| Author | Message | ||
     Anonymous (149.174.164.83) |
transferred from a.r.s., a stunning series of articles exposing the behind the scenes of the cult circa early '80's. Here he starts the series with PART I: THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 1 of 25 – Backing Off the Lines. Leaving the CoS from a position in upper management can be quite a "culture shock". For the people I've known who've done it, re-integration into the world can take years. Leaving the CoS was different for me. Backing off the lines slowly, there was no shock in the transition. After having spent 4 years in Sea Org upper management, in 1975 I left the Flagship. My wife and I went back to my hometown of Denver. While there we decided to stay and have a family. We got approval from Mary Sue Hubbard to be posted in Denver, where I started and ran the CoS of Colorado. After growing that org into one of the largest in the world, I had one of my many "run ins" with the Guardians Office, removed from my post as CO (Commanding Officer) of the org and comm eved in LA. Even though I was exonerated, in 1978, I ended up in Clearwater posted as Sea Org Chief, managing all the Sea Org units around the world. While in Flag management, I voiced serious disagreement with Flag's management of orgs, as well as the treatment of Sea Org family units. Having worked closely with Hubbard on the ship, I thought if I could reach him, these "outnesses" could be resolved. Unfortunately, he was unavailable. I was "busted" for not being a "team player", as I continually refused to be involved with the crazy and unethical orders and programs. I figured that I would just "tough things out". Then my wife became pregnant with our second child. Since my two-year-old daughter was already miserable there, my wife and I decided not to bring up another child in that insanity. So as not to be declared, we went through the painful process of "routing out" of the Sea Org and returned to Denver as "freeloaders". I ended up in 1979 working for my father, managing his business. That same year, 1979, a mission was sent from what was now upper management (known as SU/Special Unit or WDC/Watchdog Committee) to find me. I was informed that my evaluations of Flag management had turned out to be correct, and was asked if I would return to Clearwater. Turning down that offer, I was then told that my removal from the CO Denver post was a mistake and that the org's stats had crashed since my leaving. The mission wanted to know if I would go back on post as CO Denver. Having a life and job in Denver now, I proposed going back in the org in the evenings to get the stats back up into the ranges that they were in when I left. After agreeing to that, I gave the mission my conditions. The first condition was that I must be left alone by all management to do whatever I saw fit, giving me complete autonomous power with regards to the org. Secondly, there would be additional conditions once I fulfilled my part of the bargain and got the stats back up. (1) My freeloader debt would be cancelled, leaving me a public person, and (2) that auditing was to be set up for me at AOLA through OT 7. My proposal was forwarded by the mission to upper management and approved by Hubbard. Over the next many months, I fulfilled my end of the bargain, and all my conditions were then honored. So, by 1980, I found myself out of the Sea Org with no freeloader debt and just a public person again. Later that year, in May of 1980, I received a phone call at my job from Dianna Hubbard. As if the call itself wasn't enough of a shock, she then told me the purpose of her call. Apparently, there were big problems with upper management now. People trying to initiate positive changes were systematically being "shot". From our conversation, as well as the follow-up material that she sent to me, I got the idea that there were big changes occurring in upper management that was going to make things much more suppressive than ever before. Dianna was extremely concerned. I also got the distinct sense that she was no longer in touch with her father. Dianna went on to say that maybe the only effective retaliation would have to be done from her post, overseeing "distribution" in the CoS. Management only seemed interested in those things that were already in place and the public already on lines. She wanted my help in this endeavor. She felt she could trust me, not only because of my previous accomplishments, but also due to the fact that I worked closely with both her parents. Not believing that anything effective could be done from Flag, I told her that my work must be done from the field. If a strong, grassroots movement could be established, we would be in a power position, able to effect changes in current management. To begin with, I'd do an evaluation and come up with a program to accomplish our goals. She'd then have to fly to Denver to see my proposals. If approved, it would be her job to run "air cover" for me, protecting me from management and the Guardians Office. But I would work alone with autonomy. She agreed to the above and I started my evaluation. Within a month I had completed the evaluation and basic program. End of Part 1 of 25 Mike Goldstein | ||
| UNLIKELY (202.184.252.5) |
"Goldstein" does not sound like a very Scientologist name if you get my meaning. | ||
| Anonymous (64.12.117.20) |
And you, "unlikely", sound like shit-for-brains. Scientology has always prided itself on being "compatible" with other religions. There are many people of the Hebrew faith listed among the membership of the cult. Please don't use this forum to exemplify your lack of intellgence or worse yet, your anti-semitism. | ||
| Anonymous (64.12.117.20) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 2 of 25 - Grassroots Evaluation I won't get into all the details of my evaluation of the grassroots movement. I will provide a synopsis of what I came up with though. In 1973, Hubbard felt that there was a strong need for a new marketing initiative to get his technical developments, or "properties" (as he referred to them) exploited. He put me in charge of this and designed a special post for me called "LRH Properties Chief". In an hour long, taped briefing, he laid out his ideas for the position. The one idea that he was the most hot on was an idea for a grassroots movement. The idea took the form of something he called the "Volunteer Ministers Program". Basically, we were to recruit volunteer ministers to take the tech out to the general public. This program was to be run OUTSIDE any influence of the orgs, and these ministers would only take their cues from a hierarchy outside Flag management. The only tech materials used by these volunteer ministers would come from a handbook designed, specifically for them. Hubbard was so hot on this idea that he would say to me, "we need this like the desert needs rain". I liked the idea of a grassroots movement outside the existing management and orgs, but thought the volunteer minister idea was somewhat hooky. But since Hubbard was so hot on the idea, we proceeded with it. The program never really got off the ground, and was eventually scrapped. All that remained was the handbook, which just became another book to sell in the Scientology bookstore, and some mini courses, which just became more services sold in Division 6s. In my evaluation, I realized that Hubbard's idea of a grassroots movement was very legitimate, but that his vehicle for accomplishing this was weak. Additionally, why build a new vehicle when you already have one that worked. In other words, Hubbard already had had a successful grassroots movement, once, in the early 1950s, after Book One, Dianetics was published. At that time, Dianetic counseling groups started popping up on their own, people started auditing each other, and pretty soon there was quite a movement occurring. This movement continued until the advent of the organization, with more "advanced" services and training being offered. The organization was only interested in using the Dianetics book to get people "in the door" for services, and its technical value was relegated to "background data" on tech courses. Book One application was discouraged and soon became non-existent, thus ending the grassroots movement of the time. With the above in mind, my program called for the formation of a company, outside the CoS, delivering a correspondence course designed to train fully competent Book One auditors. Being totally separate from the CoS, the purpose of this company would be to simply get people auditing with only Book One application and re-create a similar grassroots movement to the one that occurred in the early 1950s. The concept was simple, yet powerful. Create a geometric progression of people auditing others, the others getting trained and auditing more people, and so on. Eventually, the CoS would be very dependent on this company for its new, qualified prospects, which would give us a strong platform for management reform. Additionally, we would dodge any competition problems with the CoS, as we would be doing something that they weren't. When I completed the evaluation and basic program, Dianna flew to Denver and I met her at the airport. She read and approved the program, then got back on a plane and went back to Clearwater. I was now ready to get started on, what would prove to be a very interesting adventure. End of Part 2 of 25 Mike Goldstein | ||
| Anonymous (4.12.184.141) |
I never saw or heard any anti-semitism when I was "in". I would like to read more of this story. Please continue. Programmer Guy | ||
| Cody Hacker (69.30.192.31) |
"when" you were "in"? *wink* *wink* | ||
| Anonymous (152.163.253.102) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 3 of 25 – John Galusha & The Book One Course It was now the summer of 1980, and I had Dianna Hubbard's approval on my program. As a "special project under Dianna", I now had an acceptable identity with the CoS. Someone could ask, "What the hell is that Mike Goldstein doing?" And someone else could say, "Oh, he's working on a special project for Dianna Hubbard", and that would be acceptable. Also, if there were any problems, Dianna had agreed to run additional "air cover" for me. With the above in place, I could now proceed with getting my Book One program off the ground. The first step was having a Book One correspondence course that actually produced COMPETENT Book One auditors. The entire program hinged on this initial step. I had some familiarity with auditing Book One. My introduction to the subject of Scientology was getting Book One auditing from some guy, reading the book and auditing other people. But I wasn't that competent and certainly didn't feel able to produce the kind of course needed. The only existing course on Book One was an extension course delivered by Pubs. But this was just a mini-type-course designed with the purpose of getting new people who had purchased the Dianetics book, on lines in the CoS. I called Dianna for assistance. Dianna thought there had been the kind of course I was looking for, and that it was delivered in Washington DC in the 1950s. While she looked through the archives at Flag, an old friend of mine, who was running the DC org, was looking in DC's archives. No such course was found. The only thing that was discovered, was the name of the man who may have delivered this course, John Galusha. I had heard of this man. He was sort of a legend in Scientology. He had been Hubbard's main technical person throughout the 1950s and early 1960s. He had even been Hubbard's research auditor, assisting in the development of Scientology. He had an unbelievable list of accomplishments. Many had tried to enlist John's assistance with various projects for the past 16 years, but he was never interested. Furthermore, he lived in Colorado! I got John's phone number from the local org. I called him and he agreed to see me. When I went to his home, I also met John's wife, Millie, another legend in Scientology. She had once been Lyndon Johnson's secretary before he was President. In the 1950s she became Hubbard's secretary in Washington DC, being the first "HCO (Hubbard Communication Office)" in the world. She had also had an interesting personal connection with Hubbard, where they did photography together and co-audited. I was pretty excited about meeting these two "old timers". I sat on their couch going over my history and my entire evaluation and program. I jabbered on for over an hour. John sat stoic, listening to what I was saying but making no comment. When I was done, John told me that he hadn't been interested in doing anything with the organization of Scientology for years, but that he was interested now in helping me. However, he informed me that that course that Dianna had referred to, was just an extension course like the one being delivered at Pubs, with the sole purpose of getting people on lines. Additionally, a course like I wanted had never existed. When he saw my spirits drop, he went on to stay that he could easily produce a course that would accomplish the purpose of training competent Book One auditors. John's first introduction to Dianetics was in 1950, when he bought the book after reading the ad for it in Amazing Science Fiction. He read the book a couple of times, started auditing people, and soon had a very successful practice. He knew the book very well. In fact, he knew the entire book by heart! John told me to come back in a week and he'd have the course ready and said goodbye. I returned the following week to be handed a few tiny, spiral notebooks. In these notebooks, written in pencil, were several hundred questions numbered consecutively. He said that he'd written these up during his lunch hour the past week. It didn't look like a course, but he said that's just what I wanted. Not knowing what to say, I just thanked him and left. As I walked to my car I realized something kind of strange. The questions in the notebook had been clearly written, but there were no erasures! As I mentioned above, I had some familiarity with Book One, but I couldn't answer the majority of the questions. I thought that maybe this man was "out to lunch", but since this "course" was all I had, I typed up the questions, verbatim, organizing them into lessons, thereby giving some format to the course. I handed this course to my wife and asked her to look at it and give me her opinion. Having been one of the first Class 8 auditors, Qual Sec at AOSH DK and at Flag, she had read the Dianetics book hundreds of times, being word cleared on the book and word clearing others on it. I figured she could give me a valuable assessment of this course. As she read through the questions she kept grabbing a Dianetics book, leafing through the pages. After about an hour, she had finished. Looking at me in amazement, she asked where I had gotten this course. She went on to say that she could only answer about half the questions and had to look in the book to confirm that the information being asked for in questions was even there. Her review ended with saying that she'd never seen such an incredible course. With a big sigh, I knew I had a winner. John later added a practical auditing section to the course, and we now had the vehicle for training competent Book One auditors. End of Part 3 of 25 Mike Goldstein | ||
| Anonymous (205.188.117.20) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 4 of 25 – Getting Book One off the Ground I now had a correspondence course to train competent Book One auditors, an integral component in accomplishing the goals of my program. But more importantly, I had discovered a partner in John Galusha. Little did I realize at the time that this collaboration would continue for the next 16 years, resulting in innovations far beyond our Book One initiative and involvement with the CoS. From the outset, we just clicked. We would find that with the two of us working together, our collective accomplishments would surpass any expectations we had previously held. Indeed, our partnership yielded advancements that would not have been possible working individually, or even with an entire staff underneath us. On September 1, 1980, our company, Survival Services International, opened for business. A friend let us use his office in the evenings. I went to the local orgs and missions enlisting their support. I told them that I was running a special, field project under Dianna Hubbard and asked them for the names and phone numbers of any people on their lines who these organizations felt were of no use to them. In other words, I was looking for the people who had no money for auditing and who were complete failures as students. I then starting contacting these public individuals, setting up interviews to be held in our "office". I designed a "briefing" that covered the pertinent points of my evaluation, John's valuable insights, and most importantly, the value of becoming a competent Book One auditor. The majority of these people bought the course, which I sold for $350, and started training with John, who supervised the course. People could come to our office at night to study their lessons or send them in by mail. Most of these public people would not bring their non-Scientology friends into the org or missions for fear that their friends might be mishandled. I addressed their fears and got them to bring their friends into our office where we held little "events" each night. In these events, I would give a short talk, then turn the floor over to John. He would talk to the group and then ask for volunteers to come up and do a session. He'd audit the volunteers in front of the rest of the audience. Most sessions were spectacular. And it wasn't just John's auditing, which was fantastic. It was his charisma. Audiences responded to him in an incredible fashion. In the Scientology events with "new people", I had always noticed that there were at least a few hecklers in the audience. Over the next couple of years, John and I would perform numerous events in many cities throughout the US and Canada. At some of these events, there were a couple of hundred people attending. NEVER did anyone heckle John. The small, initial events done at our office in the evenings produced great results. We'd get people on the correspondence course, pcs for our students, and pick up pcs of our own who paid $50 per hour. The "duds" we got from the org and missions turned out to be quite the jewels. They not only did well on the course, but also became confident and competent auditors. Due to the success with these org and mission "rejects", we soon were getting other Scientologists on the course, including org and mission staff. Within a month we moved into our own office, rented some furniture, and had a going concern. At Christmas of 1980, I went to Connecticut with my wife and kids to visit my wife's family who lived there. While on this vacation, I went into the local Scientology mission. It was thriving under a man named Peter Pinchot. I briefed Peter on what I was doing and he got very excited. A month or so later, I returned to Connecticut with John and did a large event, modeled after our successful office event. Peter jumped on the "Book One bandwagon". He, his staff and many of his public people got on to the correspondence course. Later, Peter designed a weekend seminar on Book One which he delivered to people to get them excited about Book One and then sold them our correspondence course. A few months into 1981, we had expanding operations in Denver and Connecticut. However, now that we were expanding, we started getting noticed and then scrutinized by the Guardians Office WW (Worldwide). I knew it was only a matter of time before the GO would start coming after me. We needed to get bigger, faster; in order to curb GO WW attacks. If I could launch my program internationally with enough momentum, it would be hard for even the GO to stop us. End of Part 4 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (152.163.253.102) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 5 of 25 – Shifting into High Gear as Things Heat Up With success came visibility. And with visibility came the greater possibility of attacks from the more suppressive elements of the CoS. I realized that I would have to make a bigger impact and do it quickly. It was now 1981 and the new Scientology upper bridge was being delivered at Flag (NOTs, New Era Dianetics for OTs). Having been an OT 3 completion for some years, I wanted to continue on my bridge by doing NOTs. It seemed like a good opportunity to kill two birds with one stone. I could go to Clearwater to do my NOTs, and at the same time, launch our Book One program, internationally. I called and briefed Diana that I was coming to Flag. I arrived on Flag with a briefcase full of written, Book One briefings, beginning correspondence course lessons, a credit card machine, credit card slips, and a receipt book. After getting settled and routing onto my NOTs, I went to see Diana. Things with upper management were getting worse. It appeared that Diana still was not in touch with her father and that he was off lines somewhere. Even though the management of Scientology was supposedly being done from Flag in Clearwater, it was obvious that they were just taking their orders from SU (Special Unit) from some unknown location. Being on close terms with many top management and Flag Service Org personnel at Flag, no longer being a freeloader, and working closely with Diana, I was welcomed back by Flag crew with open arms. Even as a public person, I went wherever I wanted and was privy to a lot of sensitive data. It soon became obvious to me what was happening. Hubbard had a history of backing off the existing organizational lines. In the early to mid 1960s, he was in Saint Hill, England. It was there that he started establishing an organization for the management of the rest of Scientology. In the late 1960s, Hubbard secretly gathered an entourage of personnel and left Saint Hill to start the Sea Org, first known as the Sea Project. But unlike previous moves, his and his staff's location was confidential. This secrecy and mystery provided a platform of power over the rest of the Scientology world. It is also important to note some other things with regards to power in Scientology. (1) Where Hubbard went, so did the power, and (2) Those who were with Hubbard had a standing and a power over anyone else in the Scientology organization. This may answer questions that many people have asked of how insignificant people like David Miscavige and Pat Broeker were able to assume power. But I want to continue with my thoughts about Hubbard's backing off the lines. When the Apollo was sold and Flag management was relocated in Clearwater, a location in the public eye, Hubbard backed off once more. Once again he took an entourage and set up Special Unit. But this time, even more mystery was added. Previously on the Apollo, the rest of the Scientology world didn't know its location, but who was on board and their posts were known. Not only was the location of Special Unit confidential, but the personnel as well as their posts were unknown to the rest of the Scientology world. Dispatches orders, etc. were stamped, not signed. It wasn't unusual to see an order stamped, "WDC" (which stood for Watchdog Committee). A stamped order such as this was clouded in mystery and enigma. A recipient might have had questions like, "Who is on this committee?" or "Am I under the microscope of a anonymous group of people?" When, in actual fact, there was an individual on a specific post at Special Unit who was sending that order. This individual was just stamping it with a "WDC", thereby disguising himself in a generality. It wasn't until later that I discovered that Special Unit was in California, and that Hubbard had backed off from there with a smaller entourage, composed of individuals such as David Miscavige and Pat and Annie Broeker. As Hubbard got sick and more incapacitated, those who had last been with him were taking the reins of power. In the writing that will follow in this series, I will provide some interesting data regarding some of the insane practices of the New Regime as they took control of the CoS. David Miscavige and Pat Broeker's fingerprints seem to be on these practices. But knowing something about Miscavige and knowing Broeker quite well, it is difficult for me to imagine that these two figures alone were capable of initiating some of the later activities in the CoS. I can only assume they got into bed with someone else and that this relationship continues. My guess is that if they are working with someone else, that this party was not in Scientology, has their own money and power, and is ruthless. But that's just a guess. But getting back to 1981 after I arrived at Flag; I did feel I was seeing a shift in power and operation. One subtle, but alarming change was what seemed to be the elimination of autonomous networks. One of Hubbard's main initiatives in management was the establishment of autonomous networks such as the FBO network, Flag Rep network, LRH Comm network, CMO network, and Guardians Office network. Each had its own purpose in the overall organization, and retained an autonomous power to pursue that purpose. This structure created internal conflicts among the networks, but also created a system of checks and balances for the entire operation. For example, if one was in a given org and was being screwed over by someone in the GO network, this person couldn't seek justice in that same network. But it was possible to go to a separate network whose purpose was to handle this specific injustice. If it was a violation of some LRH policy, one could go to the LRH Comm network for assistance. It wasn't a perfect system and there were a lot of injustices, but at least it provided some opportunities for fairness and equity. Most of these networks were within the Sea Org management and were being dismantled one by one. Previously autonomous operations were being put under one command line and control. And as I described above, you can see why this was alarming to me. However, I still felt we had time to change things. I went to old friends in Flag management to get them behind my program, but most of them were too rattled by upper management to put any attention or importance on what I was doing. I also had friends in the Flag Service Org and Division 6 of that org. But they too had their pressures from above to get their stats up. In Div 6 they were desperately trying to raise the stat of "Paid Starts" by pushing mini-training courses on Flag pcs. The idea was that the pcs could work on their courses while waiting to go into session. However, the majority of these public people had no interest in mini-courses. They just wanted to relax by the pool, watch TV or play games in the lounge. Div 6 staff had to be careful not to pressure the Flag pcs too much, as this public was responsible for about $500,000 a week in org income. A light went off in my head! I had an idea for launching my Book One movement internationally! End of Part 5 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (12.40.164.140) |
Hi Mike. I find your story interesting. Please continue when you can. Thanks. | ||
| Anonymous (205.188.117.20) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 6 of 25 – Launching Internationally After arriving in Clearwater in 1981, I tried to interest the Flag staff in management and the service org in my Book One program. My initial attempts at this failed. But when some Division 6 personnel told me that they were already wasting their time trying to get Flag pcs interested in doing mini-courses, an idea started to develop of how I might accomplish my purpose. I was also a Flag pc now receiving my NOTs auditing. During the time I wasn't in session, I started dialogs with the other Flag pcs in the lounge, by the pool, in the restaurants, and anywhere else I could find these people. Any time I had between sessions was spent briefing these Flag public on Book One. Just as the Scientologists in Denver and Connecticut had responded, these Flag pcs got excited about my program. I began selling our Book One correspondence course and starting people on their first lessons. Soon the lounge was filled with people doing the course between their Flag auditing sessions. While Div 6 was unsuccessfully pushing their mini-courses, John and I were training Book One auditors. When some Flag pcs started sending case success stories to the Flag CS, raving about the wins they were getting on our Book One course, I really started getting a lot of attention. Everyone in the service org, especially those in Division 6, now wanted to know what I was doing. Those staff in Div 6 now wanted to get involved with Book One. I briefed them and now they listened intently. I suggested a launch of Book One on their upcoming May 9th event at Flag. Unfortunately I could not attend as I had already planned a large event in Denver on May 9th. Peter Pinchot was my first choice to oversee Flag's Book One event, but Peter also had a May 9th event scheduled in Connecticut. Finally, Peter agreed to come to Flag the weekend before May 9th to perform the successful actions he had done in Connecticut. He would deliver his Book One seminar to Div 6 staff and the local Clearwater Scientology public. After the completion of the weekend seminar he would stress the importance of becoming competent at auditing Book One and pass out my written briefing, encouraging the students to start on our correspondence course. Additionally, Peter would train the Div 6 personnel to do what he had done. Flag would then bring people from all over the world to Clearwater on May 9th for a repeat performance of Peter's weekend. Those people would go back to their respective areas and perform the same seminar and event, thus launching my Book One movement internationally. The staff in Div 6 were excited and agreed to my plan. As arranged, Peter went to Clearwater the weekend before May 9th and delivered his seminar and put on his event. His performance was a huge success. The ball was rolling and all was on schedule. The plan for taking my program to an international level would soon be realized. On May 9th I put on my event in Denver, Peter had his in Connecticut, and Flag performed theirs in Clearwater. The following week a field Scientologist in Clearwater contacted me. She had attended both performances at Flag, the one delivered by Peter and the one delivered by Flag the following weekend. However, there was quite a difference in Flag's performance. They did deliver Peter's Book One seminar but there was no mention of my program or of our correspondence course, and my briefing was not passed out to the attendees. Furthermore, Flag took full credit for the seminar and launching the Book One movement! This woman was very confused, and as she also informed me, so were other field Scientologists who had attended both events. Needless to say, I was incensed by Flag's betrayal. I felt that they had not only betrayed me, they had also betrayed Scientology. I immediately called Diana to alert her to what was occurring, but she already knew. I was additionally disheartened to discover that there was a distinct change in Diana's demeanor. While I was at Flag she was delighted with our progress and success. Now she was sullen about the whole thing. She said that it was too bad what Flag had done but that there was nothing she could do about it. She went on to say that I just had to make the best of things and that at the very least, I'd get some of the people who had attended Peter's performance on to our correspondence course. From her communication, I could easily deduce that the pressure from above was now coming down on Diana, and that she was buckling. I realized that she was no longer able to fully support or run air cover for me. I was pretty much on my own. End of Part 6 of 25 | ||
| Mona (218.185.66.178) |
Great story! Please continue. | ||
| Anonymous (152.163.253.102) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 7 of 25 – Flag's Betrayal & The Aftermath It's 1981 and I'm back from Flag. Flag has taken over and distorted the Book One movement for their own purposes. Diana's folding under the pressure from above, and she is less able to support me. As if this wasn't bad enough, the Guardians Office is starting to come after me. A GO (Guardians Office) person from the local org came to my office with a written order that was marked "A Priority", that had been sent to her from GO WW (Worldwide). The order said to shut me down immediately, with no questions asked. Standing in my office, exuding the usual GO air of superiority, the woman insisted that I comply with the order. I didn't know if GO WW had originated this attack or if they were prompted from somewhere else. What I did know though, was that this local GO person was just a lackey. Without replying to her command, I walked to my telephone and called Diana hoping that she still might be able to help me. I told Diana what was happening and she asked me to hand the phone to the GO woman. Handing the phone to the woman I said, "Diana Hubbard wants to speak with you." All of the sudden, the woman's air of superiority fell away, replaced by a look of shock. She took the phone and timidly said hello. After intently listening for a few minutes, she handed me back the phone to hang up. I didn't know what Diana had said to the woman, but now she was very nice to me, saying that she would have to contact GO WW. She then proceeded to leave my office. Later I was contacted again by the same woman who now had new orders from GO WW. She now explained WW's concern. My company, Survival Services International, was incorporated as a profit making company. Since I was delivering a Dianetics service, they felt the non-profit status of the CoS was threatened. However, GO WW was willing now to compromise their position of shutting me down since I was involved with a special project under Diana. Their first condition was that I had to go to the local GO's lawyers, at my expense, to have them explain to me how my present corporate status was endangering the CoS. Once I understood their position, I would have to change my corporation into a Dianetics Counseling Group under the CoS. I went to the meeting, attended by local GO staff and several GO lawyers. The GO woman asked her lawyers to explain to me how my current corporation was jeopardizing the non-profit status of the CoS. After the lawyers conferred for a few minutes, the head lawyer said that they could see no way in which my company's current status would threaten the CofS's non-profit status any more than it already was. The local GO staff was visibly taken aback and immediately ended the meeting. Outside the lawyer's office the GO staff told me that these lawyers obviously didn't understand the GO WW viewpoint, and that I must proceed with changing my corporation. I now saw that maybe there was a different intention behind the GO wanting me to re-incorporate under the CoS. If I continued to operate under my present status, then the CoS couldn't control me in the future. But, I realized that if I didn't go along with their wishes, I probably wouldn't remain a Scientologist in good standing. Feeling like I was between a rock and a hard place, I reluctantly agreed. I had my lawyer, under protest, draw up the papers. However, I didn't file the documents, because GO WW wanted me first to send the docs to them for their approval. Thank God for the CoS bureaucracy! I sent the docs to WW but they were probably lost in route or sat in someone's in-basket. Subsequently, the docs were never sent back to me, and I wasn't going to follow up on them! Thus, the documents were never filed and Survival Services remained intact. Meanwhile, the CoS was launching their supposed Book One movement. The differences were that their purposes were not to train competent Book One auditors or create a grassroots movement. Their interest was in the money and stats that their program would produce. I contacted Flag Div 6 to confront them on their betrayal. The person who had been in charge of that division was no longer on her post. This person had supported my program, and her absence was suspicious. One of the two people in charge of Flag's Book One program tried to explain to me the reasoning behind their actions. Primarily, the reasoning was that Flag could not let the field know that someone else had originated the Book One movement. According to them, this would "undermine Flag as a big brother". As if this reason wasn't silly enough, the next was even more ridiculous. If things had proceeded with me running the Book One movement as I had planned, then an enormous amount of people would purchase our correspondence course. When I asked the question of why that would be a bad thing, I was told that I would make a lot of money. I responded by saying, "So what! The CoS will make thousands of times more from the flow of people that come from my efforts." The Div 6 person's response to that was that Sea Org members on Flag only made about $17 per week and that it wasn't fair that I should make so much. Shaking my head in disbelief, I realized that reasoning with these people was a waste of time. The end of 1981 was approaching and I felt like the overall success of my program was looking very dim. However, I had made some good contacts while in Clearwater. I did get some people from different parts of the world started on our correspondence course. Several of the people in Clearwater who had attended Peter Pinchot's seminar and presentation also went on to the course. I had also met a man from Switzerland who later came to Denver for training from John and me. After his training, the man set up an office for us in Europe. He translated our course into German and delivered to people in Europe. One of the best contacts I made at Flag was a man who published a magazine that went out to all the missions in the US and Canada. He supported what I was doing and published ads and articles for me. People in the missions who had read my articles started contacting Flag with concerns about the competency of auditors trained by the Flag Book One seminar. Flag just lied to them, assuring them that the Flag seminar DID make fully competent Book One auditors and that there was no cause for worry. Meanwhile, Flag Div 6 told their staff that I was dangerous. An ally sent me a copy of a dispatch from one of the top people in the Flag Div 6 regarding what I was doing. In that dispatch, it was actually stated; "It's suppressive to make competent Book One auditors". End of Part 7 of 25 | ||
| Programmer_guy (4.12.184.141) |
I would like to see this (all 25 parts) formatted into a PDF file, eventually. | ||
| Programmer_guy (4.12.184.141) |
An ally sent me a copy of a dispatch from one of the top people in the Flag Div 6 regarding what I was doing. In that dispatch, it was actually stated; "It's suppressive to make competent Book One auditors". I would like to read the content of that whole dispatch. Would you be willing to post it here? | ||
| Anonymous (205.188.117.20) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 8 of 25 – The Book One Congress With their Book One activity in high gear, Flag was going to orgs and missions all over the world delivering their weekend seminar. They avoided Colorado because of my strong foothold there, which consisted of a huge number of staff and public either having completed or in the process of completing our correspondence course. But people in my area were now interested in a live, seminar-type training activity with Book One. John Galusha and I designed our own Book One seminar, which was modeled after the old Congresses delivered in the 1950s that John had supervised for Hubbard. The seminar that Flag was delivering was the seminar Peter Pinchot had designed with the sole purpose of interesting people in Book One. We wanted to make our seminar a much more effective training vehicle. We called our seminar the Book One Congress and we delivered it over two, consecutive weekends. The first weekend was dedicated to theory and drilling, with a training routine much superior to previous Book One seminars. Additionally, students were trained on how to procure their own pcs. The students' assignment for the following week was to line up people to bring to the second weekend. The students, under our supervision, then audited the volunteers. Just like the old Congresses, students were lined up in chairs with their pcs in chairs across from them. If a student ran into trouble, he/she would put their hand behind their back. A supervisor (normally there were three or four) would come over, the student would take a session break, find out from the supervisor how to handle the problem, and then take his/her pc back into session. The Congresses started small, delivered in our offices. Later we moved to a local hotel. On the second weekend of that Congress we had over fifty student attendees auditing over one hundred pcs. These Congresses were fabulous, attended by students new to Book One auditing, people on our correspondence course, and graduates of the course. Additionally, there were large numbers of pcs brought to the second weekend. All of these pcs were interviewed by Survival Services staff after finishing their auditing. Many of them after the Congress continued with more auditing or signed up for training. CoS management and Flag never commented on the obvious success of our Congresses. They only concentrated on what they considered to be problems created by our efforts. Two unpleasant incidents with the CoS come to mind as a result of our Congress delivery. The first of these incidents was over a photograph that we used in the promotion of the Book One Congress. As I mentioned in Part 3 of this series, John Galusha's wife, Millie, was Hubbard's secretary in Washington, DC in the 1950s. She and Hubbard used to dabble in photography. Millie had retained many pictures that Hubbard had taken of her, as well as many photos she had taken of him. Looking though these photographs, I found a picture of Hubbard and John at the 1958 or 1959 Congress in DC. I used this photograph in our Book One Congress advertising. The CoS was upset with the use of an unauthorized picture of Hubbard. But it was a really cool photo, with Hubbard dressed in his famous Congress outfit that he is seen wearing in certain Scientology lecture films. The second incident was caused by an event that was viewed by the CoS as a more serious offense. During a hotel Congress, several students who could not afford auditing in the CoS, decided to co-audit each other. Observing the great wins that these students were achieving, other student attendees wanted similar results. Some of the other students who were interested in co-auditing had already declared to Clear. Being Clear, the only auditing that they were suppose to do was delivered at a higher org in LA or at Flag. Disappointed, they would say, "I wish I could co-audit on Book One! But I can't, I'm Clear". Finally, the thought occurred to one of these students that if he wanted Book One, he must not be Clear. This cogitation gave him the bright idea of going to the local org to undeclare. Coming back to the Congress, the student was excited that he had undeclared from the state of Clear and now was able to co-audit Book One. Other Clears followed suit and soon, there were several Clears showing up at the org examiner saying, "I'm not really Clear", with their needles floating. Next thing I knew, AOLA was writing me up for, "invalidating the state of Clear"! Aside from these minor episodes with the CoS, our Congresses were extremely successful. Unfortunately, we were never able to deliver the Book One Congress anywhere other than Denver. If it had been incorporated into a Book One movement internationally, along with our correspondence course, the subsequent operation of the CoS may have turned out quite differently. End of Part 8 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (205.188.117.20) |
> THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER > FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS > By Mike Goldstein > Part 9 of 25 - Flag Screws Up/We Step In > > Flag rode the wave of Book One enthusiasm as long as they could. > In time, the enthusiasm started to wane and a lull in activity ensued. > The Book One auditors trained by Flag ran into problems, they weren't > getting good results with their pcs and as a result started giving up > on auditing. These problems were occurring because the auditors > weren't competent. Flag's solution for these difficulties was to > create an advanced Book One seminar. However, their new seminar still > didn't make the auditors competent. The only thing the advanced > seminar produced was more money and stats for Flag. > > This crash was fairly predictable. In my initial evaluation, I > discovered that one of the main reasons why Book One auditors in the > early 1950s had quit so easily was that they weren't capable. This is > why I had stressed the importance of making competent Book One > auditors. > > In response to the deteriorating interest and activity with Book > One, I wrote a second briefing to field Scientologists. In this > briefing, I discussed the pertinent findings of my initial evaluation > and compared these to what was currently happening with Book One in > the field. > > The person in charge of mission management in the western United > States read this second briefing as well as other articles about Book > One that I had written. Concerned with the crash of activity in > missions, he contacted me for assistance. After we spoke, he > published both my briefings in an information letter that was sent to > missions in the western US. Soon I was getting calls for assistance > from missions, as well as orgs, throughout the US and Canada, > bypassing Flag altogether. > > In response to the calls for help, I set up events in these > missions and orgs. Over the next several months, John and I delivered > weekend events throughout the US and Canada. We modeled these events > after the successful evening events at Survival Services in Denver. > > The org or mission would pay for our airfares and set up > accommodations for our stay in their city. They would set up a place > for the event to be delivered and get their staff and public to > attend. Additionally, the org or mission would line up volunteers to > be audited by John, on stage, in front of the audience. After I was > introduced, I would get up and give a short talk and then turn the > floor over to John. John would talk for a while and then bring up > volunteers to audit in front of the crowd. > > After the event, we would have a separate meeting with the org or > mission's staff and the Book One auditors who had been trained by > Flag. In most cases, watching John's sessions had highly impressed > the Book One auditors. They would ask questions about what John had > been doing with the volunteers to get such spectacular results. When > John informed them that everything he had done was in the Dianetics > book, people would question this by saying that they hadn't learned > that in Flag's seminar or advanced seminar. John would then refer > them to page and paragraph in Dianetics where the answer to their > question could be found. Realizing that they had achieved > questionable results with Flag's seminars, many Book One auditors were > incensed and wanted to know how they could learn to audit like John. > > The upshot of our event and meeting was that we started many people > on our correspondence course. We also received great support from the > missions and orgs where we performed our events. Some mission holders > even paid for their entire staff to do our course. > > Things were progressing well again with my Book One movement. I > even got Diana to come and speak at events in LA and Seattle. When > people at the Clearwater mission wanted us to do an event there, Flag > agreed to have the event at the Fort Harrison. We performed our event > in the lounge at Flag with some of the service org staff and top Flag > auditors attending. > > I remember two interesting incidents that occurred in the meeting > that took place after the event. The first incident occurred with the > Flag auditors. They had never seen anyone audit with such ease and > competence as John and wanted to know where he had learned these > techniques. > > The second incident occurred with the administrative staff from the > Flag service org. From discussions going on in the meeting, they > discovered that John had had many successful auditing practices over > the years. Since successful auditing practices were something they > had rarely witnessed, they wanted John to tell them what his > successful promotion actions were. John's answer seemed to mystify > them. He said, "I don't know anything about promotion. In every > practice, I started by finding people I could audit, whether I charged > them or not. I delivered the best service I could. Soon those > clients brought me others who I could charge. And soon after that, I > had more than I could handle." > > Later, the CO (Commanding Officer) at Flag invited me to come back > to Clearwater for a special meeting. He told me that Flag wanted my > input on getting Book One going internationally and that I was crucial > to this effort. I thought that this was maybe a turning point in my > relationship with Flag management. > > Most of the attendees at the meeting were Sea Org members. The > only people besides me who were not Sea Org were a couple who had left > the Sea Org years before. Once the meeting began, I quickly > discovered that Flag was not interested in Book One application. They > were only interested in Dianetics book sales in the 1970s. I had run > a successful campaign selling Dianetics books while running the CoS of > Colorado and the couple was in charge of Pubs US at the time. > > As the meeting progressed, it became apparent that Flag was not > even interested in discovering successful actions to sell Dianetics > books. Their only interest was a public relations coup to get > Dianetics at the top of the Best Sellers List. > > Feeling that this trip was a waste of my time, I went to the CO's > office after the meeting to speak with him. He and I use to be > friends. I knew him from when I was in the Sea Org working in LA and > on the ship. I told him that I didn't think getting Dianetics on the > Best Sellers List was as important as selling the book, and that > selling the book was not as important as getting the book applied. I > went over my Book One program and explained the progress that had been > made. > > After listening to what I had to say, he told me that his only > interest was in following the orders and programs of upper management. > He also informed me that if I really wanted to do something, I could > give my correspondence course to the CoS. At that, I thanked him for > his hospitality and went home to Denver. > > I finally was reconciled to the idea that involving myself with > Flag or Flag management was a losing proposition. I decided to put > all my attention on working with the field, the missions, the orgs, > and some FOLO WUS staff who were supportive of my program. > > End of Part 9 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (205.188.117.20) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 10 of 25 – Revolution Begins Too Late Our efforts to rejuvenate Book One activity after the Flag seminars were keeping us quite busy. We filled our weekends performing events throughout the US and Canada, as well delivering our Book One Congress in Denver. At the end of 1981 and the beginning of 1982, Flag and upper management were relatively quiet. We pretty much went where we wanted and did what we pleased. Increasing activities in the Scientology field were also taking place. Scientologists were designing and delivering their own seminars. Mission holders were initiating successful programs and then exporting these programs to other missions. Missions started standing up to Flag and management, demanding that their grievances be heard. I attended a meeting in Clearwater that was initiated by top mission holders, including Peter Pinchot. The meeting between mission holders and Flag management was a heated debate to resolve Flag interference in mission operations. A revolution was taking place and it was very exciting. Meanwhile, significant events and changes were occurring in the CoS. You might remember in the earlier parts of this series where I mentioned the systematic elimination of all autonomous networks. All of the autonomous networks that were controlled by the Sea Org had already been incorporated along a single line of command. This left one more autonomous network still intact: the Guardians Office network. Being the most entrenched of any network, the GO would not go quietly. Additionally, the GO controlled and protected the mission network. It is interesting to also note that the money of the CoS was in three major places: (1) Sea Org reserves, which were already controlled by upper management, (2) Accounts controlled by the Guardians Office, and (3) Mission/franchise accounts. Orgs had a financial policy that dictated their income could be spent the week it was made. But missions had a different financial policy, which was designed by GO Finance. A mission could only spend designated income paid for a service when a service was actually started. For example, if someone paid for 200 hours of auditing, the mission could only spend the money for each 12-½ hour intensive as it was begun. Therefore, there were huge reserves in mission accounts that represented service not yet started. Complete power and control of all the money would only come to the New Regime with the elimination of the GO and control of the missions. Coincidentally, a GO missionaire was caught stealing documents in a US government office. People in the government went after the CoS. People in upper management said that this criminal action was only perpetrated by a select few in the CoS, those running the Guardians Office. All the top people of the GO, including Mary Sue Hubbard, were handed over for prosecution. This decimated the GO, which was then re-formed under upper management as the Office of Special Affairs. The last autonomous network was now gone. I strongly suspected this whole thing was a set-up. It just seemed too perfect. With the Guardians Office out of the way, the mission network was left alone and unprotected. But simply taking over the missions would not be easy. These missions were franchises, individually held corporations under the franchise holders. But some interesting events had been taking place with regards to missions that would drastically change the CoS. End of Part 10 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (64.12.117.20) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 11 of 25 – Taking Over the Missions With the Guardians Office out of the picture, the missions were ripe for the picking. But they couldn't be taken over by walking in and demanding the mission holder give up his mission. A mission somewhere in the northwestern part of the US was sued by one of the parishioners. The case got lots of press coverage. CoS management began creating fear in the mission holders by telling them that SPs were going after missions. The mission holders were also told that by being incorporated individually as they were, the missions were not strong enough on their own to survive these attacks. However, management proposed a solution: To re-incorporate all the missions under one corporation called Scientology Missions International. This would provide a legal umbrella for every mission. If the SPs came after one they would have to fight the entire corporation. It's interesting to note where the idea for Scientology Missions International, SMI, originated. When Hubbard was still active on the lines, he had noticed that there were a lot of wealthy Scientologists who had already been regged for all the services that the CoS had to offer them. Since these wealthy people still had lots of money, Hubbard devised a way of getting more out of them. His idea was to form a corporation called Scientology Missions International. The CoS regs the wealthy Scientologists to purchase a new mission for a huge sum of money. What they would be purchasing is the right to open a mission and a starter package of books, tapes, promo, etc. It would be an easy sale as the buyer would be contributing to the expansion of Scientology and could even use the purchase as a tax write-off. The CoS then finds someone who wants to run a mission and couples him with the wealthy person. The financier would be the mission holder and the other person would be the ED (Executive Director). In Hubbard's program, SMI was not to affect existing missions or existing mission holders who wanted to open new missions on their own. The sole purpose was to get money out of wealthy Scientologists. Hubbard explained this program in a taped conference with one of his staff. He went on to explain that if the mission failed, they still had the money. If it succeeded, then that was an added bonus. Several of the scams perpetrated by the New Regime were an alteration of some earlier program of Hubbard's. As I mentioned in Part 5 of this series, either Miscaviage or Broeker's influence was clear on certain activities of the New Regime, as one of them had been witness to the initiation of a similar program of Hubbard's. The origination of SMI was described in a Hubbard taped conference. SMI was later used as an umbrella corporation for all the missions. The staff member that Hubbard had been briefing in his taped conference was David Miscaviage. Through fear and pressure, mission holders put their missions under SMI. (As there were no more serious attacks, I suspected the incident in the northwestern US mission to be a set-up.) Now the missions were legally under the control of the CoS (now the New Regime, known as the RTC). Once the change occurred, they implemented heavy-handed tactics with the missions. Missions were told that they were dilettantes, that they were off-purpose and off-policy. A new arm of the RTC called the Finance Police, headed by a Finance Dictator, was set up to deal with mission "offences". The origination of the post of dictator can also be traced back to Hubbard. In 1973 on the Flagship, Hubbard did an evaluation and created a program to address a diminishing money flow to Flag and Sea Org reserves. His plan for this emergency was to design a temporary post of FBO (Flag Banking Officer) Dictator and appointed me to the position. I was given full authority in finance matters, worldwide, until the emergency was resolved. I resolved it and the post was disbanded. One of the people working under me at the time was Pat Broeker. In 1982 the RTC created a new dictator with finance police to do his bidding. Dressed in black uniforms, these finance police were sent to missions to find and handle offences (as defined, of course, by the RTC). There were plenty offences found in the missions and the missions were billed at an exorbitant rate. The fat bank accounts of the missions were quickly drained and the money was added to the RTC coffers. The final blow to the missions was delivered at the mission holder's conference in LA. This conference was very different from the one previously held on Flag. This time there was no interest in mission holders' grievences. Mission holders either fully went along with the RTC demands or were immediately expelled. If a mission holder complained, he was declared on the spot. The Scientology missions were finally under the control of the New Regime. End of Part 11 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (64.12.117.20) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 12 of 25 – Tying Up Loose Ends It was 1982 and the new regime, the RTC, was in power with control of all the money. They now started tying up all the loose ends. Their attention was on handling or getting rid of anyone who was not fully on board with the RTC. One primary target for RTC attention was the upper management personnel at Special Unit. Anyone questioning the New Regime's authority or demonstrating counter intention was labeled "anti-management". People not with the program were assigned to a re-vamped RPF (Rehabilitation Project Force) with heavier-then-usual mental and physical abuse. Many of the most capable people deemed "anti-management" were expelled or given almost impossible tasks in order to get back into the good graces of the New Regime. Some of these people were sent on garrison (long standing) missions to orgs. Their only hope of redemption was to get the org's stats into almost impossible ranges. They couldn't come back to management or receive training or auditing until they had fulfilled their mission, which could take years. Once again, as was done in Part 11 of this series, it is interesting to see where this idea originated. In 1971, top Sea Org execs in LA concocted a scheme to get the gross income up. Through crush sell they got the Scientology public to pay for their bridges. When a person didn't have the money to pay for services, SO regs would have the person write, what was called a "postulate check". Either a checking account check or counter check was written for the amount being regged. By writing such a check without the funds to cover it, a person was making a postulate that the money would be there! These checks were then counted on the Gross Income stat and turned into the FBO (Finance Banking Office) for deposit. Not only did this scheme greatly upset the Scientology field, but it led to financial disaster as well, as most of these postulate checks didn't get covered and then bounced. I know quite a bit about this scheme and period of Scientology history as my first real assignment in the SO was to collect the bounced checks. With Gross Income stats out the roof, Flag management thought these execs were heroes. When Flag discovered what was really going on, all these top execs were removed from their posts and recalled to Flag. Hubbard's handling of these execs was to send them all as a command team to the Boston Org. They were given incredible targets to meet before they could be back in good standing. Pat Broeker, who was assigned to the FBO network on Flag, requested and approved to be sent to Boston Org with the command team where he was posted as the FBO Boston. Once again, Broeker's influence is obvious on a later RTC tactic. In keeping with their quest to tie up the loose ends, the RTC turned their attention to Scientologists in the field doing any sort of program or activity independently. People that fit into this category included those delivering their own seminars and people selling books they wrote, even if those books had previously been sold in Scientology bookstores for years. Basically, anyone who was making money by delivering any kind of Scientology service or publication that was not now authorized by the RTC was a target. These so-called renegades were being rounded up and ordered to Clearwater for ethics handling. I, of course, fit into this category. End of Part 12 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (64.12.117.20) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 13 of 25 – My Flag Ethics Cycle Well into 1982, the New Regime (RTC) was now fully in control of the CoS. All previously autonomous networks including the Guardians Office had been reformed into one command line under the RTC. Special Unit had been whipped into line and the missions had been castrated. The RTC was putting their attention on anyone in the Scientology field who was acting independently. I got a call from the ethics officer at FOLO WUS. I was told that the RTC had a stack of knowledge reports stating that I'd been distributing/delivering confidential material to the field, and I was ordered to Flag in Clearwater for ethics handling. Incensed by the lies and obvious ploy to get me to drop what I was doing and report to Flag, I decided to call an old friend for assistance. Pat Broeker's ex-wife, Frannie, and I had worked closely together while I was in the FBO network. Frannie had been my senior for a while when she was CS-F (Commodore's staff for finance) and we had become close friends. Currently, she was holding the top post at Author's Services, high up in the ranks of the RTC. I had never known her to buckle under pressure from above and she had been close to Hubbard on the ship, as I had been. Having once supported my efforts with Book One, she had given me a confidential phone number to reach her. I figured that she was the only person who could help me with this personal attack from the RTC. I called her and told her what was going on and asked her for assistance. I was taken aback by her uncharacteristic coldness and robotic response. She told me that she could make this ethics cycle go away if I would re-join the Sea Org and come back to the fold. I could even run Book One in North America if I wanted, but I had to do it as a Sea Org member. When I informed her that I wouldn't come back to the SO, she told me that in that case, there was nothing that she could do to help me. That was the last time I spoke to Frannie. I decided to go to Flag, but that I wasn't going alone. I asked John Galusha to accompany me and he agreed. I was extremely upset by my current circumstances and wanted someone with me on this trip who would keep me sane. Just being in his presence had a calming affect on me. None of the present insanity seemed to affect John. Additionally, during all the time we had worked together on the Book One program no one had ever attacked John. It was as if the man was outside this whole crazy game and invisible to attackers. When we arrived at Flag it felt as if I was entering a den of insanity. I was just one of many people there for ethics handling. People were frantically routing on to KSW (Keeping Scientology Working) courses. Outside the Flag ethics office there was a long line of people that circled around the building. I was told that I had to get in line to see an ethics officer. Nervous and upset, I stayed in line most of the day. John stayed with me, calmly reading a book. People coming out of the ethics office looked harried and disoriented. Finally, it was my turn to see an ethics officer. In the office there were maybe two or three ethics officers busily haranguing people. I sat down across from the first available ethics officer and introduced myself. He responded by saying, "So you're Mike Goldstein". I asked him about the apparent knowledge reports that said I was distributing confidential material to the field. He couldn't produce any of these reports but said that there was good reason why I was there. When I informed him that I was working on a special project under Diana Hubbard he said that the RTC had no indication or proof that I had ever worked with her. I was told that I was in big trouble and that he had to gather more information on my situation. He then ended the interview and I was told to report back later to see him. With his cold, superior and robotic attitude, I could see that this person was not interested in anything I had to say and had already made up his mind (or had had it made up for him) about me. After leaving the ethics office, I ran into Diana who looked extremely upset and frazzled. I told her why I was there and what the ethics officer had said about there being no proof that I had ever worked with her. She said that there was nothing that she could do and just walked on. Devastated, I went with John back to our room. Over the past year there were times when I really felt I needed a session and soloing on NOTs didn't produce the desired results. In desperation, I would go to John and he would audit me using old creative processes that he had helped Hubbard research in the 1950s. These sessions had always helped, and I certainly could use some help now. I could only remember one other time in my life when I was this upset. I asked John for a session and he wholeheartedly agreed. One half-hour later, I had had the most effective session in my entire career as a Scientologist. The result of the session was something I could have previously never imagined. I not only moved out of my upset, but also felt I'd moved out of this whole crazy game. Later, on my way back to the ethics office, I felt as if I was walking through a war zone, with people all around me embroiled in battle. But none of this seemed to have anything to do with me. It was as if the others were being shot and falling like flies while I was invisible and bullets were passing harmlessly through my body. I was in a state that I imagined John was in all the time. Unscathed by my surroundings, I patiently waited in line again to see the ethics officer. Finally I was meeting with the ethics officer that I'd seen earlier, but this time I felt no malice for him, or for anyone for that matter. I really don't remember what he said to me or I said to him, but he acted differently than he had in our previous meeting. Kindness and interest in what I had to say replaced his earlier heartless demeanor. The upshot of the meeting was that not only did he believe my ethics handling should be cancelled, but also that the CoS should support my efforts! Acting as if he was just hearing about my Book One program for the first time, he excitedly scheduled another meeting outside the ethics office. The purpose of this meeting would be to brief him on my project. The rest of my trip on Flag was very pleasant. I just walked around talking with people. I even ran into Heber Jentzsch who asked me what I was doing. After telling him, he expressed a strong interest in setting up an event for John and me. I left Flag completely exhonerated from any out-ethics. End of Part 13 of 25 | ||
| Magoo (12.72.84.214) |
Thank you for this! "Having worked closely with Hubbard on the ship, I thought if I could reach him, these "outnesses" could be resolved. " If we each had one dollar for every time we thought or tried to 'reach' either LRH or Management...we could retire nicely! Best to you.... Tory/Magoo~ | ||
| Anonymous (152.163.253.102) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 14 of 25 – My First Declare After arriving back in Denver from my Flag ethics cycle, I felt very thankful to John for the session he'd given me at Flag. I remained in the wonderful state I'd achieved for a week or two. Then I received another call from the ethics officer at FOLO WUS. Apparently, the RTC was dumbfounded to discover that I had left Flag without even a slap on the wrist. They had cancelled the findings of my Flag ethics handling and had busted the ethics officer with whom I had worked on Flag. This FOLO WUS ethics officer informed me that I must now report to LA for another ethics cycle, and once again, I was told that they had a stack of knowledge reports on me. Feeling enough was enough, I began questioning this man on the validity of his orders. But with each of my questions and policy references, he would only respond by saying that I must come out to LA immediately. I ended this one way conversation by saying that his order was illegal and that per policy, I would write him an Orders Query Of and express-mail this out to him within 24 hours. I wrote a long and detailed Orders Query Of that fully demonstrated how my order to report to LA was both illegal and off-policy. One of the points of the query was that I'd never received copies of any knowledge reports, and per policy, copies should have been sent to me. Another example of the order's illegality was that if they wanted me to come out for an ethics cycle, they would have to specify the nature of the cycle (i.e. Board of Investigation, Comm Ev, etc.) and what the charges were. Additionally, if I were to come to LA without information about the charges, I wouldn't be able to gather refutable evidence or prepare a competent defense. I express-mailed the query within the time frame that I had promised. Even though the ethics officer had made an issue of my reporting to LA quickly, he didn't respond to my query in a timely fashion. Some time passed and I received a call from the local org. They said that I had a telex from FOLO WUS but wouldn't read it to me over the phone. I was told that I had to come into the org to get it. Thinking the telex was an answer to my query, I rushed over. When I arrived I was told to go upstairs to one of the offices. After I had entered the room, someone shut the door behind me. The org ethics officer, her assistant and a couple of other people were in the office. The ethics officer handed me the telex. It was from the ethics officer at FOLO WUS, but it wasn't addressed to me, it was addressed to someone at the org. It read, "Get Goldstein on a plane now, any way you have to". This was the straw that broke the camel's back. No answer to my query or communication to me had been made. Just an order to the local org to get me on a plane. The four people just stood around while I read the telex, waiting for my response. Only a few times in my life had I been as angry as I was at that moment. I went over and sat on the edge of the desk and addressed the people in the room. I calmly, but coldly told them that it appeared that they had a direct order to get me on a plane. I told them that I guessed they would have to try to comply with the order if they didn't want to get into trouble. Then I got to my feet and said that I wasn't going to LA, that I was going to walk out of this office and building, and asked them to please try to stop me. I had really hoped that they would try to stop me, as I wanted to take my anger out on somebody. As I proceeded to the door they all moved out of my way, letting me pass with no incident. It was probably for the best that they didn't try to stop me. If they had, I would later have felt badly about the harm I most certainly would have inflicted. The next morning my doorbell ran. It was the org ethics officer's assistant. Without speaking he handed me a goldenrod issue and ran away. It was an ethics order from FOLO WUS declaring me a suppressive. The order was filled with all sorts of vile lies. For example, one such lie was that I was providing confidential material to the field. Later that morning, I went to my office where I found copies of the declare order scotch-taped all over the outside door. I decided to query the declare order. I ended up writing a tome, responding to each charge in the declare order with data and policy references, and going over the entire ethics scenario in detail. I made numerous copies of my query and sent them to all appropriate parties at FOLO WUS, Flag, and upper management. Weeks went by but there was no response to my query. During this time I did get a couple of clandestine phone calls from Diana. She didn't say much and what she did say was not very coherent. She seemed rushed and harried. Because of the situation, business was pretty bad. Also, I didn't feel like doing much with Book One. I closed the office and moved my operation into the basement of my home. I took the file cabinet with all the correspondence course student files over to John's house. When I did get student lessons in the mail, I just forwarded them to John for grading. All we were now doing with Survival Services was delivering to students doing their course. I started another business to pay my bills. During this time, I suddenly became very popular in the Denver area. According to my declare order nobody was suppose to talk to me, but staff and public from the org and missions called and came to see me all the time, concerned with how I was doing. I got invited to more parties by Scientologists in the area than I'd ever been invited to previously. People responded to orders from the local org's ethics officer not to communicate with me by telling her to shove it. After some time had passed, I got a phone call from someone saying that he was on a mission in Denver from the Office of Special Affairs. I asked if this was in response to my query and he confirmed that it was, saying that he and his partner wanted to come over and see me right away. When they arrived at my home, I invited them down to my basement where I had the desks and chairs from my office set up. They sat down and immediately demanded that I give them the names of all Scientologists in the area who were in communication with me. The lead missionaire had lied when he had said that they were here in response to my query. Actually, their mission was to put a stop to people communicating with me. I told them that they had to be crazy to ask me for names. What were they going to do when I didn't give them the names, re-declare me? I was pretty outraged. When they got up to leave, I stood in front of the basement stairs and asked how they expected to leave, alive. I told them that all I would have to tell the police was that two weird people in strange uniforms came to my house and tried to assault me. After I saw that they had lost their composure and were both sufficiently frightened, I let them leave. The lead missionaire had been so scared and nervous that he actually left a copy of their mission orders on my desk! The mission orders spelled out each action they were suppose to take. Knowing what they were suppose to do, I called and warned everyone who they were coming to see. People expecting their arrival and knowing what they were going to be saying and doing, were prepared for the missionaires' visits. The missionaires soon discovered that they didn't need a list of names, as the majority of the Scientologists in Denver refused to comply with the declare order and were very adamant about their refusal. With their mission in shambles, they showed up at a party where I was the special guest. They walked over and politely asked if they could talk with me. Saying that the declare order, and their mission were probably wrong, they would now be returning to LA. After that, everyone, including the two of them, had a good time. After the party, I drove them to the airport. I wasn't to hear anything new from the CoS or RTC for a while. End of Part 14 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (205.188.117.20) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 15 of 25 – Undeclared It was 1983, and some time had passed since the Office of Special Affairs mission had come and gone. Being declared really wasn't so bad. Most of the Scientologists in Denver were still in communication with me. Old friends from the Sea Org, who had also been declared by the RTC, were contacting me and welcoming me to the club. I was making a living outside of Scientology. And best of all, I was not embroiled in the CoS insanity. Being declared was, in a way, kind of therapeutic. I received a phone call from an old friend from the ship. He was in Denver with another friend of mine from the Apollo. He informed me that they were here on a special garrison (long-term) mission from the RTC. When I asked what the hell the RTC wanted now, he told me that my bogus declare had been canceled and that one of the primary targets on their mission orders was to contact me. He requested that I come over to their motel so that they could please brief me on their mission. Curious about what they had to say, and excited about seeing old friends, I agreed. Our meeting was pleasant, and at first, we just chatted about old friends and old times. Then they got down to the business of briefing me on their mission. They told me that LRH had a warm spot in his heart for this area, as evidenced in his book, Battlefield Earth, which took place in Colorado. He wanted a huge expansion of Scientology to occur here and wanted my help, as I had been so instrumental in previous expansion in this area. The RTC's primary intention for contacting me was unmistakably apparent. Their previous mission to get Scientologists to disconnect from me was a complete failure. Canceling my declare and getting me on board with this mission would make local Scientologists' support for their endeavor much easier. I really had no interest in assisting the RTC but believed I had some leverage in these circumstances. I informed the missionaires that before I would even consider helping them, certain conditions that I required would have to be met. Simply canceling my declare would not make up for the damage caused by the publication and widespread distribution of a slanderous declare order. I wanted to be Comm Eved in Denver. The Comm Ev would specifically address the accusations listed in the declare order. I wanted local, unbiased and non-RTC people appointed to the committee. Finally, I wanted the committee's findings and recommendations, and the cancellation of my declare published and broadly distributed, as the declare order had been. The missionaires didn't see any reason why my conditions would be a problem and said they would contact their mission ops (operations) to get the ball rolling on my requests. They said that they would be in touch, and then I left. Driving home I pondered on why these two people were in Denver. Obviously, that baloney about LRH having a warm spot for Colorado was just a PR target on their mission orders. But why these two people? They were old crew from the Apollo, and had held high posts in the Sea Org. Why would they be on a garrison mission in Denver? On my trips to Clearwater, I had never seen either one of these two people there. Therefore, they must have been posted at Special Unit. A light went off in my head! They were probably part of that silly RTC action that I went over in Part 12 of this series. They must have been labeled "anti-management" and their only chance at redemption was to come to Denver and create a great expansion of Scientology. I was certain that the RTC would not like for this information to get out to Scientologists in the area. Therefore, I had an even a greater leverage with these people. The next day I went into the Denver org and met with the missionaires. As I started to explain my theory about their coming to Colorado, they both got expressions of surprise on their faces and nervously looked at each other. Then one of them quickly got up and shut the door so that no one else could hear our conversation, while the other questioned me on how I had received this information. Unwilling to tell them how I knew, I just said that I had my sources. They practically begged me not to reveal the true nature of their circumstances. I told them simply and with finality that that depended on the RTC. I then immediately asked about my requests, and they said that they were waiting to hear back from mission ops. I then told them to let me know, and left them in a state of moderate shock. A couple of days later, they contacted me saying that my requests had been approved. The RTC would be writing up the Comm Ev and local Scientologists would be selected for the committee. The missionaires would let me know when proceedings would begin. A short while later, my Comm Ev was convened. End of Part 15 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (205.188.117.20) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 16 of 25 – Findings & Recommendations The RTC had approved my request for and written up my Comm Ev. I was satisfied that the accusations put forth in my declare order were therein being addressed. The local people assigned to the committee were not really friends or allies, but they were unbiased, so I felt that the Comm Ev would be conducted fairly. At first, the committee was rather cold and suspicious. As things proceeded and they began seeing the truth of my situation, they warmed up to me. The Comm Ev didn't take very long. When we were done, I thought that it had gone quite well and believed that the committee's findings would be a truthful representation of what had occurred. With the Comm Ev's completion, the committee's findings were sent to the Convening Authority, the RTC, for approval, publication and distribution. A short time later, I got a call from the org saying that the published findings and recommendations had arrived. I went over and was given a copy of the write-up. As I read the committee's findings I was very satisfied. I had been exonerated of all false accusations. What's more, the report truthfully depicted injustices and highlighted my accomplishments. Then I read the recommendations that were laid out by the RTC. Recommendations are suppose to align with a committee's findings. For example, if the findings were that the person was guilty of high crimes, then the recommendations might be suitable punishment and correction. If the findings were that the person was innocent and had been treated unjustly, then the recommendations might include re-instatement of the innocent party and investigation of the parties responsible for the injustice. In the case of my Comm Ev, the RTC's recommendations were completely non sequitur and out of alignment with the findings of the committee. Basically, I was instructed to go to work in the Denver Org Division 6 to help the present RTC mission in the org, and to hand over my correspondence course materials to the Div 6 for their use. I took my copy of the findings and recommendations and left the org without talking to anyone. What had occurred was fairly predictable, but at least I had accomplished what I had set out to do. The findings had been published and distributed in response to the false declare order. And any thinking person could see the RTC's unjust actions and that the recommendations were completely inappropriate. After reading the write-up, a field auditor who had been shut down by the RTC for doing first dynamic ethics handling on people gave me a call. He told me that he had just come back from Santa Barbara where he had received auditing from David Mayo. He was very satisfied with the results he'd obtained, and recommended that I make the trip. This person's call was timely, as I was at a point where I was finally willing to leave the CoS. I had remained in the CoS as long as I had because I had believed in the validity of the technology and had thought I could correct the organization. Now I felt my goals of correcting management were no longer possible. David Mayo, having left the Sea Org some months prior, had just set up an independent center in Santa Barbara and was delivering services to Scientologists who had left CoS. I called David and we had a nice chat. We were friends, but I hadn't seen him since we were both on the Apollo. After talking to him and finding out what he was doing, I scheduled some time to go out and get some auditing at his establishment. I received excellent service with David's group, and for the first time I became aware of the volume of Scientologists who were leaving the CoS. In the entire past history of Scientology, never had such a mass exodus occurred. And the people leaving were not just public Scientologists dissatisfied with their services and treatment in the organization. Large numbers of highly trained technical and administrative people, many of whom had worked closely with Hubbard, were also departing. The mistreatment of independent thought by the RTC, as described in Part 10 of this series, had not crushed the revolution. RTC actions had only delayed it and forced it out of the CoS and into the field. I was now witnessing the beginning of what was to be called the "independent movement" or "free zone". I remember hearing an appropriate analogy: People are leaving a sinking ship, and only the rats will remain. While in Santa Barbara, I talked with David to see if he might be interested in my coming aboard to take on a position of interesting people never involved with Scientology in his services. But David was too busy with what he was doing, and only interested in delivering to the people leaving the CoS. It was his operation and he could, of course, do what he wanted. I thanked him for his good service and returned home. End of Part 16 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (152.163.253.102) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 17 of 25 – Leaving the CoS After returning from my trip to Santa Barbara, the person who had told me about Mayo gave me a call. He was an opinion leader in the Denver field. He was having a meeting at his home with many other local Scientologists to discuss the independent movement and wanted me to attend. Most of the people attending the meeting were public who were sick of the high prices and heavy ethics in the CoS. The host was telling them about the activities occurring outside the CoS, focusing on the delivery being done at Mayo's. Since most of these people respected my opinion, I was asked to speak to the audience. I told the group of my experiences and expressed my viewpoint about what was going on. I told them that I was leaving the CoS and that I'd just been out to Mayo's for auditing. I told them that the service I had received was better than the service I'd received in Clearwater, and recommended Mayo as a viable alternative to the CoS. When I finished my talk I started to sit down, but I was stopped by an angry crowd. They wanted to know why they had to go to Santa Barbara for service when I could open a center in Denver. Up until now, the idea hadn't occurred to me. I told them this and that I'd have to think about it. As I was leaving the meeting, the idea of opening an independent center started to appeal to me. While I was out at Mayo's, the missionaires at the org had been trying to contact me. I found that I had several messages on my answering machine from them, saying that they wanted to see me. I went over to the org and met with the lead missionaire. He said that he was wondering when I was going to start working in the Div 6 there. I tried to explain about the RTC's recommendations being inconsistent with the committee's findings, but he just didn't get what I was trying to say. He tried to tell me how wonderful it would be to work in the org Div 6, especially since we didn't have to mess with those damned missions anymore. When I asked that he elaborate, he went on to say that the missions had just been dilettante units that had now been turned into something much better, mini-orgs. Disgusted with what he had said, I told him that the missions were the best source of public the orgs had ever had, and now the RTC had destroyed them out of greed and avarice. I went on to say that he was just a puppet, mouthing RTC justifications for their crimes. Then I told him that I'd been out at David Mayo's getting auditing and that it was a breath of fresh air. Dumbfounded, all he could say was "You shouldn't have done that". I just shook my head, said goodbye, and left. It only took a couple of days before I got another phone call. This time it was from another RTC mission that had just arrived in Denver. Obviously, the RTC had been informed of my conversation with the missionaire at the org and had sent another mission to specifically deal with this "situation". This new mission was operating out of a motel near the local org, and wanted me to come over and see them. My wife was afraid and didn't want me to go. I assured her that I would be fine and not to worry. I wanted to confront these people one more time. This time there were three missionaires there to handle me. They wanted to make me realize the mistake I'd made by going to Mayo, and get me to give up the "destructive" path I was on. I sat in a chair while the three of them stood around me like cops grilling a suspect. Actually, I kind of enjoyed all the drama. I had hoped that these missionaires would be old-time Sea Org members with some history and experience under their belts. Instead, I discovered that they were pretty raw and really didn't have much of a clue about anything. I would have been surprised if any of them had been in the Sea Org for more than a year. As the session went on, it was the three of them that started to get very unconformable. I was nice, but I was giving them data that was completely new to them and contradicted what they had been told. Seven hours later they were almost basket cases. There was nothing else they could say. I had lost track of time and thought that I should call me wife. Almost hysterical, she was relieved that I was all right. I told her I'd be home directly. Departing, I told the missionaires that I was leaving the CoS and setting up a center in Denver. But figuring I'd make a last attempt at affecting changes in management, I told them that I wouldn't do anything for a least three days. In that time, I was willing to first sit down with Pat Broeker to discuss things. Amazed, I discovered that they didn't even know who Pat Broeker was! I told them that he was their senior and one of the people running the CoS. Telling them that they should just relay my message to their mission ops, I then went home. I got no further communication from the RTC about this last mission or my offer to meet with Broeker. My life as a member of the CoS was now over. But, I was about to start a new chapter in my life, embarking on an exciting and new adventure. End of Part 17 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (205.188.117.20) |
THE NEW REGIME TAKEOVER FROM MY OBSERVATION & EXPERIENCE IN THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 18 of 25 – Epilogue The New Regime Takeover series is now complete. I realize that I only used eighteen parts in this write-up, even though I had first anticipated using twenty-five. The remaining, unused parts may be appended to the existing series in an effort to respond to any questions. In this series, I have attempted, through my observation and experience, to describe the takeover of the CoS by the new regime. I first became aware of a change in the CoS's power structure in 1980, when I was first contacted in the field by Diana Hubbard. I provided a brief part of my previous history in the CoS as a background, but the majority of my personal experience in this series begins in 1980. The story continues into 1983, when the takeover was complete and I left the CoS. While writing and publishing this write-up, I have received many communications from readers trying to figure out my current viewpoint and opinions from what they have read so far. This would be difficult, as I have tried to write this series from the viewpoint I was in at the time these events were happening, over twenty years ago. I believe that doing this has given the story a more realistic flavor. Due to the many questions and interest of readers, I will be writing another series that begins where this write-up leaves off. This new series will commence after I left the CoS and continue until the present. Not wanting to get ahead of myself, I have chosen not to respond to certain postings at the site where my series first appeared, as my responses would have portrayed later points of view. I'm certain that people will find it much more interesting to observe the change in viewpoint with the progressing events and history. In the upcoming series, I will look at the history of the independent field or free zone, as well as the CoS's response to this activity, while I operated an independent center in Colorado. Readers will observe the distinct shift in viewpoint that occurred in the independent field after only two years in existence. When leaving the fold, most Scientologists still believed in the total validity of the technology, where the only imperfections arose from the management and organization of the CoS. In a free environment, the blinders came off, and an emphatic change occurred in the previously enforced ideas about Hubbard's monopoly on mental and spiritual research and advancement. Readers will get a rare glimpse at the early days and formation of the Scientology Bridge from the eyes of the man who assisted Hubbard in his research of the subject. You will see how a flawed philosophy and incorrect evaluation of technical problems led Hubbard to develop a system that had its' workability, but was fraught with inconsistencies and limitations. Out of this turbulent past and evolution of independent thought, a new subject, Idenics, was born. Not being a rehash of Dianetics or Scientology, Idenics would be a fresh, new approach to come out of the arena of self-improvement and therapy. The development and impact of this methodology will be discussed within the context of this new series of writings. Whether you have participated and witnessed events during the period of time discussed, or whether you are just questioning your existing circumstances, I hope you will find this upcoming series interesting, and perhaps, even enlightening. I wish to take this opportunity to express my appreciation to the late, John Galusha, my friend and partner of 16 years, without whose help and insight, this series and the upcoming series would not have been written. Mike Goldstein 8/16/04 | ||
| Anonymous (64.12.117.20) |
A new series by Mr. Goldstein that should serve as a follow up: LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 1 of 25 - Beginning of the Free Zone It's not as if no one left the CoS prior to 1982-1983. But the mass exodus that occurred after the RTC takeover was unprecedented in the history of Scientology. People who had been the backbone of CoS delivery and administration, many of whom had worked closely with LRH, exited in droves. What's more, lesser members of the CoS echelon who had been vital components in the organization, such as org and mission staff, also left in large numbers. The CoS prior to the RTC takeover certainly had its problems, but the majority of the people mentioned above would not have left under previous circumstances. Before the regime change, people put up with all manners of organizational aberration and injustice without seriously considering leaving. They wholeheartedly believed in the total validity of Scientology technology and LRH as their spiritual leader. Even the greatest of problems in the CoS were viewed as glitches that would be corrected in time. But as the New Regime took power, it soon became apparent to a large portion of the devoted membership that their old CoS was gone and would never return. After the brief revolution that culminated in 1982 was effectively squashed by the RTC, loyal members who had devoted their lives to the delivery and expansion of Scientology, left a life they had been completely dedicated to and re-entered normal society. Even though their old haven for practicing Scientology had disappeared, dedicated members of the old CoS were unwilling to give up their life's work. Their only alternative was to establish delivery facilities outside the CoS. In effect, the revolution which had been dampened by the New Regime was forced out into the field. For the majority of highly trained people exiting, there was an unwavering belief in a continued standard delivery of the tech. Since the disagreements with the CoS were limited to management and administration, this was the area subject to dramatic change. But the administration of these new centers did not revert back to the pattern existing in the CoS prior to the RTC takeover. Previous administrative practices were reformed, with freer and more ethically administered delivery units established. Most of the heavy ethics and cult mentality that had been practiced in the CoS for years was eliminated. The high costs of services that had put the bridge out of most people's reach were replaced by a more realistic price structure. When word of these new centers reached the Scientology public, large numbers of these people began leaving the CoS to get their services in the field. Even those who didn't leave began questioning their continued involvement with the CoS. Thus began what was to become known as the "independent movement" or "free zone". The CoS was ill prepared for such a movement. Not only were they losing millions in potential business, but many public Scientologists were demanding the return of advanced payments they had on account. Their usual tactic of threatening the exiting public was ineffective, so the CoS turned their attention to attacking the independent delivery centers and personnel operating these centers. The first stage of attack was to discredit those people running independent centers in an effort to deter the CoS public from leaving. A massive campaign was launched against these free zone leaders. They were inaccurately blamed for all sorts of past problems in the CoS. Vicious lies were circulated regarding their history and character. But the most powerful deterrent was telling Scientology public that they would not receive a standard or competent delivery of tech in the independent field. Moreover, they were told that they would be thoroughly damaged by this free zone delivery. The second stage of attack was unleashed upon people who were delivering the technology outside the CoS. Without concern for expense, the full arsenal of black ops of the old Guardian's Office was brought to bear upon independent delivery people. The intelligent independent centers were structured so as not to infringe on any copyrights or trademarks of the CoS. So aside from what the CoS continued to preach about these violations to their existing members, such legal attacks on the independent field had no real merit. But this didn't stop them from engaging in a number of dirty tricks and tactics. A no-holds-bared effort to disrupt their delivery was loosed on free zone practitioners, who now carried the CoS labels of "squirrels" and "suppressives". Anyone involved with a successful independent center from that time has his or her own horror stories depicting CoS attacks. After leaving the CoS, I opened and operated a large center in Colorado. I, too, had my run-ins with the organization of Scientology. End of Part 1 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (64.12.117.20) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 2 of 25 – Surviving the First Attack When I was leaving the CoS, a mission from the RTC was sent to Denver to "handle" me. This confrontation was described in Part 17 of the New Regime Takeover series. I told the missionaires that I would be starting an independent center in Denver. Right after that meeting, I left the CoS. The next action of the RTC was to initiate an attack using Scientologists still in the CoS who were on our Book One correspondence course. These Scientologists were ordered to contact me, demanding that I refund them for the course. We had people from all over the US and Canada on our course. Probably, because Denver was where I was located, the RTC used this area to test their initiative. To begin with, students called me demanding that I refund them for the course. During the breaks when these students were on course at the local org and missions, they would call me, one after the other, with their refund requests. Since I had never promised a refund, I told each student that I would not return money for a course that they had started. Next, I began receiving nasty, registered letters from the students stating that I must refund their money immediately. I just filed the letters without responding. The RTC's next action was to have the individual students take me to small claims court to get their money back. I was informed by mail by my city's small claims division that four or five people had initiated cases against me. I assumed that, once again, the RTC was testing the water with these few court cases. If successful, they would probably have the rest of the students take me to court. Not only would they tie me up in small claims court suits, but also, if I lost, I would be ruined financially. Very concerned, I went to my lawyer for advice. My lawyer informed me that attorneys were not allowed in small claims court. He went on to say that if I wanted him involved in a court proceeding, that I would have to have the cases kicked up to county court. However, he strongly cautioned me against going this route. He said that this was probably just what the CoS wanted me to do. In addition to the high legal fees, if the case went in their favor, it could set a precedent for future refund claims. In a small claims case, no precedent can be set for future legal claims. His advice was to leave the cases where they were and take my chances. He would advise me on how to handle myself in the proceedings, which would cost me very little in legal fees. I took his advice. The lawyer's main suggestion was that I deal with each case from strictly a business owner's point of view, and not mention anything about Scientology or the CoS. If anything were to be brought up about Scientology or the CoS, it would be the plaintiffs who would do it. Such arguments would probably be irrelevant to the proceedings and make the plaintiffs look bad. I wrote a statement in which I said that the plaintiff had paid for and started a correspondence course. I had continued to provide supervision by mail, but it was up to the student to send in his lessons. If the student failed to send in his lessons, that was his decision. I was fulfilling my part of the bargain and would continue to deliver the course if the student wished to continue. There was more written, but this was the gist of the statement. I was nervous going into the first case. At the start of the proceedings, I handed the judge my written statement. The judge read the statement and then called on the plaintiff to make his case. The student got up and made the argument that when he started the course, I was a member in good standing with the CoS. Now that I was declared, he could no longer participate in a course delivered by a squirrel because this was against his religion. He, therefore, wanted his money back. Things went back and forth for a short time, with the student making a fool of himself and me calmly taking the position of a businessman. It didn't take long for the judge to render his decision. He stated that all the information about Scientology and the CoS was irrelevant. Furthermore, he said that there was an apparent value in my service when the student started the course, and that that value would not change just because I was no longer a member of the CoS. He found the plaintiff's arguments completely without merit, and found in my favor, without even a partial refund required from me. The student and the Scientologists who had accompanied him in court were visibly shaken. Over the next couple of weeks, there were two or three more similar cases. Each one was in front of the same judge. Since a win in small claims does not set a precedent for future cases, the judge just handled each case on its' own merit. But each case pretty much went the same way. I would start by handing the judge the identical written statement. The student would get up and basically make the same stupid argument. The judge would make a similar statement in his ruling and find completely in my favor. Going into the final case that had been filed, I was feeling extremely confident and cocky. But to my surprise, this case was presented differently. The plaintiffs were a couple who had purchased the course almost a year prior. Accompanying them was the ethics officer from the local org. After I had submitted my usual written statement, the couple presented the judge with couple of feet of documents, all labeled as specific exhibits. The primary exhibits were a set of docs from me to re-incorporate my company, Survival Services, as a Dianetics Counseling Group. I had forgotten all about these documents! Two years prior, in order to keep the Guardians Office off my back, I had agreed to re-incorporate my company as a Dianetics Counseling Group. I had my lawyer draw up the papers and had sent them to GO Worldwide for their approval. The docs, probably being lost up lines, were never sent back to me. This incident was described in Part 7 of my New Regime Takeover series. Up until this point in the small claims cases, I had maintained a stance of a businessman, rejecting any connection with the CoS as irrelevant to the proceedings. But the incorporation documents showed my intention to place what I had been doing under the CoS. There were also other exhibits showing a connection to the CoS and my Book One program, including dispatches I had sent to Diana Hubbard. These plaintiffs had made good arguments, unlike the previous ones. This couple had obviously been well briefed. As I was surprised by the whole affair, my arguments clearly demonstrated that I was completely unprepared for their presentation. After arguments were made, the judge wanted to take some time to look over the exhibits before ruling. He took maybe fifteen minutes to scan through the material. During this time I was quite nervous, while the plaintiffs and ethics officer sat smiling and looking very confident. When finished, the judge announced that he was ready to make a ruling in the case. The judge made a lengthy summation before rendering his decision. He said that the exhibits obviously demonstrated an extensive working relationship between me and the CoS, also showing my intention of incorporating my business under them. But since the docs were never filed, the legal connection between us never occurred. He made the analogy of Jell-O power and water. The possibility for Jell-O is there, but without mixing the two, Jell-O is never made. He went on to compare this case to a man who buys a lawnmower that he later wants to return. There's nothing wrong with the lawnmower, but the man wants his money back because the salesman was a Buddhist or a Jew. He went on to talk about religious freedom in this country. By the end of his summation, the judge had made the plaintiffs and CoS look like bigots. During the judge's summation, you couldn't hear a pin drop in the courtroom. Everyone there was listening intently to what he had to say. When the judge gave his ruling in my favor, the entire courtroom (except for the CoS members, of course) burst into an enthusiastic applause that went on for a few minutes. Afterwards, the court recorder came up to me and asked if I wanted a taped recording of the summation. Excitedly, she told me that she had never seen that judge so enthusiastic about a small claims case and that she had never heard him give a summation like that in small claims. As I left the courtroom, people who were not even Scientologists came up to congratulate me. On my way out of the courthouse I saw the CoS members slinking away with their heads down. I went up to the ethics officer and put my arm around his shoulders and said, "Now that's a great example of our legal system at work!" Looking completely devastated, he slowly walked away without saying a word. The judge's summation and final ruling put an end to any further refund demands from members of the CoS. End of Part 2 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (64.12.117.20) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 3 of 25 – Survival Services International In an effort to discourage Scientologists from coming to me for services, the RTC sent Heber Jentzsch to Denver to put on an event disparaging me to the public. I don't know exactly what was said at this event, but I did hear about an amusing tactic that was used. Every time Jentzsch mentioned me in his talk he would say, "Goldstein!", in a guttural and disgusted tone. On cue, staff members dispersed throughout the audience would respond by saying, "Ooh", with a nauseated inflection in their voices. However, during this period of time, Survival Services International re-opened for business as an independent center. In addition to John Galusha and me, many highly trained and experienced technical people and some administrative staff were brought on board. Among these were my ex-wife, Rebecca Jessup, and an old friend of mine from LA and the ship, Russ Meadows. Rebecca was one of the first one hundred Class 8s trained at AOLA, bilingual auditor at AOSH DK, and Qual Sec at Flag. Russ was one of the original twelve Class 12s trained by LRH. We operated out of a beautiful, 5000 square foot office that was built to our needs, in a prestigious business area in Denver. Most of our clients were from Colorado, but having one of the best technical units in the entire independent field, we also got a good share of people who came to us from other areas. There were groups of Scientologists who had left the CoS in many locations without independent delivery facilities. Some of these people came to our center for services. We arranged with these clients to set up events for us in their area with other former CoS members attending. I usually brought two technical people with me to the area. We went over what we were doing and described our service potential. We offered the people a free, on the site case evaluation and a free session to handle upsets. These trips brought us a lot of clients from various parts of the country. We were different from most other independent centers in that we didn't just service Scientologists leaving the CoS. We worked with a lot of people who hadn't previously been involved with Scientology. Executing programs to enlist interest in the general public, we had success with several actions. When I was running the org in Denver, we had a thriving public office located on the main street in downtown Denver. We tried most successful Division 6 programs at that office. The best one was OCA testing. At the time, we were using the original OCA materials that were designed by Raymond Kemp. Ray was the person who wrote the OCA testing materials for Hubbard, and actually held the copyrights. In addition to the test, he had written a manual for evaluating the completed tests, which was an extremely effective part of the entire OCA process. When Ray was declared, the CoS changed some of the OCA questions and put Hubbard's copyright on the test. They also forbade further use of Kemp's manual in Scientology orgs and missions. I was interested in using Kemp's initial OCA materials at Survival Services. I managed to track him down without too much trouble. I asked him how the CoS was legally able to change a few questions and then put their copyright on the OCA. He told me that they just did it, but that he hadn't had the resources to pursue the matter. But he still had the original materials, on which he still held the copyrights. For a small fee, he licensed me to use this material and sent it to me. I published the OCA test in a large local newspaper. People would complete the test and call our office to schedule an appointment to have the test evaluated. The biggest problem with the OCA test line in the org was the time involved with properly preparing the evaluation. We solved this problem at Survival Services by writing a computer program using Kemp's manual. The potential client would bring their completed test into the office. The answers were punched into the computer that then spit out the evaluation. The whole process only took a few minutes. The client quickly received a good evaluation of his test and was sent to a sales person where he was signed up and sold services. Our OCA program was extremely successful and efficient. Different from that of the CoS, the technical staff was allowed to do their jobs without the constant interruption and pressure from management. The delivery quality and efficiency was therefore very high. Clients progressed through their training and processing levels without the stops created by high prices and heavy ethics. There were only as many administrative personnel as necessary, and the admin staff who were there were extremely effective. The years that I ran the independent center were both rewarding and enjoyable. This was much different from the stress involved when working in the CoS. In the CoS, I spent as much time dealing with the insane aspects of the organization as I spent doing my job. It was a real pleasure being in a situation where clients and staff were winning, and where there wasn't the constant flack from people who were supposedly part of the same team. End of Part 3 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (205.188.117.20) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 4 of 25 - Independent Field vs. CoS A war raged between the independent field and the CoS. I kept in good communication with other independent delivery facilities, but I didn't get involved in these battles. I had engaged in my share of skirmishes with the suppressive elements of the CoS while I was a member. Now that I was out of the CoS, I was no longer interested in having any involvement with them. I could certainly understand the field's upsets and had sympathy for their cause. But when I'd been a member of the CoS, I fought with the purposes of correcting the organization and being allowed to do my job. Failing to accomplish these purposes, I left that group and continued my work elsewhere. I had no interest in wasting my time further with the CoS. I kept Survival Services away from what I considered to be unproductive distractions that didn't forward our current activities. In or around 1985, many independent centers and their clients were launching their own offensive against the CoS. They had teamed up with a lawyer by the name of Michael Flynn, an old nemesis of the CoS. They were putting together a class action suit and were trying to get as many independent people and groups involved as they could. People working with the lawsuit contacted Survival Services with a heavy push for our involvement. We were told that the CoS would eventually be taking legal action against all the independent centers. And, since we could never hope to fight the CoS alone with our limited resources, we would have to join together with the other centers in this class action suit. Only together could we survive, because individually, we'd surely be destroyed. Feeling isolated and scared, many members of my staff met with me, asking what we were going to do. I was certainly concerned about our survival, but there were points in the lawsuit that didn't sit well with me. For example, the suite sought back wages from the CoS. When in the Sea Org, we were only paid $10 per week, which was far below minimum wage. It was true that I only made $10 a week, but I had gone along with that while in the Sea Org. I could have left because of this, but I chose to stay. I didn't feel right asking for more money now. The only reason that I would do such a thing would be to keep Survival Services from going under. As I paced around the room, with members of my staff waiting for a decision, I felt as if I was between a rock and a hard space. All of the sudden, something quite amazing occurred. In mid-stride while pacing, I seemed to "go somewhere else". In this other place I was not confused, and calmly assessed the situation. I knew that getting involved with this class action suit was not right for me. True, my refusal to go along with the lawsuit could mean that Survival Services might not survive. LRH use to take actions that on their own merit were unethical, but put in the context of "the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics", these actions were justified. This was just another way of saying, "the end justifies the means", a common justification for all sorts of atrocities committed throughout history. All of the sudden, I knew that the statement, "the end justifies the means", was just not true. The end does not necessarily justify the means. If I had to compromise my integrity in order to keep Survival Services afloat, then Survival Services should not continue. Let it die. At that instant, all my confusion was gone, and I knew exactly what I had to do. An instant later, I knew that Survival Services would be fine. When I turned my attention back to my staff in the meeting, I realized that no time had passed during this strange incident. The entire event had occurred during the time it took for one of my feet to hit the floor! I told the staff that we would not be participating in this lawsuit and why. I then assured them that Survival Services would not go out of business. My staff accepted my decision. It turned out that Michael Flynn left the lawsuit after the CoS paid him off for other legal suits he had brought against them. The class action suit was later dropped. It is interesting to note that all of the centers involved with the lawsuit eventually disappeared, and only Survival Services remained. During our operation as an independent center, we didn't get a lot of flack from the CoS; certainly not as much as other independent centers. A few spies were sent into the center, but they were easy enough to spot. There were a couple of break-in attempts that were foiled without incident. When the form of our independent center ended, it was not because of anything done by the CoS. It was a necessary evolution, which I will explain in a later series. End of Part 4 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (64.12.117.20) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 5 of 25 – A Shift in Viewpoint Not being deterred by CoS attacks, the independent field continued to grow and flourish. Without the heavy ethics and high prices that existed in the CoS, independent Scientologists progressed quickly up their bridges. Over the ensuing two years after the independent field's inception, large numbers of people completed the entire bridge of services, including the upper levels. Unlike in the CoS, people in the independent field were free to question the technology and the results that they were getting. Although most of these people were pleased to finally make it up the bridge and although they did get wins, they realized that they hadn't gotten what they had expected or what had been promised to them for so many years. Additionally, many people completing all processing levels still had unwanted conditions that had never been resolved. The difficulties mentioned above were not limited to the independent field. They also occurred in the CoS but were not voiced as openly, and when they were mentioned, they were handled in a manner to keep the person continuing on the bridge. The CoS always had a great response to any concerns expressed about not achieving a desired result. If not sent to review or ethics, the complaining pc would be told, "That will be handled on up the bridge". If the person complaining had completed the entire bridge, a gimmick that I refer to as the "constant carrot" would serve to keep the individual's hopes alive. It went something like this: "There are at least 40 levels above OT 7 that have not yet been released. Only when there are enough full OT 7s will the next level be forthcoming." I remember first hearing this from a Class 9 auditor named Rocky Stump at an event at ASHO in 1971. But anyone on the inside track of technical development with LRH knew that such a statement was not true. LRH had nothing substantial developed after he had released the old OT levels. In the late 1970s when he came out with NOTS (New Era Dianetics for OTs), he soon replaced the old OT levels with new ones. Anyone working with Hubbard on tech lines after that period of time knew there were no levels researched beyond that point. But the CoS kept promoting that fully developed and unreleased levels did exist. By 1985 there were a great number of people in and out of the CoS who had completed everything that Scientology had to offer on the bridge through OT 7 or Advanced Level 7. Independent delivery facilities openly communicated to their public that what they had finished was the extent of existing levels. Having completed all the existing bridge yet still having issues they wanted to handle and abilities they wanted to attain, many in the independent field started looking outside of standard Scientology tech for answers and results. The blind acceptance that LRH was the only source for mental and spiritual development began to fall away, and a shift in viewpoint occurred in the independent field. Other methods and systems were explored, from other forms of therapy to channeling and eastern teachings. Some continued to use parts of the technology of Scientology while discarding other sections of the tech. New systems were developed that utilized a portion of Scientology tech in conjunction with other methodologies. The true believers who had left the CoS two years prior, were now looking in many different directions to achieve the results they desired. The highly trained and more technically knowledgeable people in the independent field began researching the next step after OT 7 or Advanced Level 7. David Mayo came out with his version of Advanced Level 8, as the CoS came out with their OT 8. However, David's Advanced Level 8 was not too effective as a next step. According to people leaving the CoS after completing OT 8, this level produced mediocre results. But field research into the next step on the bridge continued. Based on all available data, there were several valid directions of research explored in the effort to come up with the next level. At Survival Services, our research took a different path than the paths other independent researchers were taking. This unique research line was possible because of the knowledge and experience of John Galusha. End of Part 5 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (64.12.117.20) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 6 of 25 – John Galusha's Research Line The majority of the research and development of Scientology was done in the 1950s. Much of the research data leading up to new developments was never published. People involved with Scientology at that time were aware of what was being developed, but only those directly involved with the research were aware of all the information. Hubbard's research auditor and primary technical assistant in the 1950s was John Galusha. In 1952, John had started working with LRH in Wichita. He followed Hubbard to such places as Phoenix, Camden, NJ, Washington, DC, and England. Additionally, John was LRH's director of training, director of processing, and supervised the congresses where many new technical developments were released. In the early 1950s LRH came out with creative processing, also known as mock-up processing and positive gains processing. Hubbard felt that this form of auditing made all other forms unnecessary. His rationale for this was as follows: What a being is doing is mocking up. If you get him mocking up on purpose what he's mocking up compulsively, that should handle any aberration. All of the primary sources of published data on creative processing came out prior to 1953 or 1954; the Philadelphia Doctorate Tapes, Creation of Human Ability, and Scientology 8-8008. But few people know that there were several more years of research done that was never written up. Being the research auditor during that period, John Galusha had knowledge of this research information. People being audited with creative processes had fast and amazing gains. But as most individuals continued with this processing, their auditing stalled and they bogged down. The reason for these difficulties puzzled Hubbard, and a lot of research went into resolving this situation. After years of trying to discover the reason for limited success with mock-up processing, LRH just came up with a reason why people were stalling. He concluded that that form of auditing was too high-level for people, and that they needed to approach creative processing on lesser gradients. Therefore, creative processing and all the unpublished research information was put on a back burner, and Hubbard started constructing a bridge of gradient auditing services. John really didn't feel that LRH had fully proven his hypothesis regarding the stalled cases, but went along with it, believing that Hubbard knew what he was doing. It's interesting to note that the idea of a bridge for Scientology was something LRH was excited about long before the difficulties with creative processing arose. The last line in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health is, "For God's sake, get busy and build a better bridge!" The problems with mock-up processing certainly gave him a good reason to build the bridge himself. Prior to the development of the bridge, auditors just had a big barrel of processes. They reached in and grabbed processes according to the situations they were handling. When his work on building the bridge began, LRH started organizing processes into a gradient scale of auditing. A decade later he came out with OT 3. This level signified to Hubbard the end of the negative gains processing. He then felt that people completing OT 3 were now able to do creative processing. But, he didn't re-institute creative processing in the researched form of the late 1950s. Over the previous ten years, Scientology had grown significantly with the marketing of a bridge, and LRH did not want to abandon this format. He therefore re-packaged creative processing in a level format, coming out with the old OT levels, 4 through 7. This level format was not as effective as the straight creative processing, but it allowed the successful marketing method to continue. As OT 3s started doing OT 4 through 7 they began bogging down, just as people had done in the 1950s with creative processing. Hubbard then believed that the reason for these bogs was that there must be more to be done with the subject of OT 3. He then came out with OT 3X (Expanded), and anyone OT 3 or above was put on OT 7, a level having to do with intention. When completed with OT 7 they went directly onto OT 3X. When they had finished OT 3X they were then put onto OT 4 through OT 7 again. But even with the re-vamped OT levels, people continued to bog down on the positive gains levels above OT 3. In the late 1970s, LRH came out with NOTs (New Era Dianetics for OTs). Even though NOTs was a negative gains process, Hubbard felt this was the necessary next gradient after OT 3. He therefore took the old OT levels 4 through 7 and put them on a back burner, just like he'd done with creative processing in the 1950s. Anyone OT 3 or above was just put onto their NOTs. For the next couple of years there was no bridge after OT 3, just NOTs. Then, wanting to maintain the bridge format, LRH re-designed NOTs into the new OT levels 4 through 7. In 1985, when others were taking diverse research paths to come up with the next step on the bridge after OT 7 or Advanced Level 7, John Galusha and Survival Services took a unique research route based on the information and history described above. The logical action with people completing all their advanced levels was to now see if they could run creative processing. But this delivery would not be in the watered down version of the old OT levels. It would be done in the original, researched form of the late 1950s. End of Part 6 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (149.174.164.83) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 7 of 25 – Creative Processing Most people know very little about creative processing. What is known comes mainly from the Philadelphia Doctorate Tapes and a couple of books. Creative processing has never appeared on the bridge, as the formation of the bridge was a response to the bogs people had developed in undergoing this type of auditing. The closest it ever came to being on the bridge was the watered-down format of the old OT levels, 4 through 7. After OT 3s had been stalling on these levels for a decade, LRH discontinued their usage after his introduction of NOTs auditing in the late 1970s. His reasoning for their removal was the same as it had been for putting creative processing on a back burner in the 1950s and constructing a bridge of gradient auditing services. Hubbard determined that creative processing was too high-level, and that lower gradients of auditing must first be accomplished before one could succeed with a positive-gains form of auditing. In 1985, many people were completing the new OT or Advanced levels and looking for their next step. Survival Services' answer was to see if these people could now successfully run creative processing. Fortunately, we had John Galusha, the one person who probably knew more about creative processing than anyone in the world. Not only had John supervised the first Philadelphia Doctorate Course in Phoenix in 1953, but he was also the research auditor for LRH over the next many years trying to resolve the bogging difficulties with creative processing. Since the data on this research was never written up, John might have been the only person other than Hubbard who had full access to this information. We started promoting creative processing to people in independent field who had completed their bridge through OT 7 or Advanced Level 7. We had a fairly good response from people at this case level. Many came and received creative processing from John. At first these clients did very well and had excellent results. However, as the clients continued with the processing, they would hit a point where they bogged. This was the same phenomenon that had occurred with OT 3s on the old OT levels and with people in the 1950s with creative processing. And this was now occurring with people who had completed the entire existing bridge of services! One of two things could have been happening: either there were more gradients to be done, according to LRH's original evaluation, or Hubbard had come up with an incorrect reason for the cases having stalled. The second of these two possibilities turned out to be correct; LRH's original "why" for people bogging on creative processing proved to be wrong. LRH's initial premise regarding creative processing was valid. It stated that what a being is doing is mocking up. If you get him to mock-up on purpose what he's mocking up compulsively, that should handle any aberration. Done properly, creative processing can produce incredible gains. But past a certain point, the person bogs. John discovered that the bogging had nothing to do with gradients. He found that the effectiveness of the process depended on what identity the person was in when he was being audited! John defined an identity as a way of being in order to accomplish something. When the client was run past the limitations of the identity that he was auditing FROM, no matter how good the process, the person bogged. From this discovery, missing pieces started to quickly fall into place for John. Questions that had arisen during the 1950s research suddenly cleared up. Case difficulties that had baffled technical people for decades suddenly appeared solvable. With a few more rudimentary discoveries, John's auditing of the bogged clients began producing astonishing results. Within just a couple of sessions, the bogs were resolved and clients began experiencing significant gains. Conditions that had not been resolved throughout their entire passage on the bridge were handled in a matter of hours. In short order, a whole new form of processing began to emerge. This was the beginning of what we would eventually call IDENICS. End of Part 7 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (149.174.164.83) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 8 of 25 – The Beginnings of Idenics With this new form of processing, John discovered that much of the creative processing was unnecessary, and only a small portion of it was incorporated into this new format. Additionally, our perspective on the necessity of the bridge began to change with John's breakthroughs. If Hubbard's formation of the bridge had been based on an incorrect "why" regarding gradients, then how much of that bridge was now necessary? We would soon have an opportunity to get this question answered. Our initial clients were people who had completed OT 7 or Advanced Level 7. But as the word of our successes got out, we had individuals who had not completed the existing bridge who wanted to receive our new service. The first of these people were clients who were on their NOTs but not yet finished. In fact, two of these NOTs clients had stalled, stuck in a NOTs case phemonenon called, "over-restimulation". People had serious upset and overwhelm in this state, and the NOTs handling for such cases was extremely delicate. Before being taken into session, the person had to de-stimulate. Only then was he taken into session and carefully run on certain NOTs processes. We had not yet coined the name "Idenics", and simply called what we were doing, "identity processing". Even though it was still in a very rudimentary state, we decided to try this new processing on these NOTs-restim cases. Within a couple of hours of identity processing not only was the "over-restimulation" handled, but also there was no more NOTs-type phenomena to be addressed! Similar, fast results were accomplished on other people in the middle of their NOTs. Next, we started getting clients in the "non-interference zone" coming to us for our service. These were people between Clear and OT3. It was called the "non-interference zone" because the only major actions permitted by Scientology tech on these people were OT 1, 2 or 3. According to the tech, such cases would be messed up if handled otherwise. However, processing these people with our identity processing produced the same fast, high-quality results as we had gotten with those clients who had completed OT 3. When we started getting the same magnitude of results working with individuals who had only done part of their lower bridge and people never having had any Scientology auditing, we began to realize the scope of John's breakthroughs and discoveries. In looking for a "next step", John had actually come up with something that "undercut" the entire Scientology bridge. During most of the period between 1985 and 1987 when John was delivering creative processing and developing identity processing, the rest of our technical staff was still delivering other services. While our new service was still in its' development stages, John was not yet able to do the necessary codifying with his research to properly train others in what he was doing. As my attention was primarily on John's work, most of the other technical staff became disillusioned and left Survival Services. Without the additional delivery I had to let all but one of my administrative personnel go. When the development of John's work made the delivery of other forms of processing obsolete, I felt that it was no longer ethical to continue to deliver anything but identity processing. In an effort to maintain the viability of the company, John wrote up what he could on his new techniques and trained the few technical people who had remained. However, this training was ineffective. To a large extent, John was still improvising in the sessions he was delivering, and coming up with questions as he worked with clients. Even though the other practitioners had years of experience working with people, they were not able to achieve the same kind of end products as John was getting. Obviously, there were things that John did in session that the other practitioners were not doing, but we were not yet able to discover what these actions were. Unable to get the quality of results John was accomplishing, the other practitioners started reverting back to old techniques with their clients. When these clients started complaining, the practitioners became frustrated and quit. Survival Services staff was now only John, one other administrative person and me. This was a very difficult time financially for Survival Services. Not only did we have just one person delivering service, but also the identity processing worked so fast and effectively that individuals didn't need too many hours to achieve their desired results. To be viable, we had to have a volume of clients coming for service. But getting the volume also presented its difficulties. Identity processing was so new that we hadn't yet had enough clients to produce a large enough word of mouth. Additionally, promoting our service was difficult, as I had not yet developed an effective way to communicate what we were doing to others. Aside from the financial problems, this research and development period was very exciting. The clients we were getting were doing extremely well. As John's guinea pig, I was receiving a lot of processing and handling things that I'd never been able to handle on the bridge. John's development of the subject was progressing well. And, I was learning all I could about identity processing. Unlike what many other groups in the independent field were doing, our work was not a re-hash of Dianetics and Scientology. Ours was a new subject that had evolved out of our earlier knowledge and experience. But the name "identity processing" was very limiting, as it seemed to only connote some kind of auditing rundown. Feeling that we needed a better name, we racked our brains trying to come up with a proper designation. Finally, a client coming out of session with John made a suggestion that really grabbed our attention. With a minor adjustment in the spelling, we finally had a name for our subject: IDENICS. End of Part 8 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (64.12.117.20) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 9 of 25 – Identities The initial development of Idenics dealt with the subject of identities. Interest in this area is not new. Identities have been discussed and worked with for hundreds, perhaps thousands of years. Nine hundred years ago they were called "elementals". Hubbard also touched on this subject from different angles. His work with this subject can first been seen in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, where he talked about a valence, which he defined as somebody else's identity assumed by a person unknowingly. He also viewed identities as the opposing "items" in his theory of GPMs (Goals Problems Mass). One of the most radical ideas that he gave the most credence to was that identities were not even generated by the person, but were separate "beings" that affect the individual adversely. Yet no one had viewed the subject of identities with the clarity of John Galusha. John's insights into the make-up and generation of identities, as well as their importance in the arena of therapy, were groundbreaking. Phenomena observed and addressed by previous complex theories and methods were not only explained, but also easily resolved with John's innovations and techniques. John defined an identity as simply a way of being in order to accomplish something. An identity is composed of beliefs, ideas, decisions, intentions, etc. In other words, an identity is a whole package of rules and laws of how to be in particular circumstances. A person moves in and out of these identities every day, without any thought. These identities, professional, social, familial etc., are mostly easily assumed and set aside. Additionally, identities that a person has ALL belong to that person, even if they were modeled after an identity of someone else. However, an identity can be generated without the input of any outside party. They may have similarities, but identities are different from person to person. Still, the common denominator between all identities is that every one of them is limited. The most obvious limitation is the identity's purpose, or what it is supposed to accomplish. While operating from an identity, the individual is also limited by the scope of that way of being. As mentioned above, most identities that a person assumes are easily set aside. The only liability is when a person gets stuck in some identity. By "stuck", I simply mean being without noticing. The liability is that the individual can continue to operate from the stuck identity in circumstances that are not appropriate. This observation led John to a very valuable discovery: any unwanted condition that a person has is simply the property of some identity. I can use an analogy here to demonstrate some of these concepts I've mentioned. One can liken an identity to a suit of armor. When one is inside the armor, it's cumbersome and it limits the person's motion, but it's useful in certain circumstances. Now, imagine that once this person put on the armor they forgot that it wasn't them. In other words, in the person's mind, there was no separation between themselves and the armor. Let's say that they now think it is part of their skin. They walk down the road and come to a battle where swords and lances are being deflected by this heavy, metal covering. All is well, the armor is working. Later, this person comes to a lake where people are swimming. Hot and uncomfortable, the individual decides to swim too. They jump into the water and sink. Someone pulls them out, and as they lie on the bank they think to themselves, "Other people can swim but I can't". Here is the unwanted condition. The person then originates all kinds of unusual solutions of how to stay afloat, when all they'd have to do is take off the armor. Unfortunately, the person doesn't know that the armor is not part of them. Numerous discoveries and processing techniques came about due to this initial understanding about identities. Case difficulties that had previously plagued auditors and case supervisors were now being resolved easily. For example, the "no case gain" who spent thousands of hours auditing with no results, was found in session to be sitting in an identity that resisted any form of case gain. Once the identity was handled in an hour-long session, the person thereafter had no difficulty making progress. The kind of discoveries and processing techniques that I have been discussing I now refer to as the mechanics of Idenics. The mechanics that we now have are much more far-reaching than what John had developed during the initial years of Idenics. Still, in the beginning, he was able to get results with a speed that hadn't been imagined with previous techniques. As I described in Part 8 of this series, John wrote up these initial mechanics for the other practitioners at Survival Services, yet these other practitioners were unable to get the same quality of results. After some inspection, John's secret of success was finally revealed. This secret turned out to be the most valuable contribution that John ever made to the subject of therapy or auditing. In my humble opinion, it is the greatest contribution that anyone has ever made to these subjects. The secret was beyond the area of mechanics. It had to do with the application of those mechanics. End of Part 9 of 25 | ||
| Magoo (12.72.82.175) |
Excellent.... Thank you Mike! Also, thanks to whomever re-posted this here. Please keep it up. People need to know this. Tory/Magoo~ | ||
| Programmer_guy (4.12.184.141) |
http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/gthursby/fonda/jung03.html THE PERSONA: is the mask we wear to make a particular impression on others; it may reveal and conceal our real nature. It is called an artificial personality that is a compromise between a person's real individuality and society's expectations--usually society's demands take precedence. It is made up of things like professional titles, roles, habits of social behaviour, etc. It serves to both guarantee social order and to protect the individual's private life. That is, when the ego identifies itself with the persona, the individual become particularly susceptible to the unconscious. | ||
| Programmer_guy (4.12.184.141) |
So, isn't this just Carl Jung warmed over? Hubbard wasn't original on this. | ||
| Anonymous (205.188.117.20) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 10 of 25 – John's Secret The techniques and procedures used in Idenics processing, as well as the basic underlying information and concepts, are referred to as the "mechanics" of Idenics. These mechanics are a vital component of the process, but are not the totality Idenics. The other part of Idenics, that at the very least is just as important, is the application. By "application", I simply mean how the mechanics are applied to or used when working with a client. In Idenics, the application is completely non-judgmental, non-evaluative, and devoid of any suggestion, advice or opinion. In Idenics, we have no preconceived agenda for people or levels that they must do. We work only from the agenda of the client. In Idenics, our mechanics are not written in stone. The Idenics procedures are only a guideline with the primary focus being the individual client. In Idenics, the ONLY source of information about a client is that individual client. In Scientology we prided ourselves on not evaluating for people. But all that that really meant was that the auditor did not VERBALLY evaluate for the pc in session. The registrars and ethics officers evaluated for the pc. The case supervisor evaluated for the pc, and the field auditor who case supervises in the chair is evaluating for the pc in his head. The Scientology Bridge is extremely evaluative and judgmental. I will most probably ruffle some people's feathers with my explanation of Idenics' application. It is not my intention to make anyone wrong, and I wish that I could state our application in a completely positive manner. But it is virtually impossible to describe our application without the use of "negative contrast". In other words, the only way that I have been able to communicate what an Idenics practitioner does in terms of application is by describing what he DOESN'T do. Due to its elusive nature, this application was overlooked in the beginning of Idenics. During this period of time, John's entire focus was on mechanics. Everyone at Survival Services, including John, was unaware of the subtle difference in John's application as compared to our other practitioners. It wasn't until the practitioners, who used the same mechanics as John, were unable to achieve the same quality of results that we suspected the existence of another element at work. At first, we just chalked up the difference in results to John's improvisational skills and experience. However, upon further investigation, specific factors came to light regarding his use of the mechanics. It was not a matter of what he WAS doing that the other practitioners weren't, but rather what he WASN'T doing that they were. John's non-judgmental application was not something that he figured out how to do. It was something that was part of his basic nature. Indeed, this approach was as natural as breathing to this man, and he operated this way both in and out of session. John had never recognized the subtle difference between his and others way of being while auditing. However, others had sensed this rare quality in Galusha. When Hubbard's demanding schedule and workload prohibited him from continuing to work with his personal pcs, the one man that he was comfortable turning his clients over to was John Galusha. When organizational policy started limiting staff and field auditor activities, the only person that LRH exempted from these policies was John Galusha. His numerous and unusually successful auditing practices were a subject of Flag's attention and evaluation. Anyone who had ever seen John audit, could not help but notice a unique quality in his auditing. During the years that he performed live Book One Dianetics sessions in front of audiences, many people, including Class 12 auditors at Flag, commented on and attempted to explore John's auditing "style"(Reference: Part 9 of The New Regime Takeover series). As I mentioned earlier, the other practitioners at Survival Services became frustrated because they were not getting the same quality of results as John while using the identical mechanics. They reverted back to old techniques and their clients complained. Disillusioned, these practitioners left Survival Services. Several months later, John's secret of success began to emerge. When we understood John's application we felt that we could then train others to deliver Idenics. John wrote up a pack of basic materials and we delivered our first training as a live lecture series and co-audit. With the videotaped lectures we designed and offered the first Idenics Practitioner Training Course. However, our initial training had limited success. Students learned and understood the mechanics of Idenics, but had great difficulty grasping and performing the Idenics application. Part of the problem was the difficulties that we were having in communicating our application. Additionally, the concepts were so intelligible and the procedures were so effective, that people tended to focus all of their attention on these mechanics while overlooking the Idenics application. Students with prior auditing experience were the hardest to train. Their training and competency as Idenics practitioners required extensive "unlearning" of old habits, something that most of these people were unable or unwilling to do. Most of these practitioners took a narrow view of Idenics and incorporated our mechanics into Scientology-based practices. Communicating an application that is so intangible is still difficult. Just as the unlearning of old habits is necessary in practitioner training, letting go of certain ingrained ideas and beliefs is required to comprehend the true impact and genius of Idenics application. People wanting to handle their own cases have a much easier time understanding our application then do auditors and practitioners of other therapies. Aside from their clinging to old concepts that have apparent value, people with their own practice can have a vested interest in maintaining superiority over their clients. If a practitioner can convince his clients that he knows more about them then they know about themselves and also convinces clients that a preconceived agenda is necessary, than clients will stick around longer and the practitioner will have an easier and more stable auditing practice. To do otherwise, the practitioner would complete clients faster and have to depend on a high client volume in order to survive. In this write-up I have only been able to provide a surface explanation of the Idenics application. More time must be devoted to describing this application and its ramifications in therapy. Therefore, the upcoming or parts of this series will be highlighted by Idenics' application. End of Part 10 of 25 | ||
| Programmer_guy (4.12.184.141) |
In Scientology we prided ourselves on not evaluating for people. But all that that really meant was that the auditor did not VERBALLY evaluate for the pc in session. The registrars and ethics officers evaluated for the pc. etc... I certainly agree with that one! | ||
| Anonymous (64.12.117.20) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 11 of 25 – The Relevance of This Series In Part 11 of this series I have decided to take a small side trip from the normal flow of this overall write-up to respond to certain readers who have questioned the relevance of this series to specific newsgroups. My previous series, The New Regime Takeover, dealt with my personal history in the CoS. From my experiences, I relayed my viewpoints regarding organizational and management changes and activities. Since there are newsgroups where the primary agenda focuses on the administrative and organizational aspects and activities of the CoS, that series was obviously relevant to them. However, the bulk of this current series is dedicated to the subject of technology. Readers of the above-mentioned newsgroups have wondered why I have chosen to post to their newsgroups a series that focuses on the history, content and ramifications of Scientology, as well as Idenics, and the comparison of these two, different methodologies. I believe that posting this current series to these newsgroups is appropriate, and I'd like to explain my reasons. A large section of the people familiar with the CoS is aware of the demented aspects and activities of that organization. However, insane actions must originate from and be carried out by people operating from aberrated ideas and viewpoints. For such a brazenly offensive mentality to exist there had to have been deficiencies in the tech. Especially, since the purpose for the formation, existence and operation of the CoS is to forward and expand Scientology methodology. Without exploring the inadequacies of the technology, one can never fully comprehend the insanities of an organization built to advance those methods. Questions then arise regarding my discussion of Idenics. Why not just discuss the technology of Scientology? Why bring Idenics into the mix? Doesn't your doing that, promote your activities? I would be lying if I said that I didn't want to promote Idenics. But there are definitely other reasons for my discussion of Idenics. Primarily, my understanding of the deficiencies of Scientology tech came from and is related to the development and delivery of Idenics, and visa versa. There are people who through their bad experiences with and observation of the CoS have formed the opinion that the technology of Scientology has absolutely no validity. Many people with this opinion also vehemently belittle anyone who continues to pursue a path to resolve their personal unwanted conditions or improve their existing state of being. Why would someone engage in activities that demean others who are seeking a path of personal discovery? The primary reason that I can think of is because of failures and confusions that that individual has had on their own path of personal discovery. Regarding the issue of the invalidity of Scientology tech: From the identity or viewpoint of the person, who states that there is absolutely no workability to Scientology tech, I am certain that that opinion is true. This person may also have never personally received any benefit or gain from the application of that technology. But for anyone who stuck around Scientology long enough, I would think that it would be extremely rare not to have gotten any positive results. I believe that if one interviewed a large number of people leaving the CoS, one would discover that the majority did get results, even if those results were few and far between. We should also ask why so many people who had such horrendous experiences and were treated so unjustly would have stayed as long as they did in the CoS? Were they brainwashed? Of course they were, but there's more to the story than that. A primary belief existing in most therapies, including Scientology, is that people get stuck in "losses". Something bad happens to an individual and they get stuck in the occasion because of that traumatic experience or loss. One can make the argument that LRH had some opinions and techniques that were contrary to this belief, but the overwhelming majority of his technology demonstrates an application that adheres to this idea. One of John Galusha's initial insights was that people do not get stuck in losses, they get stuck in "wins". As he would to say, "We may be dumb but we're not THAT dumb. Why would one hold on to a loss?" It is the win that sticks people. The rest is just part of the package that will probably need to be looked at if one is trying to resolve an unwanted condition that that package is attached to. Furthermore, any unwanted condition has some apparent value; even though this value is probably not seen from the viewpoint that a person is looking from when they are trying to get rid it. Unless this value is properly inspected, the condition will probably persist. There are powerful ramifications to this insight that I'll address later in this series. My purpose for bringing up the above data is to demonstrate that people stuck it out in the CoS because of the wins they had, and the hope that they would have more wins. It was only when these individuals reached their breaking points, or when they realized that they could accomplish their goals outside of the CoS, that they left that organization. However, the wins and the attachments of Scientology, LRH and the CoS can "follow" a person leaving this organization and/or subject. Over the past 20 years I have encountered hundreds of people who have left the CoS, but who are conflicted due to an ongoing loyalty to the CoS, LRH, or Scientology. Many of these people had been out of the CoS or Scientology for years yet still had these personal conflicts. An accepted opinion that use to exist in the independent field was that people leaving the CoS who had been heavily involved with that organization, would take five years to re-integrate into normal society. Independent Scientologists spent hundreds of hours auditing these poor souls on their bad experiences in the CoS. On the other hand, John focused on the wins that these people had had that they then completely credited to Scientology, LRH or the CoS. The CoS continually reinforced the idea of giving credit for your wins to them. For example, the activity of making a person whom has a win, get up in front of an audience and thank LRH for the win and then applaud Hubbard's picture. Most of the people who John audited who were stuck as described above, resolved their conflicts in short order. Additionally, an action that John originated and that I have continued to do when processing a person with Idenics is performed to insure that the person doesn't get stuck with what we are doing or with us. When a client has a big win and is adamantly thanking us, we will get that person to look at various things like, who got them here, who did the effective looking in session, and who had the realizations. When the individual sees that he has done these things, we then get them to take the credit for these actions and results. If the person insists on giving us some of the credit, then we might say, "OK, but at the most I can only take 50%." The exploration of technology in this series is not only relevant to these newsgroups, but it is a necessity in order to get the full picture. Furthermore, my discussion of Idenics is more than a focal point in this exploration. It demonstrates that following a path of personal improvement does not have to wind a person up submerged in a cult. Initially, one must have a technology that is based on sound principles that are effectively applied to only the goals and aspirations of the individual client. Then, those delivering that technology must insure that their organization and administration never compromise the integrity of those principles and methodology. With the above in place, maybe the reasons why any of us originally got into Scientology, those specific and individual objectives that we each wished to accomplish, can be realized. End of Part 11 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (64.12.117.20) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 12 of 25 – Additives In this series, I will talk about many themes such as unwanted conditions, identities and wins. Even though these subjects must be discussed individually, they also intertwine. Therefore, if one does not understand the relationship between these topics, as well as their singular characteristics, they will fail to grasp the scope of Idenics' mechanics and application. People tend to cling to solutions that work for them. When the clinging is done unknowingly and automatically, it is said that the person is stuck in or stuck with these solutions. When they are done automatically, a person may unknowingly operate with these solutions in inappropriate circumstances, even though those solutions were workable in the past. This sort of habitual activity creates problems for the individual and is expressed as an unwanted condition. An identity is a solution that a person generates in a confusion to somehow handle that confusion. Identities, which are composed of such things as beliefs, ideas, and decisions, are additive to the basic person. All of the parts of an identity are also additions taken on by the individual. Unsuccessfully trying to resolve their unwanted conditions themselves, people have sought help from others. Unfortunately, most assistance is given in the form of answers to explain the individual's issues. For the most part, all these "answers" do for the person is to provide that individual with an opportunity to accumulate more additives. The following example will demonstrate my point: Jane has a low self-image. She buys a book on "How to Improve Your Self-Esteem". The author says, "The reason you have low self-esteem is because of ideas your parents instilled in you when you were young." Jane thinks to herself, "Well, my father did tell me I was worthless several times. Yeah, that makes sense!" She feels better for the rest of the day, as the book's statement has explained her unwanted condition. The following day, some situation in life occurs and she falls back into the condition of low self-esteem. The explanation only provided temporary relief, but Jane holds on to it because it had worked. She still has the original condition, but also has the explanation, which is an additive because it adds on to the condition. If you've ever spoken with someone who has spent years in therapy, you may have noticed that they could sit and talk with you for hours, explaining all the reasons why they have the conditions they do, even though they still have the conditions. What you were listening to were additives. People seem to gravitate towards and even crave additives. What is at the foundation of the problem has become desired in the solution. For this reason, groups like the CoS, selling the most additives (pretended knowingness, pie in the sky, etc.), will continue to prosper. People leaving such groups wonder how the group could get rich while preying on the misery of others. But such groups wouldn't even be in business if they didn't fulfill some demand. In this case, the demand is for answers and solutions. Auditing is supposed to assist the individual in letting go of their additives. Unfortunately, the subject of Scientology is fraught with explanations. In an atmosphere like the CoS, it is considered a crime to even question these explanations. Members blindly accept LRH's explanations as fact. Opportunities are constantly created where a person can take on more additives than they can let go of in auditing. Hubbard's explanations are an integral part of the mechanics and application of Scientology auditing. It's true that the auditor doesn't verbally relate these explanations to the pc in session. However, the processes used and the questions asked the pc are based on these explanations. The following are actual examples of clients who came to Idenics for assistance after being mishandled in Scientology auditing. Only the clients' names have been changed. Case History #1 – Joe came to us with an unwanted condition that he'd been trying to handle throughout his history in Scientology. He'd completed the entire bridge yet the condition still persisted. In his first Idenics session, his attention immediately went to an incident when he was seven years old on a playground. His first response was, "Oh no, not that incident again! That damn thing has come up 500 times in auditing, starting with my first session with Dianetics!" However, he was willing to take one more look at the event. In that occasion, a little girl had looked at him. She didn't do or say anything, just looked. There was no pain, no unconsciousness or loss, but for this person this incident was a tremendous confusion (defined in Idenics as a disruption of one's intention or expectation). His response to this confusion was something that he'd been stuck in ever since. In an hour and a half session, the unwanted condition that he'd been trying to handle for the past 25 years was resolved. Even though it had presented itself throughout his Dianetic and Scientology auditing, the incident had never been properly addressed. In that technology, that incident, without pain, unconsciousness or loss, could only be a lock. Additionally, there is the LRH idea that this lifetime is insignificant compared to dealing with past lives. Auditors adhering to these concepts brushed the incident off as a lock, and asked for earlier similar incidents that would contain loss, pain and unconsciousness. The pc, also being educated in the technology, went along with the auditors. Most of the auditing addressing this issue was spent running past lives. In actual fact, that condition DID start with that initial incident but was overlooked by pc, auditors and case supervisors. Due to Hubbard's explanations of how people are, the incident that needed to be run was always glossed over. Case History #2 – Betty had done hundreds hours of auditing, with the majority of her hours spent doing review or repair actions. Beginning at a local mission, she'd continued at the local org, and eventually wound up in Clearwater. Her auditing had started bogging when she had insisted that she only had 15 years of time track. Being 35 years old, the Scientology tech people knew she had 20 years of track in this lifetime, as well as trillions of years of other existences. Case supervisors had racked their brains trying to figure out what was wrong with her, coming up with all sorts of auditing and qual cramming actions. When she arrived at Survival Services she had a list of conditions that she wanted to handle, most of which had never even been addressed in CoS auditing. But the first issue she brought up was not having any track before the age of 20. In her Idenics processing, she discovered that she had been firmly stuck in an identity that she had generated in confusion when she was 20 years old. Needless to say, resolving this issue was an enormous relief for this individual. Even though she had been questioned mercilessly during her CoS experience, she'd always been telling the truth. She had been in an identity that only had 15 years of time track! Case History #3 – Roger contacted me, wanting to schedule some time to come for services. He had me reiterate many times that in Idenics we only go by the client's agenda, handling only what the client wishes to address. Once in the session room, he made sure of this again before allowing the practitioner to begin the session. Only when he was satisfied that John would take up his issue and not try to talk him out of doing that or make him wrong, would he allow the session to start. What he wanted to address was the subject of telekinesis. He wanted to be able to move objects around without touching them. He got into Scientology after having read some success stories in an Advanced Magazine. His only purpose in auditing was telekinesis, but when he questioned when this would be taken up, he was always told, "That will be handled on up the bridge." When he failed to accept that answer, the subject had been addressed, but only as a hidden standard. After he had completed his entire bridge, including his OT levels, he not only couldn't perform telekinesis, but the subject had never even been directly addressed. Extremely upset, he left the CoS. His beginning Idenics session was the first time he had been allowed to directly address this issue, and without being made wrong for what he wished to accomplish. Fifteen minutes into the session he came up with an unwanted condition that had been ruining his life, for which telekinesis had been the solution! Now his attention was on the unwanted condition. Following the client's interest, John worked with him on this issue. After a few sessions, the condition that had been destroying this person's life for decades was resolved. After work on the condition was complete, John asked the man about the subject of telekinesis. Roger's response was, "I don't care about that". I've only mentioned three dramatic examples, but we have had hundreds of instances where additives from Scientology have gotten in a person's way from their dealing with their case. In Idenics, we don't provide people with opportunities to take on more additives. Our non-evaluative and nonjudgmental application insures that this does not occur. Furthermore, this application is adhered to not only in session, but also when dealing with clients out of session. For example, the only things that I will do in the selling of Idenics services is to inform people about what we're doing and to answer their questions. Even when a person asks me if I think they should do Idenics processing, my answer is always, "I don't know." I hope that this discussion about additives has provided a better insight into the application of Idenics. End of Part 12 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (64.12.117.20) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 14 of 25 – Basic Philosophy Difference Previously, I mentioned a philosophy that states that people are unique and different, and that the answers those individuals seek about themselves are within them. Any Scientology tech person would probably agree with this philosophy and assert that it is applied in Scientology. I would argue that only a qualified version of this philosophy is applied in that technology. It doesn't take much investigation to see that people have aspects of themselves that they want to change, but are unable to do so by themselves. An alternative to remaining in these conditions is for individuals to receive outside assistance with their issues. Any modality involved with delivering this kind of facilitation has, as part of its system, hypothesized commonalties that exist in people. Hubbard's research produced volumes of commonalties while Galusha only discovered a few. From these commonalties, both investigators designed mechanics (processes and questions) that could be applied to a person in order to assist that individual in the resolution of their unwanted conditions. The number of mechanics produced by Galusha pale in comparison with the volume of mechanics created by Hubbard. In Scientology, Hubbard's mechanics are treated like law, with a demand that they be applied exactly and without the slightest alteration or variation. Whereas in Idenics, Galusha's few mechanics are treated only as guidelines, with flexibility in application that is tailored to the individual client. In order to understand the difference between Scientology and Idenics, it is important to explore the reason behind the disparities in the volume and application of theorized commonalties and mechanics. Both Hubbard and Galusha believed that people were different and unique, but Hubbard believed that individuals had much more in common than Galusha. Both men believed that the answers that people sought about themselves was within them, but there was a great divergence in each of their ideas regarding an individual's ability to access these answers. I believe that the difference in the volume of commonalties and mechanics discovered by these two men, as well as their research methods, were a product of their diverging ideas regarding a person's ability to access. Furthermore, it is this disparity that most distinguishes Idenics from Scientology. Hubbard had very little faith in an individual's ability to access the answers within themselves. He went so far as to believe that people could not confront or even know the proper things they should be addressing or direction that they should be going. Taking it upon himself, he would determine for the individual the proper path of self-discovery, and then guide them on that path to greater self-awareness. From the early stages of Scientology development, Hubbard instructed auditors with the above ideas and attitudes. A good example of this can be seen in the early 1950s. Hubbard gave a Philadelphia Doctorate Course lecture called The Goals of an Auditor, where he was addressing prospective auditors. In that lecture he stated that an auditor should not be interested in the goals of the pc, but should have his/her own goals for the sessions. To demonstrate his point, Hubbard gave an example of a pc, coming into session wanting to handle his baldness. In the example, the auditor doesn't verbally evaluate for the pc or make him wrong, but what the auditor knows is that he/she is going to make the pc a better person. "Making the pc a better person" later translated in to a long list of EPs (end phenomena) that were determined by Hubbard for all people. The extent to which LRH built upon the basic ideas and attitudes described above is easily seen in his development of Scientology. It took over 30 years of following the direction set by Hubbard for John Galusha to discover an easier and more effective way to go. While researching Idenics, John once said something to me that, at the time, I did not understand. Pointing at his bookcase filled with Scientology technical books he said, "I don't need any of that anymore. I've finally let go of my pretended knowingness". John had a great faith in an individual's ability to access. With the origination of Idenics, he ALWAYS trusted that what the client wanted to address was the correct way to go. He trusted the client in these matters far beyond his own perception. Instead of proceeding down the same, old path of "trying to figure people out", something common to every therapy, including Scientology, Galusha simply got people to look and notice what was already there. He was able to develop a simple set of mechanics that assist a person in quickly accessing the things they need to know in order to resolve their unwanted conditions. It took me some years to let go of my "pretended knowingness" and master Idenics' application. If I were attending the above mentioned lecture with my present viewpoint, I would respond to Hubbard's comments about making the pc a better person by saying, "Excuse me Ron, but a better person according to whom? According to you or the auditor? How would either of you know what's a better person for someone else!" Additionally, there would be a definite difference in application, if the pc in his example came to me for Idenics processing. Even if that pc had a full head of hair, I wouldn't consider addressing anything other than baldness with him. How would I know what baldness means to him? How do I know what baldness is connected to? How do I know that five minutes into a session addressing baldness that that pc doesn't come up with a serious self-esteem issue? I don't know anything about the validity of the condition being addressed. But if I were to think to myself something like, "He has a full head of hair and wants to handle baldness! He must be delusional. I need to do such and such a rundown on him. I need to..." then I would be going down that same, old evaluative road of "pretended knowingness". In Part 12 of this series, I gave an actual case history that demonstrates the above points very well. The example I gave was of a client who had wanted to address the subject of telekinesis when he got into Scientology. He had continually expressed that he wished to take this up throughout his 25-year trek on the bridge. Never directly addressing the subject, Scientology tech people either tried to get his attention off of this subject or made him wrong for wanting to address it. It wasn't until he came for Idenics processing that he was allowed to take this subject up. Fifteen minutes into his first session addressing telekinesis, the client came up with an unwanted condition that had been ruining his life, for which telekinesis had been the solution. Handling that condition produced life-changing results for the client. In the above example, this client had presented for handling, for a quarter of a century, the most important item on his case, but no one trusted his perception. An important aspect of Scientology auditing is that the pc must learn to trust the auditor. In Idenics, the processing works because the practitioner has learned to trust the client. End of Part 14 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (205.188.117.20) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 15 of 25 – What An Idenics Practitioner Does I have divided Idenics into two main parts, the mechanics (the questions and processes used and the concepts they are based on) and the application (the way the mechanics are applied to a client). Only by understanding both parts can one hope to comprehend the scope of Idenics. When comparing Idenics to a song, the words of the song would be the mechanics and the music would be the application. Even though these two parts are discussed separately, their relationship to one another is inseparable. The development of Idenics' mechanics was dependent on its application, and visa versa. The same dependency exists in their use with a client. The practicing Scientologist or trained technical person will probably have great difficulty trying to understand Idenics. Concentrating on Idenics' mechanics, they will compare these mechanics to those of Scientology's. From this narrow viewpoint, they will make little or nothing of our mechanics, only seeing them as a small part in the great scheme of Scientology technology. Idenics' application will mean even less to the tech person or practicing Scientologist. Coming from a point of view that must defend the evaluative and judgmental aspects of Scientology tech, they will see Idenics' application as invalid and "theetie-weetie". In an effort to explain our application I have made comments like, "the practitioner must trust the client" and "the answers someone is seeking about themselves is within them". It is not surprising to have a Scientologist take these comments out of context, viewing Idenics' application as "sweetness and light". Making nothing of our application justifies the Scientology approach of dealing with people, as well as the "answers" that Scientology thrust down the throats of its members. However, the point that I was attempting to make regarding our application is simple and straightforward. The Idenics practitioner doesn't operate from any preconceived or predetermined ideas about a client when working with that individual. The practitioner's full source of information about someone that they are processing is with that person. This is all that I was trying to communicate when I talked about the practitioner trusting the client and the client having the answers about themselves within themselves. Where else would the answers about you be accept with YOU? Who else lived your life or had your experience? How would anyone else know how you responded in some circumstance? How would someone else know the responses you got stuck with or the kinds of incidents you got stuck in? How would anyone else know the subjects that you should address? A practitioner of Scientology professes to know these things, where a practitioner of Idenics doesn't. That's the difference, end of story. Without being submerged in a quagmire of "pretended knowingness", the Idenics practitioner is not involved with all the speculative activities of a Scientology tech person. Without these encumbrances, a practitioner of Idenics can be completely focused on the job at hand. Even though a practitioner doesn't try to figure out, analyze or evaluate a client, his role is far from passive. Knowing that all the "answers" necessary in an individual's case resolution are with that person, an Idenics practitioner's sole activity is to assist that individual to ACCESS those answers. Accessing these answers on one's own is extremely difficult. The reason for this difficulty is covered in the mechanics of Idenics, more specifically, in the subjects of viewpoints and identities. I define a viewpoint, simply, as a point from which one perceives. Two people in a room are viewing that room from different viewpoints. Even if they were crowded together looking out of a tiny window, there would still be some difference in viewpoint. Add to that the difference in tastes and evaluations of what is seen, and we get a great difference between the two individuals. Even though each is unique, the common denominator between all viewpoints is that every viewpoint is limited. For example, you and I, sitting in chairs facing one another, are looking from different viewpoints. From my viewpoint I can see the wall behind you and you can't. From your viewpoint, you can see the wall behind me and I can't. Why? Because the points from which we perceive are limited as they only see within a certain parameter. This doesn't mean that WE are limited; we could turn around or switch chairs. But as long as we are in those viewpoints, we are limited to that degree. Now imagine that you are sitting in a chair facing a wall. On the other side of that wall are some "answers", for your eyes only. From the chair, the limitations of that viewpoint prevent you from seeing those answers. All of the wonderful information that others give to you, such as what's on the other side of their walls and what the wall is made up of, is completely irrelevant. The only relevant action is for you to get up out of the chair, walk around to the other side of the wall, thereby shifting to a viewpoint that is appropriate in order to inspect those answers. But if you were stuck in the chair, and didn't even know that you were stuck there, you could stare at that wall forever and not be able to see what's on the other side. All you would be able to do from the viewpoint, "in the chair", is think about, figure-figure, and speculate regarding what is on the opposite side of that wall. You might be very susceptible to others' explanations and answers, which are, at their best, only additional speculation. However, from the appropriate viewpoint, "standing on the other side of the wall", viewing and inspecting what is there is easy. The above explanation provides another way of saying what an Idenics practitioner does. The practitioner assists the client in freeing themselves from certain viewpoints and assuming the appropriate one from which they can inspect information relative to an issue's resolution. Not knowing what the appropriate viewpoint is for any client at any time, the practitioner must be extremely familiar with the Idenics mechanics and skilled in their application. By asking the client the proper questions, a practitioner will get close enough to the mark to where the individual will drop into the appropriate viewpoint. From there, the practitioner needs only facilitate the client's looking at and inspection of what is perceivable from that viewpoint. Even though there may be more than one viewpoint or identity connected with a condition and needing to be worked with, complete resolution of the unwanted condition is usually very fast. As a bonus, one may resolve conditions not directly addressed that were somehow connected to the viewpoint or identity one was handling. When someone would ask John what he did, he would usually respond with a simple answer: "I get the client to look, and keep their nose in it until they have fully inspected what is there. That is all I do". In truth, that is a good statement of what an Idenics practitioner does. The practitioner has lots of questions that they can ask. But every question is just another way of saying, "Have a look". End of Part 15 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (205.188.117.20) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 16 of 25 – Mock-ups & Addivites A mock-up is a picture someone makes of something that is real or imagined. For example, a person gets a picture of his father, someone who actually exists or existed. The person may also be able to envision an orange, put it out in front of them, put two wings on the orange, and have it do a little dance. That's also a mock-up, but this mock-up is imagined. Everyone has the ability to mock-up, even though that ability varies from person to person. This ability, like any ability, can go on automatic, being performed unknowingly. When it goes out of control, the ability becomes an aberration. A person's "case" is composed of mock-ups that they cling to unknowingly. The "cement" that holds these mock-ups there, is some apparent value. I have taken great pains to describe the extent to which an Idenics practitioner goes to not evaluate for clients. Evaluation, at its best, is only speculation. The odds on being able to figure out exactly how things are for someone else are astronomically slim. Certainly an evaluation may "indicate" to a person, but the liability of evaluating for someone far outweighs any possible value. Having some ring of truth, a person can embrace the evaluation because it explains some condition that they have been trying to resolve. The person gets some temporary relief, but the condition persists. Because of its workability, even if only short-lived, the person tends to hold on to that explanation. Now they have the explanation that is additive to the unresolved condition. In Part 12 of this series, entitled Additives, I gave an example of a woman with a low self-image of herself buying a book about improving one's self-esteem. In the book the author made an evaluation that peoples' low self-esteem came from ideas that their parents instilled in them when they were young. When reading that statement, the woman remembered that her father had, throughout her life, told her that she was worthless. After recalling this, she felt better, and continued to feel good for the rest of that day. The following day the woman's condition of low self-esteem returned. But since the author's evaluation had explained her condition, she held on to the explanation. Continuing with the above scenario, we find the woman completely buying into the idea that low-self esteem comes from ideas that parents instill in their children. She uses this idea, operates from it, and teaches it to others. The idea becomes a valuable piece of knowledge for her. Any attempt by others to invalidate that idea is met with a vehement defense. She defends this idea because it had "indicated" to her when she read it. She defends this idea because she had experienced some relief after reading it. But let's explore this example further and find exactly what indicated and how that relief came about. A few years after reading the book, the woman went into an Idenics session and addressed her issue of low self-esteem. In the session, she discovered that her father had told her that she was worthless almost every day since she was able to walk. However, during her childhood, she never bought into that idea. Her father's statement had bothered her, but she just blew it off, thinking her father was a domineering lout. Then, when she was 15 years old, her boyfriend dumped her. Devastated, she returned home, sat at the kitchen table and cried. Walking into the room, her father asked her what was happening and she told him. His response was, "See, I told you that you were worthless!" This time, she bought into his statement as it explained why her boyfriend had broken up with her. This was the beginning of her condition of low self-esteem. The ramifications of the above example are far reaching. People have cases that are composed of compulsive mock-ups and solutions. Instead of just assisting these people to let go of these things, many therapies provide opportunities for the individual to accumulate more mock-ups and solutions to explain their unwanted conditions. Scientology, as well as many of its offshoots, does this. Take for example, the insistance that there is some incident that is common to everyone. In this scenario, everyone had this incident, and all responded to it adversely. I'll wager that I could make up such an incident, invent processes to handle the effects of that incident on people, advertise my service with certain newsgroups, and make money. I'll give it a try: "I've just discovered the source of "somatics" in human beings! 75 trillion years ago, on the planet Zortch, all beings from this sector of the galaxy were implanted with a series of invisible train tracks that would continue to run throughout every body they would occupy thereafter. Invisible trains were also implanted to run on these tracks. Every time the trains cross in front of one another, the person gets a somatic. I am the only person who has ever been able to discover the secrets of undoing the horrible affects of this incident, and I broke my back three times during the research. But I have returned to write up these confidential materials for you. Now, for only $3000, you can purchase these materials and run out the Wall of Trains!" I'll bet that if I created a more serious version of the above and published it, there would be people who contact me saying that what I wrote had indicated to them. You might think that it's ridiculous that anyone would respond to my advertisement and purchase my service. But I'll further wager that some people reading the above story actually mocked up a picture of it as they read it. One does have the ability to mockup something that is imagined. What if someone reading a seriously written account of the "Train Track Incident", had once been hit by a train. Maybe, when they read my account, they even got a somatic. If all they were aware of was that they had a somatic, accompanied by some negative emotions and feelings, they might feel that my story had indicated to them. With a bit of salesmanship, I may even be able to sell them the rundown for 3Gs. If I had some good general processes on the rundown, people might be able to get some charge off. For example, if some process got close to some existing condition, the person might take a look and have some positive result. But look at all the additive nonsense that the person might take on while doing my rundown. They may end up taking more on than they let go of. Additionally, they could spend two years solo auditing those materials to get some wins. It would be much easier if they could just address their conditions directly, probably handling those issues in a much shorter time. I could give many examples in Scientology and other subjects of the phenomena that I've written about in this article. But I'm certain that anyone, who reads and understands what I've written, can come up with plenty of his/her own examples. If you are a well-intentioned practitioner who evaluates for or uses evaluative materials on your clients, please take a look at what you are doing. Just because what you do may indicate to certain clients who keep paying for more services, doesn't mean that you are doing the best thing for them. And if you are a client receiving this kind of service, please inspect what is actually indicating to you and what about the process is in fact workable. End of Part 16 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (205.188.117.20) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 17 of 25 – Obsolete Tech Many people have asked me why I no longer use Dianetics technology, especially since I was once such a strong proponent of that method. They wonder if I now believe that Dianetics is unworkable. For many years, Dianetics was state of the art in the field of therapy. However, with the advent of Idenics, Dianetics became obsolete. However, I would never say that Dianetics doesn't work. If one were trying to cut down a tree and only had a pocketknife, the knife would be workable in cutting down the tree. One may skim the skin off their knuckles and it might take a long time to accomplish the task, but a pocketknife would be workable in their endeavor. But if they had a power saw, why would a person continue to use the less effective tool? What it would take to accomplish in hundreds of hours using Dianetics would only require a few hours with Idenics. There are numerous examples of less efficient ideas and mechanics used in Dianetics when compared to those employed in Idenics. In this write-up, I will describe the difference in a couple of the major concepts. One of the main tenets of Dianetics is that the source of aberration is the engram, a picture recording of a time of physical pain and unconsciousness. In other words, the basic kind of incident at the bottom of any unwanted condition would contain physical pain and unconsciousness. John Galusha, a man who probably understood and could apply the mechanics of Dianetics as well or better than anyone, found that the above statement is not true. He discovered that there could be an incident containing physical pain and unconsciousness where an unwanted condition began, but that this was not inevitably the case. There is an incident where any unwanted condition started, but it isn't necessarily as described in an engram. In Idenics, we refer to this initial incident as a "confusion", and define a confusion as a disruption of one's intention or expectation. In life, a person is almost always operating from some identity. In an occasion when what the person is being is not capable of handling the situation, this incident would constitute a confusion. One of the most important understandings of this primary event is that what would be a confusion for one person is not necessarily a confusion for another person. In other words, what constitutes a confusion is an individual matter. This understanding exposes a great limitation in the mechanics of Dianetics. Not all that dissimilar from the example given in Part 16 of this series of Hubbard's insistence that there were incidents common in all people, LRH incorrectly assumed that there was a common TYPE of incident at the bottom of all people's unwanted conditions. This incorrect assumption has caused great difficulty for many people. The application of the supposition regarding engrams has produced enormous hardship for numerous pcs. A case history described in Part 12 of this series, demonstrates the extent of difficulty to which this assumption about engrams can cause for a person. In this example, a client came to us wanting to resolve a major condition that had persisted for most of his life. Even though he had addressed this condition many times throughout his 25-year trek up the entire bridge of Scientology, the condition remained. Every time the condition was addressed, starting with his first Dianetics session, the pc would come up with an incident where he was on a playground and a little girl had looked at him. Since the event contained no physical pain, unconsciousness or even loss, auditors had adjudicated that at the best, this incident was only a "lock". Therefore, according to the mechanics of Dianetics, the auditor would abandon the incident, having the pc look earlier for the elusive engram. In the first Idenics session addressing his unwanted condition, the client discovered that the incident that his attention had always first gone to was where that condition had begun. Even though it had previously been treated only as a minor event on a hypothesized chain of more important events, that incident WAS the confusion for that individual. Addressing that confusion properly with Idenics, the unwanted condition was quickly resolved. Here's another dramatic case history of someone bogged down by the application of Dianetic theory. Only the client's name has been changed. Bill had inherited a large and successful business that made outdoor, recreational equipment and accessories. Not having much interest in the business end of the company, Bill's passion and activity was focused on the testing and use of the company's products. His time was spent with activities such as skydiving, going on dangerous canoe and rafting trips, and racing motorcycles. During this career, he'd had more incidents of physical pain and unconsciousness than the average person would have in twenty lifetimes. Exposed to Scientology, Bill went into a local mission for auditing. During his initial interview, the case supervisor discovered Bill's "Evil Kenevil-type" history. Bill's auditing program focused on handling his numerous engrams. However, Bill's auditing produced no results. Unable to get anywhere with him, Bill was sent to the local org for handling, where his lack of auditing results continued. From there he was sent to ASHO, and eventually to Flag for case handling. His "no-case-gain" response to engram running and all manners of repair and review auditing continued in all of these organizations. Because he trusted the auditors and case supervisors, didn't complain, and had plenty of money, the CoS continued auditing Bill for several years. Finally, after over a thousand hours of auditing without any substantial results, Bill left the CoS. Coming to Survival Services, Bill relayed to me his unsatisfactory experiences with Scientology. During our meeting, the discussion turned to a less serious subject. We found that we both shared a common interest in motorcycles. While exchanging harrowing motorcycle experiences, Bill told me about a time when he was riding on the highway with his daughter on the back of his bike and had gotten into an accident. His daughter was miraculously unhurt, but he had almost been decapitated and had sustained serious physical damage. A flight-for-life helicopter flew him to the nearest hospital while he went in and out of consciousness, barely surviving the incident. He underwent heavy, re-constructive surgeries and was in the hospital for many months. But during the entire ordeal, his attention was mainly on a big, upcoming motorcycle race, concerned that he might not get out of the hospital in time to participate in this important event. His story ended with him being released from the hospital the day before the race, qualifying for the race and winning it! Listening to Bill recount this experience, it was obvious that the pain and unconsciousness that he had undergone had little importance to and created no adverse affects for him. Later, Bill decided to try Idenics processing. It was quickly discovered that his incidents of physical pain and unconsciousness were not confusions for Bill. What he wanted to work on were difficulties he'd always had with relationships. These difficulties were what he had gone into Scientology to handle, but were never addressed. Within a few hours of Idenics processing, he was able to resolve these difficulties and was extremely satisfied with the results. Another important part of the mechanics of Dianetics is the running of earlier similar incidents. Even though this technique is workable and does get charge off in most cases, we have discarded its use in Idenics. By asking for earlier similar incidents, the client tends to jump from one identity to another, leaving identities not fully handled, and thereby leaving unwanted conditions unresolved. Using Idenics' mechanics produces much more stable results in a much shorter period of time. In this write-up, I have only discussed two obsolete aspects of the mechanics used in Dianetics. But with this discussion, I believe that I've answered the question of why, even though it may have its workability, I no longer use the technology of Dianetics. End of Part 17 of 25 | ||
| Anonymous (152.163.101.12) |
LIFE AFTER THE CoS By Mike Goldstein Part 18 of 25 – Entities Many people have, in different ways, asked me about Idenics' position on the subject of entities. Answering these sorts of questions will take a bit of explanation, as within the Idenics technology there is not a specific position that we take regarding entities. I would give the same answer if I were asked about Idenics' position on past lives. Entities and past lives are not subjects of Idenics' mechanics. There are no processes or questions where a practitioner directs a client's attention to either of these topics. However, this does not preclude a client from bringing up this subject matter. In other words, a client may have a position on entities or past lives, but the practitioner doesn't. Any issues the client wishes to address are taken up by the practitioner, but only with the use of Idenics techniques. Over the years, we have had a lot people who came to us for Idenics processing who had previously been involved with Scientology. Prior to their involvement with Idenics, many of these clients had been on OT 3, NOTS (New Era Dianetics for OTs), or the equivalent of these levels in the independent field. These levels are exclusively concerned with the addressing of entities, or BTs and clusters, as they are referred to in Scientology. Even though a client may have brought up the subject of entities in session, all of these clients main attention was on specific issues that they wanted to handle. Most of these clients' issues were resolved quickly with the application of Idenics technology. Any difficulties with entities connected to these issues were resolved by just handling the issues. Some clients with a Scientology history of auditing BTs and clusters have come to us with a lot of their attention on entities. However, after processing these people with Idenics, any upsets difficulties or confusions regarding entities were cleared up for these clients. Most importantly, issues that clients had unsuccessfully been trying to handle on Scientology advanced levels that addressed BTs and clusters finally got resolved with Idenics processing. I can recall a client who had a serious condition that he had been trying to resolve since he first got into Scientology. Having made it to OT 5, he had been making frequent trips to Clearwater to address his condition with NOTs auditing. When this condition would kick in on the man, he would go to Flag for auditing. As he had described, "I would clean up all the BTs and clusters connected with my condition and feel good. I'd go home but the condition would come back. I would then go back to Flag and find more BTs and clusters and run these out until I felt fine about the condition. But after I'd return home, the condition would sooner or later come back. I'd then need to go back to Flag for more NOTs auditing". Frustrated, the man started looking in the independent field for assistance. Finding out about Idenics, he came to us for processing. During the week that he was here he resolved his condition. Additionally, there was no further mention of BTs or clusters by the client. As far as what occurred in the above-mentioned cases, I can only speculate. I won't give my opinion on whether entities exist or not, but I will speculate on two possible scenarios. Various clients have originated both of these scenarios in different ways. In each case, the scenario that was voiced was true for that individual. Scenario #1 – What the client had previously believed to be entities were in fact identities. Attached to the major identities were insignificant or "locked" identities that disappeared when the major ones were handled. Since identities are not the individual, they can appear to the person to be separate beings. On Scientology upper levels, people are educated with the existence, characteristics, and activity of entities. As explained in my previous write-ups concerning additives, the individual can fit their actual case into the explained framework regarding BTs and clusters. Auditing levels such as OT 3 or NOTs, the person thinks they are auditing BTs and clusters when in actuality, they are handling identities and locked identities. Since, on these Scientology levels the identities are not being properly or fully addressed, they don't always get completely handled. This is why people spend so much time auditing on these levels, keep coming up with more entities to handle, and don't always resolve their unwanted conditions. Scenario #2 – Two questions have puzzled people who have audited on their NOTs levels. (1) How does a person get into a situation where other beings are attached to them and (2) how is it that they are adversely and unknowingly affected by this attachment? There are explanations available in the NOTs materials, but many people don't feel completely satisfied by these answers. They search for a deeper explanation, and some hope it would be revealed on later OT levels. In the NOTs training materials, LRH said that it was an interesting fact that the aberration of the BT or cluster is similar to the aberration of the pc. Hubbard had his explanations for this statement, but the important point here is that he noticed a similarity that existed. The similar aberration in the pc that Hubbard noticed is actually an identity. BTs and clusters having a similar or mutual-type aberration attach themselves to the identity. A pc can blow off BTs and clusters and get relief, but as long as the identity remains, BTs and clusters can later attach to it. This explains what happens in a case like the one mentioned above. The pc has a condition they want to resolve, they receive NOTs auditing to handle BTs and clusters connected with that condition, feel better, but the condition comes back. The pc then does additional NOTs auditing on the condition and discovers more BTs and clusters attached that need to be handled. Idenics undercuts NOTs auditing and renders it unnecessary. By handling the identity, anything attached to it leaves. Furthermore, there is nothing still there for additional entities to attach themselves to. ******************** Some clients have expressed a reality that is made up of parts of both of the above scenarios. I leave it up to the reader to find his or her own reality. I cannot provide a definitive answer as to why Idenics processing works as it does in the above mentioned cases. However, what I do know is that it does work. I can say with confidence that running levels that directly address the subject of entities, BTs, or clusters, is not necessary. What's more, many Idenics clients who had previously been heavily into the running of entities were more difficult to process than people not involved with entities. Clients believing that BTs and clusters were causing all of their problems have had a rougher time in session and have taken longer than clients without those beliefs. End of Part 18 of 25 |
