
But a person who has knowledge of another's overts or crimes
against Scientology should have made out an ethics report
himself and having failed to do so, would have a withhold
of knowing about another's offense and not having reported
it, even if it were only suspected.
There are various reasons why a person might withhold from
reporting the offenses of another: similar overts or
withholds of one's own; fear of consequences or retaliation
from the person being reported on; not having all the facts
and so only suspecting the offense and not being certain
enough, are among more common reasons.
None of these are valid because a staff member can only be
disciplined for making a knowing false report or for a
no-report. And if the matter is only suspected, the report
should say so and it is the Ethics Officer's hat to
investigate and determine the facts.
Thus, when a minister discovers that a pc has knowledge of
an overt or crime against Scientology or against the codes
of the Church but has not reported the matter to Ethics,
this shouid be handled as a withhold and must be the
subject of an ethics report. This applies both to HCO
Confessionals and to any other session.
OFFENSES AGAINST SCIENTOLOGY OR ITS CODES BY ANOTHER
PERSON THAN THE PC, MUST BE REPORTED TO ETHICS FOR
INVESTIGATION (EVEN IF ONLY SUSPECTED OR WHEN FULL FACTS ARE
NOT KNOWN).
This is important because persons who get off their own
overts have a higher responsibility level than those who
don't and these last, who don't get off their overts, are
sometimes only detectable and handleable by the reports of
others.
The more serious the ethics offense, the more necessary and
vital it is that such reports be made. Failure to make such
a report can result in the pc (or staff member) being named
as an accessory or at least being charged with condoning
the offense.
There is another side to this. Some pcs, viciously, can
begin a black PR campaign against another by "getting off
the other's withholds" which are false.
Some people, unfortunately, can be very wily and spread all
sorts of rumors or trouble in this way. Doing so is the
very lifeblood of such criminal organizations as the FBI
and Interpol.
So the minister reporting all overts reported by the pc
serves a triple purpose:
A. It catches actual crimes by others which might otherwise
remain undetected
B. It gets rid of withholds from the pc which he knows he
should have reported and
C. It gives evidence of a black PR campaign in progress
against principal people of Scientology and executives.
The use that the Ethics Officer puts these reports to is
very precise.
They are:
In the case of (A) he can at once investigate and sec check
the others named and get ethics in.
In the case of (C) he can order a full rollback of the
rumor or report and usually catch a real tiger operating in
an org or area with black PR designed to paralyze the place.
So the reports are VERY valuable.
An honest executive would be very foolish to discourage
these from being filed and even more foolish not to make
sure they get fully followed up and investigated.
Doing this is a heavy blow to criminals and to the enemy
who seek to stop Scientology.
For instance, finance crimes cannot occur without
collaboration or someone noticing.
Black PR with its false reports is covering up real
withholds and overts, which, remaining undetected, can cave
the whole place in.
A person can be helped by Scientology only when he has
clean hands with it.
One cannot be helped by it when he has overts against it,
its principal names or organizations.
So this policy assists greatly, not only in protecting
execs but in saving people.
It must NOT be looked on as a way to victimize anyone. It
is an instrument of salvage.
And on an organizational strata, no org can prosper when
its staff has overts.
Recent investigation has shown that below EVERY outness in
an org or down stat there lay heavy withholds and overts.
The many should not be penalized by the criminal few.
By following these policies, ethics investigations will be
speeded, statistics raised and a much cleaner, happier and
more productive environment will be achieved. Only the
guilty will ever protest such reports and that, too, is an
indicator for urgent action.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
==================
101. Book MAR 82 UNDERSTANDING THE E-METER
[Page 393 of New Tech Vol XII]
[A picture of the cover is included]
UNDERSTANDING THE E-METER
by L. Ron Hubbard
Published March 1982
When Ron published Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental
Health in 1950, he put a simple, workable technology of
making people well and happy within the reach of millions.
As the technology of auditing advanced, it became clear
that a reliable means of measuring thought and the
preclear's state of case was needed. It was to answer this
need that the first Electrometer was produced, following
Ron's exact specifications. With advance after advance in
precision, sensitivity and simplicity of operation, the
E-Meter was refined to produce the superlative instruments
of today.
But for all of the advances in its inner workings, the
basic principles on which the meter operates have never
changed. With clear and concise text and illustrations,
Understanding The E-Meter describes and illustrates these
principles, from the basics of the composition of the
physical universe and the nature of the thetan, to exactly
what the E-Meter measures and how.
In 1988, with the release of the Hubbard Professional Mark
Super VII E-Meter, a new edition of Understanding The
E-Meter was released. This beautiful new book features the
state-of-the-art Mark Super VII and includes a
photographic history of the meter from the very first
models to the most modern.
==================
102. HCOB 20 MAR 82R r. 12 Apr 88 STANDARDS
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 20 MARCH 1982R
REVISED 12 APRIL 1988
Remimeo
STANDARDS
A favorite trick is to use one set of standards to condemn
an action disrelated to them.
Tribe A that hates women condemns Tribe B for being nice to
them.
A man attacked by mad dogs is condemned by the SPCA for
being mean to animals.
An older generation, raised to believe a girl's place is in
the home, objects to a daughter going out to earn a living.
They would object even if she were starving! Anyone can
always be criticized for something - it all depends on what
standards the critic uses.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
==================
103. HCOB 25 MAR 82R r. 16 Apr 90 OBJECTIVES NOT BITING
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 25 MARCH 1982R
REVISED 16 APRIL 1990
Remimeo
C/Ses
Auditors
Co-audit Supervisors
OBJECTIVES NOT BITING
Refs:
Tape: 5511C08 "Six Levels of Processing, Issue 5, Level 2"
Tape: 5610C16 "Mimicry, Duplication, Ability"
HCOB 19 Mar. 78 QUICKIE OBJECTIVES
This bulletin contains important data for auditors and
C/Ses on the running of Objective Processes.
Once in a while an auditor will run an Objective Process on
a preclear and the process will not produce any change.
There are two reasons why this occurs:
1. the process was already flat, or
2. the process was too high for the preclear.
It has been known since the early days of Dianetics that if
an auditor runs a process that is over the pc's head, the
pc will not make gain on the process. It exceeds his reality.
Some pcs, for instance, can run Opening Procedure by
Duplication with great ease, back and forth, back and
forth, but the process doesn't have any effect on the pc
and doesn't do anything to him. It is over his head. The pc
doesn't really participate in the session, he doesn't
notice anything and he is actually avoiding the whole process.
An auditor therefore has to know that an Objective Process
can be quickied on a pc by running a process that is too
steep a gradient for that case. The auditor mistakes the pc
glibly skating across the top of the process for the
process being flat, and so he ends off running it before it
reaches EP, thereby quickying it.
Pcs who run Objective Processes in such a fashion need
lower gradient
Objectives run on them first before tackling steeper
gradient processes.
Not all cases being run on Objectives require lower
gradient processes by a long ways. But we have long known
that it is often necessary to undercut a case to reach the
case's level of reality, at which point the case will run a
process and gain from it.
Most cases do just fine when run standardly on a routine
battery of Objectives as contained on a TRs and Objectives
Co-audit. But a C/S does have to know when a pc is being
run above his case level and there are precise and exact
indicators that tell the C/S this.
WHEN TO UNDERCUT
In 1955, London, I gave a dissertation on Objectives not
biting in the second lecture of the Hubbard Professional
Course (Tape 5511C08). The main points were as follows:
A. When a pc is being run on too high a process, the
auditor is running the process on a machine; no matter how
brightly the pc may answer, the process is being run on a
machine.
B. If you are running the pc too high, there are two
things missing: communication lag and cognition; the pc
will trot like a well-trained horse through the whole
process, without any communication lag, without any
cognitions.
After you have listened to such a case for a while and he
has not developed a communication lag and he has not gotten
a cognition on the process of any kind whatsoever, realize
you were processing him too high.
When you get the pc running at the right level, the first
process that develops a communication lag will also develop
a cognition on his part, and you will start to get change
in the preclear. But if he just skates across the top of
the bank, you will never get any change in the preclear.
Thus we have the rule:
AN OBJECTIVE PROCESS THAT PRODUCES A COMMUNICATION
LAG, WILL PRODUCE A COGNITION; A PROCESS THAT DOES NOT
DEVELOP A COMMUNICATION LAG, WILL NOT PRODUCE A COGNITION.
Auditors must use these guidelines in running Objective
Processes. C/Ses must be alert for the indicators that
Objective Processes are not biting because the pc is being
run above his head, and correct the pc's program by adding
other Objectives that are at the pc's level.
Tapes, bulletins and other issues from the 1950s abound
with Objective Processes, many of which are of a low
gradient. A partial list, by no means all, of references
containing such processes is:
PAB 20, mid-Feb. 54 TWO ANSWERS TO CORRESPONDENTS:
THE NON-PERSISTENCE CASE AND RIDGE RUNNING
PAB 44, 21 Jan. 55 TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION IN ACTION
Operational Bulletin 1 20 Oct. 55
"The following auditing commands ..."
Operational Bulletin 4 11 Nov. 55
SIX LEVELS OF PROCESSING ISSUE 5
HCO Training Bulletin 6 Feb. 57
"The following procedure . . ."
Book: (Dec. 57) Scientology: Clear Procedure, Issue One
HCOB 28 Sept. 59 TECHNICAL NOTES ON CHILD PROCESSING
Objective Processing, when done right, produces fantastic
gains. Make sure your pcs get these gains.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
==================
104. HCOB 31 MAR 82R r. 29 Dec 88 BASIC STUDY MISSED WITHHOLD
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 31 MARCH 1982R
REVISED 29 DECEMBER 1988
Remimeo
Tech/Qual
Supervisors
STO Hat
SSO Hat
Ethics Officers
Study Series 11R
Word Clearing Series 68R
BASIC STUDY MISSED WITHHOLD
I think I have spotted the basic missed withhold on study
which may underlie why many execs don't study. They go by
MISUNDERSTOODS all the time in their work!
It is probably the missed withhold of going past MUs and of
course those MUs won't then clean up because they are also
a missed withhold.
So, probably, a reason MUs don't clean up is that they are
also a missed withhold.
The remedy is to get off the missed withhold of having gone
past MUs, handling it earlier-similar to F/N (per HCOB 11
Aug. 78 I, RUDIMENTS, DEFINITIONS AND PATTER). Then locate
the misunderstood words and clear each to F/N.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
==================
105. HCOB 11 APR 82 SEC CHECKING IMPLANTS
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 11 APRIL 1982
Remimeo
SEC CHECKING IMPLANTS
(The end of auditors missing withholds while sec checking!)
An implant is an enforced command or series of commands
installed in the reactive mind below the awareness level of
the individual to cause him to react or behave in a
prearranged way without his "knowing it."
There are several methods of implanting.
IMPOSED SILENCE: The simplest and most common implant - and
its lightest but not least deadly form - is the command to
withhold. Implants could be said to be "methods of preventing
knowledge or communication" and this can extend to the
point of the person himself denying himself the data. The
commonest "imposed silence" is probably the threatened
child - an "if you tell, you will be punished." Or simply
ordering him not to tell. This tends to occlude his own
memory and can be classified as an implant.
HYPNOTISM: This is without physical duress. Western
hypnotism is effective on only about 22% of the people on
whom it is attempted. It requires some cooperation from the
subject and he often can tell you he has been hypnotized,
even when he cannot tell you the content of the implant at
once. It can be exposed and erased rather easily when
found, often by simple recall of the content. Psychiatrists
and psychologists use it and they are not very expert.
DRUGS: These are often used, by psychiatrists and
psychologists, in connection with or independent of
hypnotism to increase the percentage of effectiveness and
to deepen the effect. Anyone who has been given psychiatric
drugs - or street drugs - can be suspected of also having
been implanted. For most of the drugs alone produce a trance
state and environmental incidents can "go in" as an
implant. The intensity of a received engram is increased
when the subject is on drugs. For example, an auto
accident, on a drugged person, makes a heavier engram than
if he were not on drugs.
Any druggie who has also been in the hands of psychiatrists
or psychologists can also be suspected of having been
implanted by them. Anyone psychiatrists or psychologists
have given drugs to directly is a definite suspect of having
been implanted by them.
ELECTRIC SHOCK: Although they pretend it is the shock that
is the "therapy" (their word for mayhem and murder), an
electric shock was usually just a method of implanting the
"patient." The criminals usually accompany the shock with
hypnotic suggestions to the unconscious person before,
during and after shock. This is why persons who have been
"electric-shocked" sometimes go out and commit crimes. It
could be concluded they have been told to do so while being
shocked. (There is no therapeutic reason for shocking
anyone and there are no authentic cases on record of anyone
having been cured of anything by shock.)
DRUGS AND SHOCK: It is stated by psychiatrists and
psychologists that they have to drug patients before they
shock them to prevent them from breaking their teeth and
spines from the convulsions. This is a lie. The reason they
shock patients (with electricity or insulin or other means)
is, by their own texts, to produce a convulsion. (They do
this because the Greeks did it, no other reason; and the
Greeks did it because a convulsion is "evidence" the person
has been visited by a god.) The real reason psychiatrists
and psychologists give drugs before shock is to hide from
the patient he has been shocked and to deepen the implant.
One can find people who do not know they have been
shocked-think they only have been drugged. Yet below that
drugged state one can find, with careful search, one or a
hundred vicious shocks and implants.
PAIN-DRUG-HYPNOSIS: Using administered pain, drugs and hypnotism,
the psychiatrist, psychologist and other criminals, such as
CIA or other government agents, seek to cause victims to
become robots and commit crimes or act in an irrational
way. "PDH" is the psychiatrists' gift to the police state.
PDH is not very effective but it is very damaging to the
person.
BRAINWASHING: This is a wrong-use term to describe implanting by
deprivation and physical and mental duress. It is said to
be based on the Pavlov dog experiments (but was not
developed by Pavlov). The theory is that when a victim is
subjected to enough punishment, he will forget his former
allegiances and can be "reeducated" politically. Despite
the usual advertising lies of psychiatry and psychology
(criminals seldom tell the truth), the workability of
"brainwashing" is laughable. Dianetics can undo
"brainwashing" rather rapidly when detected. To call the
remedy for brainwashing "brainwashing" merely shows public
ignorance of what "brainwashing" is.
NONEXISTENT IMPLANTS: Part of the criminal tricks of implanting
is to give the person an "implant" that doesn't happen. The
motions are all gone through but the content is blank. It
introverts the person and sometimes makes him pull implants
up from his past where they may exist.
NEEDLE BEHAVIOR
When encountering an implant in a session, an auditor may
be baffled by not getting any reads on it. BUT there IS a
needle manifestation that no implant, no matter how buried,
can escape.
New research on this subject has revealed that
IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IMPLANT THE NEEDLE CAN GO STILL.
This is because of the hidden and withhold character of the
implant.
One runs into a track area where "nothing registers on the
meter." Things which should register do not. Example: The
question "How old were you then?" would ordinarily get some
sort of read. In the presence of an implant, it does not.
The needle simply goes very still and unreacting. It is
different than the normal needle reaction of the same pc.
The pc, too, can begin to go vague and unresponsive, very
introverted and not reacting. But with or without this pc
reaction, the needle goes quite still.
An auditor sometimes has to work like mad to get the needle
responding.
It is VERY easy at this point to miss a withhold!
The auditor, faced with an implant in the pc he does not
suspect, can see this still needle and suppose there is
nothing there and write "clean needle" on the worksheet.
And this is a mistake. For one thing, if you cannot get an
area of track (or list) to F/N, there is something wrong.
(One can, of course, have a false read or a Suppress or an
Assert or out session ruds to prevent an F/N.)
This still needle will not respond. If one puts in ruds,
asks for false reads, asserts, one may continue to get that
same still needle.
If so, it means an implant - any one of the above listed
methods.
One should work with various questions now that concern the
possibility of an implant.
One could even draw up a prepared list that would cover all
angles of an implant.
Confronted with a still needle that should react but
doesn't, one begins with "Is this something you are not
supposed to tell?" and continues on with various approaches
("Ever see a psychiatrist or psychologist?" "Did anyone
give you drugs?" "Is there something here that you yourself
don't know?" etc.). Sooner or later, as the auditor guesses
and fishes his way through this, the still needle will jar
loose and, slightly at first, begin to respond as he gets
off the obscure trail and onto the main road of it.
The art is to GET THAT NEEDLE ACTIVE AGAIN.
It will only get active when you find out what it is that
is making it so unresponsive. Something there has frozen
the person's wits and comm and he himself may know nothing
of it.
Oddly enough, the person is not likely to blow up on you as
he will when you are missing a withhold he knows about. He
just gets more and more introverted.
The end phenomena, so far as the meter is concerned, occurs
only when the needle is no longer so unresponsive. It is
now reading with small falls, falls and even blowdowns and,
when you have it all, F/Ns.
One must beware of mistaking out-ruds for an implant, but
in no case, once you have a real still needle before you
that won't react, is it anything but one of the implants
listed above.
If you understand this data I am giving you and use it
cleverly, there goes the danger of missing withholds!
Pretty good, huh?
You're welcome!
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
==================
106. HCOB 13 APR 82 STILL NEEDLE AND CONFESSIONALS
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 13 APRIL 1982
Remimeo
STILL NEEDLE AND CONFESSIONALS
Ref:
HCOB 11 Apr. 82 SEC CHECKING IMPLANTS
The still needle which does not react on ordinary things it
should react on is an indicator of withholds.
This is covered in the recent HCOB of 11 Apr. 82, SEC CHECKING
IMPLANTS, but there is more data.
The "withhold" can be partially gotten off and one can get
a strange F/N. It is strange because, while it is an F/N,
it is less than normal width and has a sort of spring on
each end, as though the needle was hitting a spring or
cushion. It is not a nice flowing F/N. And if you look
close you can see it is sort of springing back. It is not
flowing clean. The F/N also tends to stop too soon, does
not carry over.
It indicates the subject of the withhold or area of life is
still somewhat withheld.
When you clean the withholds up all the way on the subject
or area being sec checked, you get a free flowing F/N.
As it is fatal to miss a withhold, realize it is also fatal
to miss part of a withhold.
Although the person is always a party to the withhold, it
is not necessarily true that he or she committed the overts
being withheld. It still registers as a still needle.
And still behaves when partly clean with that F/N.
However, the person, in all cases so found, is either the
one who committed the overts personally or was withholding
for somebody else. It won't clean up just by seeking to
shift the responsibility and get off the hook. It may even
go "stiller." The isness of it is the isness of it.
This tech is new. It resulted from research I did on Sec
Checks with the Mark VI E-Meter. It may or may not apply to
the Mark V, but the probability is that it does.
The Mark VI, however, is dead-on with this subject.
See a chronically still needle in answer to your questions?
It tends to indicate a withhold. See an F/N that does not
flow and springs at the end? The subject you are sec
checking is not fully clean.
Nice to know, eh?
Good hunting!
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
==================
107. HCOB 16 APR 82 MORE ON PTS HANDLING
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 16 APRIL 1982
Remimeo
HCO
(Excerpted from an LRH despatch of 10 Aug. 73. Also note
there are additional tools developed since this despatch was
written for handling PTSes, e.g., Can We Ever Be Friends
cassette, Suppressed Persons or PTS Rundown, etc.)
MORE ON PTS HANDLING
Refs:
HCOB 10 Aug. 73 PTS HANDLING
HCOB 20 Oct. 76 PTS DATA
HCOB 31 Dec. 78 II OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING
BPL 31 May 71RG Rev. 13.11.77 PTS AND SP DETECTION, ROUTING
AND HANDLING CHECKSHEET
___________
PTS is a connection to an SP. That is true. But what may be
overlooked is that persons of the middle class (which is a
culture, not an income bracket, to which belong all the
puritan hypocritical mores of the cop and the
get-ajob-bea-moderate-plugging- success) frown very
terribly on anything that the least bit tries to make a
better world. The middle class wants the world of a job and
order and even hypocrisy and cops because they are AFRAID.
They hold their narrow views because any other views may
disturb their twenty-year house mortgage, the store, the
job. So when someone decides to make a better world, they
look on him as a direct menace even though the dull
middle-class world is a sort of slavery and suicide. It is
the middle class that tries the hardest to keep the
down-and-outer out and down, who go along with a cop
America and hate support of anything not their class. And
nearly every PTS you have will be found one way or another
to be PTS to the middle class. As a group, not as
individuals, the middle-class-parent world suppresses
anything different.
So you have PTSes.
The bulk of your PTSes may very well be PTS to a class, the
middle class of which their particular SP is simply a
member. Few of them realize this or even that the middle
class (bourgeoisie) ARE very suppressive to anyone who
tries to do something in the world besides support the
system. My attitude in this is that both the capitalist and
communist are alike old hat and a bore, that they've made a
ruddy mess of things, exhausted the planet and, with their
senseless wars, smashed up mankind.
I have sometimes heard that less PTSes are found than are
found people with the question "Do you have problems in
your environment?" reading on a meter.
[Editor's Note: BPL 31 May 71RG, PTS AND SP DETECTION, ROUTING
AND HANDLING CHECKSHEET, has been cancelled. It is replaced by
HCO PL 23 May 89R I, PTS/SP COURSE, HOW TO CONFRONT AND SHATTER
SUPPRESSION, and HCO PL 23 May 89 II, PTS/SP AUDITOR COURSE.]
I began to wonder about it. Then I heard of PTSes being
simply transferred or demoted. Now listen, these people are
PTS and there must be a total grasp on that tech. It IS a tech.
It is definitely out-tech to either (1) transfer someone
who is PTS to another area yet still keep the person on
one's lines or (2) to put someone who is PTS on a lower
post, AS A MEANS OF HANDLING, as it is not handling at all.
The person has to handle. If he does so, he will begin to
get well and cease to have problems. The reasons he cannot
handle are because he tries to do it in the heroic fashion
that is required in a disconnect. Handling can be very,
very gradient. I have seen a case where the person was
simply coached to give his parents good roads and good
weather and not take up any entheta and have seen the
person pull right out of it and get well. It doesn't have
to be an explosive handling. It can be very gentle. All you
want is the person at cause and that is attained on a
gradient toward the SP.
The whole crux of PTSes is HANDLE. And the misunderstood on
it is how gently one can handle.
Many of them are caught up in the mystery of why they are
snarled at and have no conception of the middle class as a
formidable and jealous force that goes psychotic when it
feels anyone may get away from the treadmill and threaten
their uneasy and doomed lives.
One tries to find what it is and then persuades them into
handling. That's the tech.
EVERY ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE CAN BE STRAIGHTENED OUT.
EVERY ONE OF THEM SHOULD BE.
Every one who reads on "problems in your environment" is to
some degree PTS. Most of them don't even know what the letters
PTS stand for. So there is an educational step, the PTS/SP
checksheet. It does not mean they have been connected to
ogres. It means they are suppressed by someone or something,
OFTEN FAR EXTERIOR TO THEIR PRESENT POSITION OR AREA. So
there is an educational step. The tech is in HCO PLs and
HCOBs. It is perhaps given more directly herein, as it
applies to that exact scene.
So go to it. Really get a grip on it. And handle the hell
out of them yourselves.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Mission Issues Revision
==================
108. HCOB 26 APR 82 THE CRIMINAL MIND AND THE PSYCHS
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 26 APRIL 1982
Remimeo
THE CRIMINAL MIND AND THE PSYCHS
It has often been noted (and reported routinely in the
papers) that criminals "treated" by psychologists and
psychiatrists go out and commit crimes.
It could be suspected that these "practitioners" used
pain-drug-hypnosis and other means (under the guise of
treatment) to induce the criminal to go out and commit more
crimes. And possibly they do.
But I have just made a discovery that sheds some light on
this scene.
Morality and good conduct are sensible. That is the theme
of The Way to Happiness. It follows (and can be proven) that
immorality and bad conduct are stupid.
This bears out under further investigation. One could lay
aside the ancient Greek speculations of "Good and Bad" and
go on an easier and less contentious logic of "Bright and
Stupid."
Anything that a criminal seeks to obtain can be obtained
without crime if one is bright enough. Criminals, as police
can tell you, are usually very, very stupid. The things
they do and clues they leave around are hallmarks of very
low IQ. The "bright" criminal is found only in fiction. Now
and then a Hitler comes along and begins a myth that the
highly positioned are criminal - but Hitler (and Napoleon and
all their ilk) were stupid beyond belief. Hitler destroyed
himself and Germany, didn't he? And Napoleon destroyed
himself and France. So not even the highly placed criminals
are bright. Had they really been bright, they could have
accomplished a successful reign without crime.
The bones of old civilizations are signboards of stupidity.
The jails are bursting with people so stupid they did bad
things and even did those uncleverly.
So let us look at psychs again-what they call "treatment"
is a suppression (by shocks, drugs, etc.) of the ability to
think. They are not honest enough, these psychs, being just
dramatizing psychotics themselves for the most part, to
publish the fact that all their "treatments" (mayhem,
really, when it is not murder) make people more stupid.
These actions of shock and crazy evaluative counseling,
etc., lower IQ like an express elevator going down to the
basement. They do not tell legislators this or put it in
their books. This is why they say "no one can change IQ."
They are hiding the fact that they ruin it.
So the psych in prisons is engaging in an action (shocking
or whatever) that makes people who are already criminal
even stupider.
Although they obviously tell their victims to go out and
commit more crimes (the psychoanalysts urge wives to commit
adultery, for instance), they would not have to do this at
all to manufacture more crime.
Thelr "treatments" make the criminals more stupid. The
stupid commit more crlmes.
It is pretty simple, really, when you look at it.
Why does the state support psychiatrists and psychologists?
Because the state is stupid? Or does it want more citizens
robbed and killed? It's one or the other. Take your choice.
One is bright and is moral and honest and does well or one
is stupid and does badly.
The answer to crime is raising IQ. But only the
Scientologist can do that.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
==================
109. HCOB 6 MAY 82 THE CAUSE OF CRIME
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 6 MAY 1982
Remimeo
THE CAUSE OF CRIME
They say poverty makes crime. They say if one improved
education there would be less crime. They say if one cured
the lot of the underprivileged one would have solved crime.
All these "remedies" have proven blatantly false.
In very poor countries there is little crime. The
"improving" education, it was tailored to "social reform,"
not teaching skills. And it is a total failure. The fact
that rewarding the underprivileged has simply wrecked
schools and neighborhoods and cost billions is missing.
So who is "they"? The psychologist and psychiatrist, of
course. These were their crackpot remedies for crime. And
it's wrecked a civilization.
So what IS the cause of crime? The treatment, of course!
Electric shocks, behavior modification, abuse of the soul.
These are the causes of crime. There would be no criminals
at all if the psychs had not begun to oppress beings into
vengeance against society.
There's only one remedy for crime - get rid of the psychs!
They are causing it! Ah yes, it's true on cases and cases
of research on criminals. And what's it all go back to? The
psychs!
Their brutality and heartlessness is renowned.
The data is rolling in. Any more you pick up off a criminal
or anyone, send it in.
On crime we have an epidemic running on this planet. The
wrong causes psychs assign for crime plus their own
"treatments" make them a deadly virus.
The psychs should not be let to get away with "treatment"
which amounts to criminal acts, mayhem and murder. They are
not above the law. In fact, there are no laws at all which
protect them, for what sane society would sanction crime
against its citizens even as science? They should be
handled like any other criminals. They are at best
dramatizing psychotics and dangerous, but more dangerous to
society at large than the psychotics they keep in their
offices and loony bins because they lie and are
treacherous. Why the government funds them I do not know.
They are the last ones that should be let loose to handle
children.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
==================
110. HCOB 10 MAY 82 OT LEVELS
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 10 MAY 1982
BPI
OT LEVELS
Psychotics deal with doing people in. Their whole mission
in life is destruction.
They inveigh against lower-level gains and seek to
discredit them since these run contrary to their aberrated
purpose.
But when it gets to Clears and OT levels, psychos go berserk!
They are, it happens, terrified of punishment for their own
crimes.
The thought of someone being sensible or powerful enough to
punish them (the way they would do) is more than they can
stand.
You can, with the utmost certainty, identify a criminal
psychotic by the way he vilifies or degrades or seeks to
stop Clears and OTs from coming into existence.
It is lost on him that immorality and crime in others stem
from the very things he is doing to them.
So look well at psychs and antireligious campaigners. They
are speaking from their own blackened souls and they speak
from terror.
That people when they grow saner are less inclined to
vengeance is an argument they cannot assimilate. They know
if they had the power to torture and kill everyone they
would do so.
Thus, the psychs with their rantings and electric shocks
wear their own brand clearly marked on them by their own
conduct in life.
Recognize them for what they are - psychotic criminals -
and handle them accordingly.
Don't let them stop man from going free.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
==================
111. HCOB 11 JUL 82 QUESTIONABLE AUDITING REPAIR LIST
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 11 JULY 1982
Remimeo
All Auditors
All C/Ses
QUESTIONABLE AUDITING REPAIR LIST
Refs:
HCOB 8 Mar. 62 THE BAD "AUDITOR"
HCOB 15 Mar. 62 SUPPRESSORS
HCOB 26 Oct. 76 I AUDITING REPORTS, FALSIFYING OF
This list is for use in cleaning up pcs who have been
audited by a questionable auditor. Often a questionable
auditor or SP falsifies the worksheets and thus errors made
in the session would not necessarily be visible in the pc's
folder.
If a pc has been found to have been audited by a
questionable auditor or by an SP, that auditing should be
FESed and any needed repair actions done. Additionally the
C/S can order this prepared list assessed on the pc to
detect hidden errors in the auditing.
This prepared list would ordinarily be done Method 5.
This assessment may be prefixed by the line "IN YOUR
AUDITING WITH (name of auditor) ..." or used without the
prefix.
_________
1. WERE YOU GIVEN A WRONG ITEM? _________
(Repair the list with L4BRA.)
2. WERE YOU GIVEN SOMEBODY ELSE'S ITEM? _________
(Handle as in #1.)
3. WERE YOU GIVEN A WRONG INDICATION? _________
(Handle as in #1.)
4. DID YOU EVER THINK IT WAS ONE THING WHEN THE AUDITOR
SAID IT WAS ANOTHER? _________
(Indicate the BPC and 2WC E/S to F/N.)
5. WERE YOU AUDITED OVER AN ARC BREAK? _________
(Fly the ARC break.)
6 . WERE YOU AUDITED OVER A PRESENT TIME PROBLEM? _________
(Fly the PTP.)
7. WERE YOU AUDITED OVER A WITHHOLD? _________
(Pull the W/H.)
8. WERE YOU PERSUADED TO GET THE SAME WITHHOLD OFF
MORE THAN ONCE? _________
(Usually comes from a false or protest read so find out which it
was. E/S to find if pc had same thing happen before. Indicate to
pc it did erase - for pcs, when this happens, think they cannot
erase.)
9. DID YOU AND AUDITOR AGREE IN ANY WAY NOT TO PUT SOMETHING
DOWN ON THE WORKSHEET? _________
(Get it fully and enter it on current worksheet.)
10. DID AUDITOR PUT SOMETHING ON WORKSHEET YOU DIDN'T WANT? _________
(Find out if there is any false entry on worksheet.)
11. WERE YOU THREATENED WITH BLACKMAIL? _________
(Handle.)
12. DID YOU FEEL YOU WERE RUNNING THE SESSION? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
13. WAS THERE SOME KIND OF MYSTERY? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
14. DID THE AUDITOR EVALUATE FOR YOU? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
15. DID THE AUDITOR TELL YOU WHAT YOU SHOULD THINK
ABOUT YOUR CASE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
16. WAS THERE ANY INVALIDATION OF YOUR CASE OR GAINS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
17. DID THE AUDITOR GIVE YOU A PROBLEM? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
18. WAS THE AUDITOR CHATTERING AT YOU? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
19. WERE YOU DISTRACTED BY THE AUDITOR? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
20. WAS YOUR COMMUNICATION CHOPPED? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
21. DID THE AUDITOR GET ANGRY AT YOU? _________
(If this happened, indicate it is illegal to do so. 2WC E/S to F/N.
Clean up any ARC break.)
22. WERE ORIGINATIONS IGNORED? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
23. WERE THERE AUDITOR'S CODE VIOLATIONS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
24. WERE YOU TOLD SOMETHING READ WHEN YOU DIDN'T SEE
HOW IT COULD HAVE? _________
(Get what, indicate it was a false read. Itsa E/S to F/N.)
25. WERE YOU TOLD THAT SOMETHING DIDN'T READ ON THE METER
WHEN YOU FELT IT SHOULD HAVE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (Note for C/S.)
26. DID YOU FEEL AN F/N SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN INDICATED
WHEN IT WAS? _________
(Find the point and get in Suppress on it and complete the action.
Check "Are there any other F/Ns which should not have been
indicated by the auditor when they were?" and handle as above.
Then find and run the ARC breaks bypassed, with ARC break
handling.)
27. WAS AN F/N OR RELEASE-POINT BYPASSED? _________
(Find and rehab the overrun of the release-point to F/N. Check
for any other bypassed F/Ns and rehab them.)
28. WERE YOU PREVENTED FROM GETTING OFF A WITHHOLD? _________
(Indicate the BPC, then pull the W/H.)
29. WAS AN OVERT OR WITHHOLD NOT ACCEPTED? _________
(Get what, get off any protest and inval, and clean it up E/S
to F/N.)
30. DID THE AUDITOR TRY TO PULL A WITHHOLD THAT YOU
DIDN'T HAVE? _________
(Indicate if so. 2WC E/S to F/N.)
31. DID YOU FEEL GUILTY AFTER HAVING GOTTEN OFF A WITHHOLD? _________
(Get what. Get off any protest and inval, and clean it up E/S to
F/N.)
32. WERE YOU MADE TO WITHHOLD SOMETHING? _________
(Indicate. Then clean up the W/H, E/S to F/N.)
33. WERE YOU MADE WRONG FOR SOMETHING YOU SAID? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N. Clean up any ARC break to F/N.)
34. DID THE AUDITOR TRY TO DOMINATE YOU? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
35. DID YOU GO PTS TO THE AUDITOR? _________
(Indicate. 2WC to F/N.) (Note for C/S for further handling.)
36. WERE YOU RUN ON SOMETHING THAT WAS ACTUALLY PART OF
THE AUDITOR'S CASE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
37. DID THE AUDITOR TALK TO YOU ABOUT HIS/HER OWN CASE
OR PROBLEMS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
38. DID YOU EVER HAVE THE IMPRESSION THAT THINGS YOU'D SAID
IN SESSION HADN'T BEEN REPORTED TO THE C/S? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
39. DID THE AUDITOR FAIL TO DO A NEEDED REPAIR? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (Note for C/S.)
40. WERE YOU GIVEN UNNECESSARY REPAIRS? _________
(Indicate. 2WC E/S to F/N.)
41. WERE YOU FORCED TO RUN SOMETHING OVER PROTEST? _________
(Indicate. 2WC E/S to F/N.)
42. DID YOU EVER FEEL THAT THE AUDITOR HAD SOME OTHER MOTIVE
THAN TO HELP YOU? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
43. WERE THERE FLUBBED COMMANDS OR OTHER TECH VIOLATIONS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
44. WERE YOU PREVENTED FROM EXECUTING AN AUDITING COMMAND? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (Note for C/S.)
45. WAS A PROCESS LEFT UNFLAT? _________
(Get in Suppress on it and complete the action.)
46. DID THE AUDIIOR SYMPATHIZE WITH YOU INSTEAD OF BEING
EFFECTIVE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N. If an action left unflat, get in Suppress on it
and complete the action.)
47. DID THE AUDITOR RABBIT? _________
(Handle as in #46.)
48. WERE YOU PERMITTED TO END PROCESSES OR SESSIONS ON YOUR
OWN VOLITION? _________
(Handle as in #46.)
49. DID YOU COMMIT ANY OVERTS ON (name of auditor) or
THE AUDITOR? _________
(Pull the overts.)
50. DID YOU GO INTO AGREEMENT WITH THE AUDITOR ABOUT
SOMETHING? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Senior C/S
Flag Land Base
==================
112. HCOB 11 JUL 82 QUESTIONABLE AUDITING
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 11 JULY 1982
Issue II
C/Ses
Auditors
QUESTIONABLE AUDITING
Every once in a while a C/S finds himself in the position
where he's had an auditor of questionable reputation on his
lines, and he is now faced with the task of cleaning up pcs
audited by that auditor and ensuring there are no hidden
errors on pcs he has audited. HCOB 11 July 82 I,
QUESTIONABLE AUDITING REPAIR LIST, was written for this purpose,
but there is an additional handling that should be done as well.
The handling is as follows:
A. Explain the Auditor's Code (R-factor).
B. Ask the pc if any of the following were violated in any
way by the auditor (or any auditor).
C. Read to the pc (on a meter) the Auditor's Code line by
line. Clear up all reads.
This will, of course, detect and clear up code breaks on
pcs and get them back in the correct frame of mind about
being audited.
Very few auditors, of course, get into the situation
described above. And of this we can all be proud. But for
those who have strayed we have these tools to remedy the
matter.
I hope they are of some help to you.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Commodore's Messenger
==================
113. HCOB 10 AUG 82 OT MAXIMS
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 10 AUGUST 1982
OT MAXIMS
For some time now I've been engaged on a path of OT
research, resulting in the new OT levels and which will
result in never-before-dreamed-of states of being for thetans.
These new OT levels and others to follow will advance a
thetan to levels he hasn't even imagined for eons.
And hear this! In order to help you along the road to OT,
I'm going to release the following OT data that you can use
to pull up your theta bootstraps and get along up the road.
These are OT maxims! Know them well!!
THE POWER (defined as light-year kilotons per microsecond)
OF A THETAN IS MEASURED BY NOTHING ELSE THAN THE DISTANCE
(defined as spherical spatial length) AROUND HIM IN HIS
ENVIRONMENT THAT HE CAN CONTROL.
And that is the power of a thetan; the totality of it,
believe it or not.
WHEN A THETAN EXERTS THIS POWER UNCLEVERLY, HE BRINGS
ABOUT DESTRUCTION.
And thus you get a fascist state that destroys itself. It's
got the control but not good sense.
And so that is where good sense and judgment enter in.
WHEN GOOD SENSE AND GOOD JUDGMENT ARE NOT ADDED INTO
CONTROL, CONTROL GETS A BAD NAME.
And that is where you get the idea that people shouldn't control.
A WAY TO IMPROVE YOUR CONTROL OR ANOTHER'S IS TO DO IT ON A
GRADIENT.
If a thetan is having trouble controlling things, get him
to control things on a gradient and he'll snap right out of it.
DEFINITIONS
GOOD CONTROL: Harmonious alignment.
BAD CONTROL: Disharmonious alignment.
And by the way, you have art here, too!
WAR: Bad control having to be exerted because good control
wasn't exerted.
And this also defines destruction.
So there you are! Use these maxims well. Our future depends on it!
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
==================
114. HCOB 25 AUG 82 Art Series 10 THE JOY OF CREATING
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 25 AUGUST 1982
Remimeo
Art Series 10
THE JOY OF CREATING
Force yourself to smile and you'll soon stop frowning.
Force yourself to laugh and you'll soon find something to
laugh about.
Wax enthusiastic and you'll very soon feel so.
A being causes his own feelings.
The greatest joy there is in life is creating.
Splurge on it!
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
==================
115. HCOB 26 AUG 82 PAIN AND SEX
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 26 AUGUST 1982
Remimeo
PAIN AND SEX
(Note: This HCOB probably won't increase my popularity but I would
be very remiss if I did not pass on an important discovery.)
There are two items in this universe that cause more
trouble than many others combined.
One is PAIN.
The other is SEX.
One should know more about these things.
They may have applications but they are used by destructive
beings in great volume to cave others in.
Despite the false data of Freud, psychologists,
psychiatrists and other criminals, they are not native to a
being. They are only artificial wavelengths. They have
exact frequencies that can be manufactured. A being or a
machine can synthesize either one.
Pain becomes a lock on a being's abhorrence for misalignment
of his own electrical flows. It is a lock upon unconsciousness
which shuts off knowingness.
Sex is a lock on and perversion of the "joy of creation"
which involves a whole being and expands him, but by using
just one wavelength, sex, this can be perverted and he
contracts.
When pain enters a scene, a being withdraws, contracts and
can go unconscious.
When sex enters the scene, a being fixates and loses power.
Destructive creatures who do not want people big or
reaching-since they are terrified of punishment due to
their crimes-invented pain and sex to shrink people and cut
their alertness, knowingness, power and reach.
Thus, you see people who are "experiencing" either pain or
sex introverting and not producing much.
Pain and sex were the INVENTED tools of degradation.
Believe it or not, a being can be so overwhelmed by either
that he or she becomes an addict of it. Priests become
flagellants and cut themselves to pieces with self-whipping.
Torturers drool over pain. Lovers are very seldom happy.
People do the most irrational things when overcharged with
sex, and prostitutes use it as a knowing stock-in- trade.
Combined, pain and sex make up the insane Jack-the-Rippers
(who killed only prostitutes) and the whole strange body of
sex-murder freaks, including Hinckley, and the devotees of
late-night horror movies. Under the false data of the
psychs (who have been on the track a long time and are the
sole cause of decline in this universe) both pain and sex
are gaining ground in this society and, coupled with
robbery which is a hooded companion of both, may very soon
make the land a true jungle of crime.
Go into an asylum or a prison and look at the increasing
institutional population and know what you are looking at.
In the main, these are pain and sex addicts, decadent and
degraded and no longer capable. They were sent on that
route down through the ages by the psychs and here they are
still in the psychs' hands! And do they get well or go
straight? Oh no. Whether in prisons or insane asylums they
just get worse. And the psychs in both places rub their
bloodied hands as they turn their products loose again upon
the remaining population! It's no accident. And the
stocks-in- trade of psychs are PAIN and SEX. They will even
tell you it's "natural" to steal! To compound their
felony-if that is possible-they tell you it's the body
doing it. Another crashing big false datum on top of all
their other lies.
These are data which emerged from recent thorough research
of the whole track.
This is not theory or some strange opinion. It is provable
electronic fact. The waves are just synthesized.
They are the most-used tools in the campaign against beings
in furthering the general goal of those creatures whose
sole ambition is destruction. The universe does not happen
to be either destructive or chaotic except as such obsessed
creeps make it.
Statements it is otherwise are just more false data from
the same suspect "authorities." It fits their purposes to
make seem natural what they make artificially. The universe
only seems that way to a being because such loathsome
psychotics make it seem so.
They destroyed every great civilization to date and are
hard at work on this one. The one thing they can't stand is
the light of truth, so despite their objections, one must
turn it on them. Only in its glare do their lies wither. It
is the potent weapon they can't fend off.
These facts may not be very palatable. But they could clear
up some mysteries for you.
For wherever there is a mystery (and both pain and sex have
been these for man) there are answers. As both pain and sex
could have messed up your life, the above may be some
answers you've been looking for.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
==================
116. HCOB 28 SEP 82 C/S Ser 115 MIXING RUNDOWNS AND REPAIRS
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 28 SEPTEMBER 1982
Remimeo
All C/Ses
All Auditors
C/S Series 115
MIXING RUNDOWNS AND REPAIRS
Refs:
HCOB 6 Mar. 74 INTROSPECTION RD, SECOND ADDITION INFORMATION
TO C/Ses (Section: "Integrity")
HCOB 9 June 71 II C/S Series 42 C/S RULES
HCOB 20 Nov. 73 II C/S Series 89 F/N WHAT YOU ASK OR PROGRAM
HCOB 26 May 71 C/S Series 38 TRs COURSE AND AUDITING
MIXING MAJOR ACTIONS
HCOB 20 June 71 C/S Series 47 THE SUPREME TEST OF A C/S
HCOB 4 Aug. 71R POST PURPOSE CLEARING Rev. 26.11.74
HCOB 17 Dec. 81 POST PURPOSE CLEARING REVIVED
HCOB 20 Dec. 71 C/S Series 72 USE OF CORRECTION LISTS
HCOB 16 June 70 C/S Series 6 WHAT THE C/S IS DOING
(Section: "C/S Purpose")
HCOB 8 Aug. 71 C/S Series 55 THE IVORY TOWER
Book: Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health
Book Three, Chapter 3, "The Auditor's Role"
Book: Scientology 0-8, The Book of Basics
Chapter 3, "Consideration and Mechanics"
__________
WHEN C/Sing A RUNDOWN, ONE C/Ses THAT RUNDOWN, NOT A
MIXTURE OF DIFFERENT RUNDOWNS. EACH RUNDOWN IS ITSELF AND
NO OTHER, AND EACH RUNDOWN HAS ITS OWN REPAIR.
To do otherwise is violent and actionable out-tech.
EXAMPLES OF MIXED RUNDOWNS AND REPAIRS
Recently, one particular (now removed) C/S was found to
have an "anything goes" pattern of C/Sing and programing
cases. This C/S mixed rundowns one with another into hash
and did not do the standard rundown or repair it standardly
as its own rundown.
Example: A case was being run on Post Purpose Clearing and
got up through the L&N step. The C/S decided something was
wrong with the purpose that had been listed and ordered an
Expanded Dianetics action on it. The result was an
evaluated-for and caved-in pc. PPC is just PPC; it is not
mixed with other rundowns.
Example: A pre-OT on the level of Solo OT III was Solo
auditing as per the directions given in the OT III
materials. At one point the pre-OT ran into some BPC.
Instead of C/Sing for the repair list for that level, the
C/S took parts of another rundown (Audited NOTs) and wrote
out C/S instructions for the Solo auditor to run Solo, as
part of OT III. Before this was caught by another C/S and
handled, the pre-OT had done a number of attempted Solo
sessions and gotten her case into quite a snarl. OT III and
New OT V (Audited NOTs) are two entirely separate rundowns
and must not be mishmashed together.
Example: A pre-OT was left incomplete on a NOTs Drug RD and
put onto the HRD. Then, with the HRD only half done, was
put onto a rundown of HC Lists "on your marriage," and then
put onto yet another action. Needless to say, the end
product of these mixed rundowns was a totally and utterly
messed-up case.
Example (taken from earlier C/S errors): A pc was C/Sed for
Book One Dianetics, was audited halfway down a chain and was
left there. Then, because he was upset, was C/Sed to be
"repaired" by flying Scientology ruds instead of a
Dianetics repair prepared list!
Example: A pc on Grade IV was given a wrong item, got
upset, was "repaired" with an O/W session! And blew.
Example: A pc was started on NED and, with it incomplete,
was begun on Scientology grades. Then, with Grade 0 incomplete,
was C/Sed to begin Book One auditing and, when this bogged, was
"repaired" with an L&N prepared list! The result in all
these cases was a thoroughly snarled-up case. It required
expert C/Sing and auditing to handle and can cause a lot of
trouble (including for the C/S found doing it).
Mixing rundowns or repairs for rundowns as in the above
examples is outtech of a very serious nature and must not
be done. It is the job of the C/S to make sure that it
doesn't happen and handle it when he finds others doing it.
CORRECT C/Sing
The right way to go about C/Sing is:
1. Ensure the pc is set up for rundown "X."
2. C/S the pc standardly through rundown "X."
3. If trouble, repair the pc using the repair action or
repair list designated for rundown "X."
4. Get rundown "X" completed to its full EP and attested.
Then you can C/S the case for rundown "Y" or rundown "Z" or
whatever the next grade or level on the Grade Chart is that
pc's next step. When you find a case where "C/Sing" has not
followed the proper Grade Chart or the case has been
snarled up with each rundown interrupted with something
else or wrong repairs used, the following is the proper
procedure:
A. Go back in the folder to find where the case was doing
well. (Or spot it on a meter with dating and get the data
that way if folders are unavailable or suspected false.)
B. Plot out the rundowns run but incomplete.
C. Spot the wrong prepared lists that were used to "repair."
D. Program the case to:
i. Complete each action in sequence of incompletes OR use
the correct
prepared list to repair it.
ii. Get the case back onto an Advance Program that follows
the Grade Chart.
CRAMS, PPC AND CONFESSIONALS
It would be thought that, by this, no one could ever cram a
person or do a PPC or require a Confessional.
There is a dicey point here. If a case cannot be crammed or
post purpose cleared or have a current withhold pulled
while he is on a rundown, then no one could be hatted or
corrected or gotten back if blown.
This is why it is mandatory to get a C/S okay to cram or
PPC or pull O/Ws on a pc.
The safe rules for giving a C/S okay are as follows:
RULE ONE: DO NOT do or permit a cram or PPC or Qual Why Finding
on a pc who is NOT at a rest point or win on a rundown. Get the
pc to a rest point or win on his current rundown before these
are done.
RULE TWO: ALWAYS require ruds be flown before a cram or PPC.
RULE THREE: ALWAYS use only the repair actions or prepared
lists for the rundown the pc is ON, not some other "repair"
action for some other rundown or some action that is
squirrel tech.
RULE FOUR: ALWAYS C/S the pc for his own gain, not for any other
purpose. The purpose of auditing is to help the pc, not to
remedy social or organizational ills. If this is followed,
those same ills vanish. If this is not followed, the ills
multiply. The purpose of auditing is to help the pc become
more able as a being and has no part of discipline or
"getting even."
RULE FIVE: It is the C/S who C/Ses the case, NOT the pc or
his or her spouse or the Ethics Officer or some senior.
RULE SIX: All cramming, PPCing, withhold pulling and even
coffee-shop auditing must be part of the pc's auditing folder.
RULE SEVEN: Get the pc on the Grade Chart and keep him
progressing up it smoothly, repairing what he is on with
what was designed and intended to repair it and not with
something else.
RULE EIGHT: C/Sing and auditing are very straightforward
procedures, well laid out. If no one in the near infinity
of years behind us in this universe came up with a precise
and doable system to unsnarl a being-and they didn't- the
auditor in the chair and the C/S are not going to find any
new-and-wonderfuls off the cuff. Or any "different" cases
or pcs either.
RULE NINE: C/Sing and auditing are a straight silver path
to a golden future for the pc. It is there to be followed
step by step with standard tech and all side trips lead
only into grief and thorns.
RULE TEN: All C/Ses and auditors are trusted beings. They
earn that trust by being very standard. When they depart
from standard tech, when they mix up rundowns or repairs,
they betray that trust, the pc and themselves and block the
way to a better being and far better universe.
RULE ELEVEN: Standard, straight tech will get the pc there
every time. It is only auditors and C/Ses who fail and they
fail only when they don't apply completely available, fully
published standard tech. So don't scatter around on the
Grade Chart or mix rundowns or use wrong repairs, and
handle the hell out of it when you find another has done
it. And when you find it, report it swiftly to the Senior
C/S Int and the new Inspector General Network via Flag.
Standard Dianetics and Scientology tech has never been
known to harm anyone. Pretending to apply it when not doing
so is applying something else and falsely calling it
Dianetics and Scientology. Thus, nonstandard actions become
a violation, not only of trust but of trademark and
copyright law and can be actionable.
RULE TWELVE: You are safe and secure doing standard tech.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Data collected by
Senior C/S International
P.S. What happened to the "C/Ses" and "auditors" who did
the above examples? Don't ask! This is a bulletin not a
horror movie!
==================
117. HCOB 13 OCT 82 C/S Ser 116 ETHICS AND THE C/S
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 13 OCTOBER 1982
Remimeo
All C/Ses
All Auditors
Ethics Officers
C/S Series 116
ETHICS AND THE C/S
Refs:
HCO PL 18 June 68 ETHICS
HCO PL 17 June 65 STAFF AUDITOR ADVICES
HCO PL 1 May 65 STAFF MEMBER REPORTS
HCO PL 22 July 82 KNOWLEDGE REPORTS
HCO PL 29 Apr. 65 III ETHICS, REVIEW
HCO PL 30 July 65 PRECLEAR ROUTING TO ETHICS
HCO PL 4 July 65 PC ROUTING REVIEW CODE
HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I C/S Series 79 PTS INTERVIEWS
HCOB 29 Mar. 70 AUDITING AND ETHICS
HCOB 25 June 70 C/S SERIES II
HCOB 28 Oct. 76 C/S Series 98 AUDITING FOLDERS, OMISSIONS IN COMPLETENESS
HCOB 10 Nov. 87 Auditor Admin Series 20RA MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS
HCOPL 27 Oct. 64R Rev. 15.11.87 POLICIES ON PHYSICAL HEALING,
INSANITY AND SOURCES OF TROUBLE
HCO PL 16 May 65 II INDICATORS OF ORGS
HCO PL 16 Oct. 67 AKH Series 16 SUPPRESSIVES AND THE
ADMINISTRATOR-HOW TO DETECT SPs AS AN ADMINISTRATOR
HCO PL 23 Feb. 78R BOARD OF REVIEW Rev. 7.5 .84
__________
It has just been brought to my attention that over the last
few years a C/S had been advising staffs that C/S approval
was required before somebody could be handled in Ethics!
(The real problem he was solving was that he had an
out-ethics situation of his own going on and didn't want an
Ethics Officer anywhere around. He has since been removed
from post.)
The above was not known at the time C/S Series 115 was
written and it's
possible some people could use HCOB C/S Series 115 to
inadvertently or otherwise deny needed ethics actions on a
person.
Technically, it is very proper indeed to get a C/S okay
before somebody
meddles with a case, regardless of the circumstances. But
let's put this into a proper framework: If some pc is
standing over a body with a smoking gun in his hand, it
certainly does not require a C/S okay to take him to jail!
HCOB 28 Sept. 82, C/S Series 115, does not specifically
state that C/S okay is required before someone can get
ethics handling, but people could alter-is it and say,
"See, this person has an out-ethics situation but he can't
be sent to Ethics because he is on the Grade Chart."
HANDLING PC ETHICS
To handle pc ethics, a C/S must, first of all, have data.
He must ensure that the various reports and worksheets,
such as for cramming or Word Clearing or Product Debug
actions, do get filed in pcs' folders, as such reports
often alert the C/S to existing ethics situations. (Refs:
HCO PL 28 Oct. 76, C/S Series 98, AUDITING FOLDERS,
OMISSIONS IN COMPLETENESS and HCOB 10 Nov. 87, Auditor
Admin Series 20RA, MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS)
For example, the C/S sees a report that the pc has an
unhandled PTS situation.
He would have the pc routed to Ethics via Review. (Refs:
HCO PL 29 Apr. 65 III, ETHICS, REVIEW and HCO PL 4 July 65,
PC ROUTING REVIEW CODE)
Once the pc's ethics handling is complete, he's returned
back to auditing lines via Review, and copies of any Ethics
interview must be filed in his pc folder.
When ethics action on a pc is originated by a terminal
other than the C/S (a lower condition, Court of Ethics or
Comm Ev), the D of P should be advised and make note of
this in the pc's folder. The pc's auditing is then
suspended until the action is complete. (Ref: HCOB 29 Mar.
70, AUDITING AND ETHICS)
When the pc is off auditing for any of these handlings,
there must be a tight liaison maintained with Ethics and/or
Review (via the D of P) to ensure pcs aren't lost off lines
or kept waiting interminably for handling.
Where any auditing handling, such as a Confessional, etc.,
is recommended by a court or Comm Ev, C/S okay must, of
course, be obtained and the C/S would oversee the action
from his hat.
PC PROGRAMS AND ETHICS
There is a difference between a program-which is a general
plan for the case- and the day-to-day C/Sing which, of
course, is gauged to keep the program going forward.
Thus, it is often found that additional steps have to be
added to a program to handle outnesses as they turn up,
without violating the program itself.
Example: One pc had gotten into ethics trouble and was
given a Repair Program to unsnarl him, the first step of
which was to get up through the conditions which he was
already on. He got hung up at Doubt, couldn't get through
it and virtually went off post. Step 1 of the program was
then unbugged by pointing out that the Doubt would either
be false data or PTSness. The PTS condition was then found
and, by report, the pc was then able to get up through the
conditions.
Thus, the program discovered an earlier tech outness: A PTS
pc was being audited on grades. Because of this an
additional step had to be added to the program, step 1A to
get the PTSness handled. With that resolved, the remainder
of the program could be continued.
That is an example of a program in action which is
unsnarling the case, but it requires considerable
alertness. From it it can be seen that C/Ses are necessary
and valuable on an ethics line, but they must know what
they're doing.
HOW MUCH ETHICS IS CORRECT?
There is (or can appear to be) a conflict of targets
between a C/S and an Ethics Officer. An Ethics Officer is
trying to get in discipline and a C/S is trying to improve
a case. But it is true that an out-ethics pc does not make
case gain.
So one could say that one measures the amount of ethics
which must go in to satisfy the viewpoint of the Ethics
Officer who is charged with maintaining discipline and to
still keep in Rule 4 of HCOB C/S Series 115 to C/S the pc
for his own case gain.
In normal operating practice, the way I handle ethics in
relationship to C/Sing is to:
1. Take the ethics actions necessary for the benefit of
discipline in the group, and when this has been done,
2. Salvage the being independently of the organizational
requirements.
So I would say that a C/S must not forbid ethics actions
but that he follows steps 1 and 2 above, in that sequence.
For it is very certain that tech won't go in unless ethics
is in.
Thus, the two viewpoints (Ethics Officer and C/S) are maintained.
HCO BOARD OF REVIEW
As the pendulum can swing too far in either direction (too
much or too little ethics), there is a third port of call
in this scene. That is the HCO Board of Review action.
The HCO Board of Review exists in Department 21. In an org,
the board is convened by any LRH Comm or KOT who appoints a
chairman and two other members.
Its function is to look into injustices or technically
incorrect findings and cancel any miscarriage of justice or
incorrect handlings. (Ref: HCO PL 23 Feb. 78, BOARD OF REVIEW)
A properly established HCO Board of Review is obviously
necessary as a point of recourse to keep some sanity in
between the ethics actions and the C/Sing.
SUMMARY
The data in this HCOB and in the references listed at the
beginning should resolve any conflict between a C/S and
Ethics and prevent a majority of pendulum swings from
occurring.
The basic datum upon which all of these references are
founded is just this: TECH WILL NOT GO IN WHEN ETHICS IS OUT.
As a note, with misuse of this datum it can also go to
total ethics, no tech! In one org, many years ago, the
C/Ses and auditors handily got rid of all the evidence of
their out-tech and their inactivity and put themselves on a
long loaf by simply sending every pc that came on the lines
over to the Ethics Officer. The pcs, unhandled, then moved
out of the org and no cases were finished at all.
So there can be abuses both ways in case handling and
ethics. Ethics can be overused or it can be not used at all
when needed. A C/S has simply got to know his stuff and
steer a sane path on the subject.
It is the correct ethics and the correct tech action used
in the correct amounts, that result in winning pcs.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
==================
118. HCOB 27 DEC 82 TRAINING AND OT
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 27 DECEMBER 1982
Remimeo
BPI
Pre-OT Solo Auditors
Solo Courses
Solo NOTs Auditing Course
Ds of T
Registrars
C/Ses
TRAINING AND OT
On Solo levels you deserve the best auditor you can get: You.
Auditor training is highly recommended whether you plan to audit
professionally or not. "Getting trained," as a Solo
auditor, does not simply mean to do the Solo courses.
Training up to the level of a Class IV/NED Auditor who
knows his business is the most positive assurance there is
that you will make it to OT.
It's all right for these guys in lower grades to be
pcs-that's fine. But there comes a point as you move up the
Grade Chart when your lack of auditing skill starts hitting
you in the teeth and you won't make it to OT at all. You're
walking straight into the tiger's lair on New OT VII and
you'd better be good!
Recently, some Solo NOTs auditors reported that they were
just giving themselves a session a week "to keep their ruds
in." What was actually occurring was that they were trying
to make it to OT without being sufficiently trained, and
giving as an excuse that, well, they're just keeping their
ruds in. If those Solo NOTs auditors knew what was ahead of
them up the line, they sure would not be monkeying with that.
The plain truth of it is, if anybody is really going to
make it to OT he has to know how to audit. That's the long
and short of it.
You wouldn't put yourself and your case in the hands of an
untrained or poorly trained auditor, would you?
You owe yourself the best auditor in the world on Solo, and
that is you.
So get trained.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
==================
1983
==================
119. HCOB 8 MAR 83 HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 8 MARCH 1983
Remimeo
PTS/SP Checksheets
All Staff
HCOs
Tech/Qual
C/Ses
Auditors
HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS
Refs:
HCO PL 20 Oct. 81R PTS TYPE A HANDLING Rev. 10.9.83
HCOB 10 Aug. 73 PTS HANDLING
The following was taken from one of my taped lectures
(7511C20) and is hereby issued in HCOB form:
I coached a pc one time as to how to talk to his parents. I
coached him very, very carefully. This is a sort of MAA
job, not a C/S job. I made him repeat everything after me,
very carefully: "And when your mother says to you so and so
and so and so, what are you going to say?" It was simply
good roads and good weather. l forced him, at pain of being
squashed, to follow that exact patter with the parents. It
was just good roads and good weather.
"Hello Mamma, how are you? How's Papa?" you know. And she
says, "Yeow, yeow, yeow, yeow, yeow and you whawha whawha."
Just say, "Well, all right, all right." Don't answer back
and don't engage in any argument of any kind whatsoever.
Give it an ack. I said, "You're calling them up just
because you're passing through and you were interested in
how they were, and that is your whole story." And he did,
and that was the end of the whole situation. Pc came back
to battery. Relationships with the parents went totally normal.
In other words, he was keeping it going-his worry, his
upset, his letters, trying to answer their questions, his
conversation with them. Whereas I cut it all into just a
pattern of something on the order of about a tone 3.5
straight across the boards. That was the end of the PTS
condition.
A PTS condition also has outside handling steps. But you as
an auditor or you as a C/S are possibly limited by the fact
that you don't have an MAA, or you do not have somebody who
is sufficiently skilled in order to do this job for you.
And it winds up blowing everybody's head off.
In such an instance, just get hold of the guy and coach him
in exactly what he's going to say.
"Oh, but no, she'd never listen, she won't, she hasn't
talked to me for seven years! She won't talk to me in any
way, shape or form!"
"Well, all right, all right, all right. That's fine, good."
You get a little bit inventive and you say, "Well, when is
her birthday?" or something like that.
The pc says, "Well, as a matter of fact, it was a month or
two ago." And you say, "Well, all right, why don't you send
her a birthday card and tell her it's a belated birthday
card and that you remembered her birthday and always had
kind thoughts of her?"
Now, the incoming comm may blow his head off. You just cool
him off. Don't engage in any corner of this; this is not
the game you're playing. You simply acknowledge any nice
parts you can find.
"Papa went hunting and you're a dirty dog and I've never
seen the like of you and you're an ungrateful brat and so
on, and why don't you be like your great-uncle Oscar who is
now doing time in Sing Sing and'll be executed next week?"
And you say, "I hope Daddy had a fine hunting trip."
It's the only part of it you answer. You coach him into
two-way comm that is well above 2.0 on the Tone Scale, that
mostly consists of acks and mild interest in what's going
on. You'll find out these conditions will evaporate, if you
can prevent the backflash from being responded to by the
PTS person. In other words, there are ways to handle this
in real life.
You will find a great many people who are "PTS" are
antagonizing the people.
They are antagonizing them beyond belief, and they're
telling them what's wrong with them and they're telling
them this and they're telling them that and the person
eventually gets very resentful.
Well, even that can be patched up. You are not doing
anything at the other end of the line. You cool off the PT
scene sufficiently one way or the other so that the person
can sit in the auditing chair.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
==================