A great resource

Chris Shelton

We are posting some videos here as a first introduction to Chris Shelton who recently left the Sea Org.

In his own words, (published on Mike Rinder’s blog in February this year) he says:

“I spent my entire adult life as a professional Scientology staff member. I started taking classes when I was 15 and joined staff at the age of 17. I joined the Sea Organization when I was 25 and stayed in until I was 43.

I trained as a Pro Course Supervisor and Word Clearer, Class 0 Auditor and Purification Rundown In-Charge. I also trained as a Data Series Evaluator and Org Manager, amongst many other things. I completed all of The Basics books and lectures after they were released in 2006, as well as the LRH Congresses and a panoply of other lectures and materials (including many issues that public may never see as they were “confidential Sea Org references” concerning management and administration). When it comes to Scientology and Sea Organization policy and tech, I can unequivocally state that I am an expert.”

The full article can be seen here http://www.mikerindersblog.org/chris-shelton-speaks/

In the first two videos, Chris was interviewed by Karen De La Carriere earlier this year – he describes the exact mechanism behind the failure of the Ideal Org campaign, which he was integrally involved in. These videos are equally applicable to what is happening in South Africa right now with the “Ideal Org Alliance”.

The next 5 videos are a series called “What is wrong with Scientology” in which Chris addresses pertinent non-optimum issues existing in the Church. They are concise, simple, very easily understood, and certainly give food for thought.

Although not specific to South Africa, these videos are applicable to all Scientologists everywhere – whether in or out of the Church. They are also a perfect tool to forward to anyone you know that may be starting to “look”.

Acknowledgements go to Karen, Mike and of course, Chris for providing this material.

Links below:








57 thoughts on “A great resource

  1. Since late 2009, I have done a LOT of forbidden Internet research on the Church of Scientology. That is to say, I researched the unofficial versions of what happens in the church from A -Z as much as I could find. I have read and seen the most bizarre, shocking, and sensational, revealing, informative, exposing, ridiculous, and heart-breaking stuff about the church of Scientology that could be found.

    Then recently, along came Chris – freshly escaped from the Sea Org to make some of the best educational videos available. Thank you so very much Chris.

    Chris is a remarkable man in many ways. For starters, he had the ability to completely and promptly snap out of the valence of a $cientologist. Each one of his presentations are done in a down to earth analytical way – to cut right through the crap, the hype, the deception, and the lies – right down to the chase.

    Chris is making these presentations for educational purposes and not a ‘money-making-scheme’ as the official church hate mail would say to the flock about those who expose the crimes, labelling them as being paid by the psychiatric industry, to say what they are saying.

    Christ not only has a big heart, but personifies integrity regained. Big and able enough to have asked to be forgiven for his part in any hurt or damage caused to people by his own actions. Not hollow words as this is his contribution for ‘making up the damage’ in his role for building the all devouring machine of $cientology.

    NO ONE – can ignore the sharp focus of what Chris has to say. I understand that this Blog is monitored by the church, hence the lawyers letter to Ryan Hogarth. (Whatever was the upshot of that?)

    So I will have some direct communication with the church right here. Albert d Beer, are you reading this? This is a personal invitation to you, to take some time off, to sit down, and watch these videos for real. Take off that $cientology valence. The real you is a jewel. I trust that you realise Albert that you can leave right now. Outside the confines of the imaginary prison walls – you will find much love, as ex-$cientologists are some of the most remarkable and forgiving people that you will ever find in this world. Albert, you had dreams of becoming an architect. It is never too late to follow your own heart and dreams.

    There is a big shit storm coming your way. You can jump ship right now.

    For anyone else lurking, or in doubt, in fear, terrified of consequences – please replace your name with Albert’s above. Once you have watched these videos – you will see $cientology cannot survive its own destruction, which is destined to soon to arrive at your local Org.

    • Jane, this is what strikes me too: “he had the ability to completely and promptly snap out of the valence…”

      We’ve seen again and again that the process of leaving the Miscavige cult is long and difficult. People need time to decompress, to process what has happened, to reorient themselves to a world where they can speak freely and entertain previously forbidden thoughts.

      But Chris (along with Jillian Schlesinger, another recent SO escapee) has very quickly moved from loyal foot soldier to active and articulate critic. Is this just because he’s an exceptionally strong-minded person, or has something else changed?

      Perhaps the church’s thought-control is weakening among those still in? Perhaps the existence of a lively “ex” community, like the one around this blog, makes it easier for people to make that big step out into freedom, knowing that they’re not alone with their troubling thoughts and doubts? In any case, it’s a hopeful sign.

      • Has something else changed? Well…

        The internet, and the ever increasing amount of information available through the Internet, is a big change. Hard to believe, but it wasn’t that long ago that there was no (widely used) Internet.

        The explosion of information began in the 1980s, with the availability of many key secret $cientology documents, obtained by way of search warrants during July 1977. By late 1979, many of these documents, including items by LRH, had become the subject of news stories, and were circulating around.

        In 1982/83 came the crushing of the Mission Holders, and the purging of many top people such as former Senior Case Supervisor/Class XII David Mayo. At that point, there was a genuine schism in the Church. Independent groups abounded, and many of the top people were now willing to talk, and did.

        Next, in 1984, came Armstrong vs Church of Scientology, and more documents became available.

        Then came two books: ‘Messiah or Madman?’, by a Class VIII, OT 7 (old and new), FEBC grad, and another book, ‘Barefaced Messiah’, by an established biographer. Each book contained numerous in-depth interviews with people who had worked closely with L. Ron Hubbard.

        By the mid 1990s, the Internet was up and running, and the above information, and additional information, began appearing on the Net.

        Then came things such as Internet News Groups (where people could talk to each other in a group), and then Internet videos.

        Meanwhile, inside Scientology, it had been around 20 years since the release of a new OT level – OT levels about which LRH had written in a number of places. The next mysterious OT level is a key component of what keeps a person stuck inside $cientology, and it was missing.

        That, along with a new level of aggressive “fund raising,” made possible by the 1993 IRS deal, began to make people stay away from Scientology. Registrars, per the Hard Sell tech, had always been aggressive, but this was something new and on another level.

        So more and more people began to look at the forbidden Internet, and to read forbidden books.

        And now we have these great videos!

  2. From what I can see most of what Chris is saying about the current corporate Church is true. No doubt about it. My problem with his videos is his constant attacks on LRH. Chis was not there when the technology was being developed and has firmly adopted his own view that LRH ‘invented’ the idea of suppressives in order to explain away processes not working and justify the creation of a lot of harsh ethics and justice policies. My view is that Ron was finding a way out for us and dedicated his life to doing that. Chris is denying scientology’s history. What we see now is the justice policies being used against its own members and former members. This was NEVER the intention of LRH. He gave us a way out and to continually equate him with the corporate Church’s current use of the policies is ill-informed. Chris is probably operating on his own best information, but it is very dangerous ground to constantly vilify LRH. To pluck those policies out of their own time and the circumstances of their day and intimate that LRH EVER intended them to be used the way they are today is, well, I’ll just be kind and say ill-informed again. LRH wasn’t an angel. I for one could not give a rat’s ass. He found a way out of the trap. To constantly equate LRH with the current state of the church is a travesty. He developed admin and ethics policies in an attempt to safeguard the technology. The corporate Church has made a mockery of both of those bodies of data. And guess what, they’re not there to protect the tech. The tech is now being systematically destroyed. LRH knew that all that he discovered could be used for bad purposes. That is what has now happened and lots of people are being hurt. People in the corporate Church are fighting to Keep Scientology Working, but what they are fighting to protect is NOT Scientology. Chris has every right, obviously, to his views, and there is much truth in them. I am just concerned that he is speaking as an authority on an era of Scientology in which he was not involved. Honestly, if you have an SP trying to shut you down you had better know the data on SPs down cold. And if trashing LRH leads people to leave the subject of scientology as well as the Church that is a crying shame and just another chuckle in the shade for the real bad guys who want to see the last of the whole subject, not just the corporate church. Scientology technology works and is alive and well in the field for those who wish to avail themselves of it.

    • To hold the views that you do requires the denial of a lot of information that has become available in the last thirty or so years.

      As has been the case for a long time, there is a difference of opinion between those that have a loyalty to what is *best in Scientology*, and those that have a loyalty to a man: L. Ron Hubbard.

      No one is “attacking” LRH.

      What’s occurring here is insightful analysis and truth-telling.

      And that’s good.

      • I’m with you, B. Partz. There is too much information that refutes the myths we were ‘brought up in’ with regards to both Scientology and to L. Ron Hubbard.

        I am curious though: How exactly did LRH give us a way out? My experience was that it’s damn hard to get out! What LRH did was a mind control that his was the only way and you had nothing if you did not have Scientology. And if you dare to disagree, to have a mind of your own, a declare is waiting for you. Well, those of us out are finding out differently. I, for one, have more now than when I was in Scientology.

    • Nora, You’ve hit the nail on the head.
      There is a huge difference between Scientology and the Church of Scientology. The first one works – the second one has failed to deliver the first.
      I’d like to point out to the many who make statements like ‘there’s no such thing as a Clear’, or the upper levels don’t deliver what was promised, that firstly only a true Clear would know about the state of Clear, and as with all states of awareness, one is only aware of ONLY the next level above. So, for those initiates at the bottom of the Bridge – you look like fools making comments on this arena.
      I note that many list their training levels, but omit to state their case level. And yet call themselves ‘experts’ in Scientology. Scientology is first and foremost NOT about the management of Orgs, or the SO, or such management items. Auditing received?
      (And in all of my comments, I work on the premise that auditing was done on tech a la LRH. Obviously altered auditing and processing will produce altered results from that intended.)
      Then the man – Ron Hubbard: let’s stack him up against anyone you lot want to, using any production statistic: number of words published, minutes of lectures delivered, search and discovery notes, or whatever. And simple processing steps that work, every time when applied, to change conditions. Please – just name any other person on planet Earth with their production stats, you criticals. Because I’ve tried that to get a measure of this man. He outstrips the next nearest by a factor of more than 5.
      I once had a long afternoon with one of four of Ron’s secretaries at St Hill. In the mornings, she said, there would be four baskets two feet high each with Ron’s output from the night before. She and the others were 90 words per minute typists – it would take them the whole day to process their basket, only to have that filled again the next morning. Then look at Ron’s daily timetable in those days: and he would only go to his research room upstairs around 9:30 pm the earliest. He would be up around 5:30 am. Between those hours he had enough sleep, and wrote out in longhand enough to keep four 90 wpm ladies busy for the whole next day. Day in and day out. And the writings were the results of research or search.
      You lot are going to end up throwing out the baby with the bathwater in your anger and misinformation. You act no different than the hordes of central Europe when they threw out the Romans – they threw out the management systems of civil society and bathing bodies more than once a week – everything associated with Rome. They ended up with dysfunctional city managements and with bodies that stank to high heaven – so they invented perfume.
      And you lot are busy inventing a perfume . . . . and that, my dear flock, is not the solution.

      • There is how I feel about various bits of information – some of them hearsay and some of them a matter of record – and there is also personal integrity. I’ve been tempted to dismiss everything I hear from anyone not in “good standing” with the church. I’ve also been tempted to dismiss everything connected with the mere word “Scientology”. The truth has nothing to do with either one nor anything in the middle. The truth is what I know to be workable. I’m Clear and have a little training and have given a few hundred, maybe a couple of thousand hours auditing. There is much that I agree with Chris Shelton about and I think he has done a very good job in his videos. But I don’t agree that Ron intended to create the cult that exists today inside the church.

        I agree with the way I’ve always taken KSW1 – it works, don’t mess with it until you understand it and can do it exactly as stated. I disagree that it can’t be improved upon but no way before the above has been achieved.

        What LRH says about SPs is very much in line with what several other researchers have also found – they exist and represent a minority of the population but can foul things up way out of proportion to their numbers. They are also very hard to reach with help.

        The baby and the bathwater are still somewhat confused to me but I know that there is much to be salvaged from the subject.

      • Frik my bra, you said it pal! I like eeit plenty, those that leave the game are often blamed for this or that despite all their MASSIVE contributions while in it. Screw that. Everyones a critic until its their head under the guillotine!

        Let those who choose not to bath as the Romans did stay stinky. Folks who like perfume and dislike their Baths LRH style I say etu brute! Since when did you y’all throw out your common sense with the watered baby??

  3. Of course as usual I tend to be the odd man out which was my fate when I was in the Church, so I’m pretty much used to it.

    The first lesson I learned when studying Scientology and then later while researching Scientology on the internet is to not believe everything you read.

    One of the things I objected to in Chris’ presentation was saying that “justice prevailed” which in my opinion shows his support of the biggest and most insidious cult there is and that of course is the cult of the*state*.

    Personally I never thought “justice prevailed” at all in the case of the Scientology Eleven.

    If “justice prevailed” than the eleven would have had a very public trial which would have also exposed the Government’s *Top Secret* efforts to curtail the First Amendment guarantee of “Freedom of Religion” and CIA’s involvement with several prominent Scientologists in a T/S SCI program using Scientology technology to gain a psychic advantage over the USSR who like the US were involved in Parapsychological research:



    Then Chris calls “Operation Snow White” the biggest domestic spying operation in US history.

    Well this may be true according to disinfopedia:


    But actually that mantel should be worn by our own Government:


    As any actual historian will agree:


    Just a couple of points of contention regarding Chris’ presentation.

    • “the biggest and most insidious cult there is and that of course is the cult of the*state*.

      100% agree on that and the all the rest of your comment.

      Would be good to share notes with you.

    • Snow White (and the G.O) was the largest private Intelligence operation in the history of the United States. What upset the government was that it targeted their offices and files. They didn’t care much about abuses to private citizens.

      Remember that it was the FBI that had arrested Paulette Cooper after she had been set up and framed by Scientology in late 1972.

      The covert “dirty tricks” ops against private citizens, such as Paulette Cooper, and also the Mayor of Clearwater, Florida, were revealed accidentally during the July 1977 raids by the FBI. Then, with the documents released by court order in late 1979, legal/civil action was beginning, grand juries convening, etc, concerning those and other ops.

      The outrageous behavior overseen and directed by LRH for years, applying his ALWAYS ATTACK mentality,, was unraveling. LRH had been listed as a co-conspirator, but his wife had taken the rap for him, going to prison in his place. But there were many more documents that needed to be shredded to hide LRH’s direction of these activities.

      Perhaps it’s time for those newly out of corporate Scientology to begin to re-view this area.

      Examine the available documentation.

      Listen to Nancy Many’s video which addresses the topic of Paulette Cooper.

      LRH wanted Paulette Cooper destroyed.

      Cooper was being spied on. There was a Scientology plant in her apartment building. It had been discovered that Cooper was corresponding with Sara Northrup, LRH’s 2nd wife. LRH wanted Cooper stopped at any cost.

      LRH had developed what he called “Scientology Intelligence tech.” There were three parts to this tech: Spying, Evaluation, and Attack. Rank and file Scientologists know the Evaluation part as the Data Series. The other two parts are Confidential.

      This was the tech that Mary Sue, under the direction of her husband, was applying.

      It was quite mad, and still is.

      And LRH “Scientology Intelligence tech” is still part of Scientology.

  4. I have no problem with insightful analysis and truth-telling. In each of Chris’ videos I can see some truths and some areas where he simply lacks information. I failed as a Scientologist by putting my church on automatic. I didn’t really look and evaluate and come to my own decisions about what was right with it and wrong with it. I don’t intend to do the same as an indie. It worries me that often new people leave the church and each of their opinions somehow become ‘truths’. I’m sure LRH made errors and I am not trying to deify him. I admire him for developing a technology that works for me and many that I know. And I don’t want to personally attack Chris. But if I am in error it is not because I’m ‘denying’ anything. I am either not aware of it or I have analyzed it and found it to be incorrect. I won’t put my new independence on automatic without evaluating the source of the data. Not everyone who makes a video is an expert.

    • Nora,

      Doncha know that anyone who can make a powerpoint presentation with a laser pointer is considered an “expert” 😉

      But seriously Chris makes some valid points but then conflates the Religion of Scientology with the Church of Scientology which are mutually exclusive while saying that he isn’t.

      Then he commits the most odious crime of all by calling Scientology a “belief system”.

      Yet there is no policy or HCOB that I know of that says one has to believe in Scientology.

      For example a touch assist has always worked on any one I’ve ever done one on someone whether they believed it worked or not.

      • I agree remoteviewed and thank you for all he informative links.

      • Remoteviewed, it IS a belief system. People have the policies and bulletins and gems like, LOOK, DON’T LISTEN. However, they believe everything LRH said just because he said it and now do the same with David Miscavige. It is a belief system. Sorry.

        And now many don’t want to ‘believe’ truths that are being revealed about the man and the subject, because it upsets their beliefs!

        It is a belief system.

      • If you ever get a chance, listen to the Class VIII lectures – unedited. You may change your mind about not having to believe anything in Scientology.

        The “fixed glare” total certainly demanded by Scientology exceeds “believing,” and enters the realm of fanaticism.

        I understand what you’re saying about not having to “believe” in Scientology, but, really, it’s not that simple. It does sound good, however, and I can remember when I would tell others much the same thing.

        Probably though, this is neither the time nor the place to discuss that.

      • Ah yes B Partz and HC 44.

        The anti-Scientology and obviously Hubbard tag team.

        BTW I listened to the lecture that you’ve mentioned and there is nowhere in any part of that lecture where Hubbard says you must believe or accept what he says in faith.

        I suggest you read the article Personal Integrity and the DAB How to Study Dianetics where he urges students of the subject to actually test these data for themselves.

        As far as I know there are no such admonishment in studying any subject school or College.

        Freud or whoever said that’s the way it is and that’s the way it is. No effort on the Teacher or the Professor’s to inspect these data themselves.

        Talk about a *belief system*.

        A least religions are upfront about claiming they are purely based on belief and not authoritarianism or what is considered “conventional ‘wisdom'” for instance at one time it was considered even in the DSM that homosexuality was “aberrant behavior” that is until the GLBLT lobby lobbies against being called “aberrant” then all of sudden it’s normal to have “latent homosexual tendencies” or whatever.

        Another thing at least Scientology to a large part is based on the basic Scientific Method:


        Nothing more and nothing less.

        While it seems that much “Science” what is appropriately known as “Soft Science” like Psychiatry for example is based exclusively on theory and peer pressure.

        Like the above theory noted until it depopulalized out of existence.

  5. Noracuriston, how do you know what LRH intended?

    By the way, I describe the camp I’m in as:

    1. Not interested in auditing anymore in any way shape or form
    2. Quite happy with the gains I’ve made in my training and processing
    3. I believe the lower levels of the Bridge are quite beneficial
    4. I believe the upper levels of the Bridge might be therapeutic to some but certainly offer nothing even close to what is promised in Scientology
    5. I believe that no matter how many negative things might be true about LRH, this doesn’t change what might be workable about the technology he developed.

    BUT…I think it is quite dangerous (mentally) to believe that since LRH did some good work that it’s therefore wrong to point out important negative things about LRH’s life, or about other parts of Scientology that were clearly wrong from the get-go.

    Like you said, you don’t give a rat’s ass. But many honest people do.

    Does the fact that LRH lied about what a Clear is mean that Dianetics does not work at all? I don’t think so. But why did LRH lie about the state of Clear? What could the latter fact indicate about the prior?

    Is it possible for both things to be true…for Dianetics to be a fully workable science of the mind AND that LRH lied about what the State of Clear is?

    There’s nothing wrong with asking these questions; it’s an interesting debate…and asking such questions is not an “attack” on LRH. Asking such questions is actually an exercise is common sense.

    The fact that LRH said DEFINITIVELY that a Clear was such and such and so and so, and these statements turned out to be obviously false…what does that mean?

    Do you think LRH was confused about the matter? Maybe he was just hopeful? Were the intentions behind these mis-statements benign or sinister? If he was just hopeful about what a Clear could be, why didn’t he just say that instead of making a bunch of false claims about what Clear was?

    We all may have our opinions about LRH’s intentions, but do any of us really know? My objection is merely that you claim to know something which you couldn’t possibly know.

    My goal here is not to make points about Dianetics, but to point out that there are dozens of such questions that could and should be asked about Scientology…and none of these questions should denigrated as mere “attacks” on LRH. That’s bubble-dweller type think in my opinion.

    LRH said the Bridge was the route out of the trap that is the physical universe. He promised full, stable exteriorization at will. He promised full, knowing cause over life and MEST.

    Yet he died in poor physical and metal health according to the people who were with him at the time. How can one fully separate LRH the man from the subject of Scientology…when one should be a reflection of the other.

    Questioning LRH and his methods and motives is LOGICAL. In my opinion, only those who feel Scientology is a “faith” would feel otherwise. Scientology was NEVER meant to be a “faith”.

    • Thank you for your response Deep Six.

      I can see that you have done a lot of searching of your own and have lots of questions that I hope you find answers for. They are good questions and it is important that we each find our own answers.

      I’m not trying to impose my opinions as ‘truth’ either. It is true for me that I don’t care that Ron made mistakes. I understand that that may not be true for others, yourself included.

      The questions you ask and the stance you have taken seem real and honest and they are yours just as mine are mine. I have no problem at all with people asking the hard questions and doing honest investigations.

      For some reason Chris just gets my goat. There are lots of holes in his arguments and yet he portrays himself as an expert.

      I don’t wish to denigrate anyone’s route to their own knowingness. Just hoping that we all continue to question and verify data before accepting it – whether it’s from Ron or anyone else.

      • Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Nora, you say Chris ‘just gets my boat.’

        He has a totally different effect on me. He was there, he was in the thick of it, his story is first hand; it is credible. Chris strikes me as a most sincere person who, from his factual knowledge of how things are in the church, is setting the record straight and trying to actually help us! I have the utmost trust in what he’s revealing.

        Each to his own, hey?

    • Brother, I am confused on your writings. I’m sure you enjoy the benefits of what the Wright brothers brought to us in 1904, or what Henry Ford did. You take those, and you do not question their “methods and motives”. You probably don’t thank them every time you fly or drive somewhere, instead of going by horse cart. You don’t, because their systems they gave us work – most of the time. Of course you don’t stop flying after some idiot pilot doesn’t follow standard SOP and crashes. And 103 passengers are killed.
      Scientology is a practical way of life. And it works when standard SOP is followed. I agree with you, there’s no belief required or implied.
      These meat bags called bodies only last so long, and dropping them is part of the cycle – and Ron would have to drop his at some point. And exactly what condition he was in mentally? Wow! He would have been way up the OT levels – and the so-called witnesses were just Clears plus – except for David Mayo, who does not say what you’re saying. In fact the opposite. And I discount Miscaviage’s version of course.
      I find it strange that the judicial policy of not allowing hearsay in a court room is in place mostly everywhere on this Earth, but hearsay is allowed in public debates.
      There are so many facets of Scientology in the broader sense, and Chris brings to the table but one facet – that which he experienced, and I find that very valuable. But I suspect he has less experience in what Scientology/auditing/OT levels does. But so what? I love and admire what he’s saying and doing!
      A luta contua.

      • One thing I cannot forget so easily, is the fact that LRH did not benefit from his own processes and for nearly his entire adult life he was in poor case shape and in poor health. For most of his adult life, he was not only unethical but criminal.

        With regards the OT levels, I have seen too may OTs (5 – 8) having the hardest times of their lives; in poor health, not winning in life at all; who have failing businesses. Etc. An OT 5, close to many of us, died a young woman. Scientology didn’t help her as it didn’t help Ron.

        I am lucky that I got the best out of Scientology and definitely benefitted. Lucky or just savvy – a bit of both. However, I will not go any further up the Bridge because of what I know and what I’ve observed with my own eyes.

        I’ve also become aware of statements LRH has made, many, that have become absolute truths to many people but which he has not substantiated in any way whatsoever for our inspection. So, to that degree, we ‘believed’. After all, didn’t the great man tell us himself that he is Source and the only one? Now I’m inspecting these LRH statements and finding some of them wanting.

        So Frik, we each have our own experiences, our own observations. If we denigrate Scientology or LRH, we’re entitled to from that standpoint. You’re entitled to your opinion from your viewpoint. So be it.

    • DS 6,

      Where do you get the idea that Ron “lied” about Clear?

      Also these attacks against Scientology were real and were in fact conducted by various agencies of the US and other Governments assisted by various vested interests:


      All *documented*.

      As far as I’m concerned anyone who says otherwise is living in a “bubble”.

      One based on “civics courses” claiming that ours or any one else’s Government would never do such things.

      Please there is more than enough *documentation* that says otherwise obtained through FOIA or dumped by wikileaks.

      This is not to mention many of the dirty deeds done cheap by many of our outstanding Corporate “citizens” and Foundations in order to preserve their “bottom line”.

      Wake up.

      In my opinion many ex-Scientologists are just as gullible and naive as the current fold.

      • The link to the article by David Mayo on Clear, which answers your question, has been posted on this thread, but, so far, it has not been allowed to be seen. (???)

        Google ‘David Mayo, On Clear.’

      • If you are referring to Mayo’s Recollections the section where he discuses clear I already read it when it was first posted on ARS.

        My conclusion about the whole turgid article was it really didn’t say much of anything including the state of clear.

        Moving on.

        Mayo had the audacity to say there were no levels above OT VII yet the HCOB entitled OT VIII was on the Class VIII course he did.

      • I get the idea that Ron lied about clear from his description of Clear in Dianetics:
        A Clear never has colds or accidents, has a soaring IQ, has total recall of his entire life from conception on, has cancer (possibly) and other physical deficiencies repaired, can compute in seconds what the average person needs 30 or more minutes for, and is the first case of a truly rational person. [Dianetics, pgs. 24, 228, 24, 18, 543] A Clear has “an increase in longevity which is at least a hundred to one for every hour of therapy”. [Dianetics, 1975 edition, p.417. Although edited out in newer versions, this claim was indeed made by LRH.]

        I call deliberate deception a lie. LRH presented “the world’s first clear” at the Shrine Auditorium in 1950. It was a dismal failure. Sonya Bianca was supposed to have perfect recall and all the other abilities listed above from Dianetics. However, she couldn’t recall simple physics equations (her field of study at the time) or recall the color of LRH’s tie when he turned his back. Why did LRH present her as a Clear when she obviously wasn’t? Did she deceive LRH or was LRH attempting to deceive the audience? He attempted to explain this by saying he’d accidentally froze her in PT. Really? Does it make any sense that a Clear could loose all abilities simply by hearing the word “now’?

        Hubbard next declared John McMaster the “world’s first real clear.” Although he was also declared ‘Pope’ (for a short time) by LRH and created the Power Processes – Grade 7, he was later declared an SP. By any definition of Clear his life certainly didn’t play out like a person unfettered by a reactive mind, past traumas, or grief, let alone the Dianetic’s definition of Clear.

        Somehow all the amazing abilities one was supposed to achieve by becoming Clear in Dianetics becomes in current Scientology “a being who no longer is affected by past traumas and grief” or “a being who no longer has his own reactive mind”. Hmmmm…
        Is this change due to the fact that LRH’s promises for the state of Clear are completely fabricated? I think so. His original promises could be objectively evaluated. The current definition can’t be evaluated or tested because it’s subjective.

        I believe he was lying about OT powers as well. From 8-8008:
        “A thetan who is completely rehabilitated and can do everything a thetan should do, such as move [matter, energy, space, and time (MEST)] and control others from a distance, or create his own universe; a person who is able to create his own universe or, living in the MEST universe is able to create illusions perceivable by others at will, to handle MEST universe objects without mechanical means and to have and feel no need of bodies or even the MEST universe to keep himself and his friends interested in existence”.[Hubbard, Scientology 8-8008, pg 114 (1st ed), pg. 151 (1990 ed.)

        Have you met a single OT with any of these abilities? You read about changing traffic lights or finding parking spots and that’s about it. Hubbard said OT’s shouldn’t show off abilities. Fine, without showing off they certainly should be better adjusted, happier, more prosperous, healthier as a group than non-OT’s. That simply isn’t the reality.

      • Maggie,

        Despite what you say many find the state worth achieving.

        That is most of us who post here.

        Also there can be various technical reasons why the state once achieved is not stable nor why any abilities regained would not spring forth like a fully armed Zeus is covered in later issues.

        I mean anyone who has 10 fingers has the ability to play the piano. Yet few do without practice.

        For instance eidetic memory or what is called a photographic memory is achieved all the time by some of our friends on the Dark Side and even card counters with practice.

        Others can’t even if their lives depended on it.

        If you read Dianetics he also mentions physiological factors that would prevent someone from achieving those abilities he lists in Chapter II.

        And yes I’ve met some OTs with OT or what the parapsychologists call “psychic ability” who could describe a target in minute detail or had telepathic abilities and others who couldn’t even tell you the color their spouse’s eyes or tell you what they had for breakfast.

        Yet there seems to be statistical data that tend to confirm that such abilities exist:


        which includes testing Scientologists involved in RV:


        So you can write what you want and I’m sure others will agree with you that Ron “lied” but I’ll move on to other things.

  6. Wow, what an interesting range of comments, many of which show a strong sense of conviction for the respective writers.

    ‘Judging a dog by his biscuits’, a jovial remark once made by LRH, is not something one should do, IMHO, unless one has tried them first, and then measured them against OTHER biscuits — to assess ‘the worth of the dog’ and HIS choice of biscuits! 🙂

    By the same token, as a ‘consumer’, one has an inherent obligation, to satisfy one’s self, as to the value, or not, of the ‘biscuits’ in question, and the claims thereto.

    In today’s consumer oriented society, virtually any product on offer, from religion to rhubarb, has the aforementioned obligation.

    Whether biscuits, tools, or faiths, in each single case, the time tested warning applies…….
    “caveat emptor” (Latin — (usage–buyer beware! )).

  7. If 25 years of full time staff and Sea Org experience, thousands of hours of auditing and co-auditing, a full study of all LRH books, Congresses, numerous ACCs, many Tech Vols cover-to-cover, three different Pro Supervisor checksheets and internships (pre and post-GAT), Data Series Evaluator, Book One, Academy and NED auditor training, and innumerable management courses including a full study of LRH FOs and CBOs do not make me an expert on Dianetics and Scientology, then clearly nothing will in the eyes of remoteviewed and Nora. I knew going in to this that not everyone was going to agree with what I had to say. I’m not here to denigrate anyone’s beliefs. My articles and videos speak ffor themselves. I’m talking about the obvious and visible destruction of the Church of Scientology. There are serious and fatal flaws in many of Hubbard’s policies. These are inescapable facts, not my opinion or conjecture. The results are right in front of your eyes.

    • Chris, your videos and write ups are fabulous. To me, you are sincere and what you’ve experienced and what you’re conveying to us from that experience, is most valuable – from the horse’s mouth, so to speak.

      I know that Nora and removeview have some disagreements, but I’ve noted that they are the minority. I take the liberty of thanking you on behalf of the rest of us who appreciate your hard work and efforts to expose the lies.

      LRH lied to us. Perhaps, that is the most unforvigeable thing of all. I know that I trusted him explicitly but perhaps it was some blind faith, which is not alalytical. Waking up to the truth was hard at first but now I’m toughened to it and I’d rather the unpretty truth than hobwash.

      • Thanks and I have noted the minority as well. Like I said, I know that some people are not going to agree me and that’s fine. There are some who can’t seem to accept that L. Ron Hubbard was a human being and a very flawed one at that. It goes along with the nature of Scientology and those who chose to follow it. I’ll go get my laser pointer and return to my Power Point presentations now.;-)

    • If a guy studies every book and takes every course on the subject of Ford trucks, and still can’t fix a Ford truck, I can’t think of him as an expert. I’ve known people in my life who got exactly what they were looking for from Scientology, and people who were properly trained and able to deliver those results. I’ve even seen things some people might call miracles, resulting from correct applications of Dianetics and Scientology. I’ve applied it myself to good results, sometimes startlingly good, even “miraculous”, and I’ve been in since 1972, and I’ve been on staff and in the SO, and I still don’t call myself an expert. Far from it, I’ve still got a long ways to go. Sorry, Chris, I’m not convinced of your expertise in Scientology. The “fatal flaws” in LRH policies? I say they are fatal mis-applications of otherwise useful policies. So again, please stop trying to put your opinions off on us as “inescapable facts”. How about if we just say it’s a religion, and as with all religions, it works for some people and not for others? It works for me. Even the policies work, when properly and intelligently applied.

      • Uh oh.

        A religion?

        Have you read Lawrence Brennan’s legal declaration on Religious Cloaking in Scientology? There’s also a video of it.

    • I never said there weren’t flaws in policy or tech. Fact is that Hubbard himself says Scientology isn’t “perfect” and that you have to be able to think with the data and evaluate for yourself.

      Yet it is obvious to me that you haven’t taken these very important steps.

      You like many “Scientologists” I’ve known in my over 30 years in Scientology Organizations just accept everything that Ron says as holy writ without questioning it at all.

      Ron or in many cases allegedly says do this and the autocratic Sea Org just follows orders (what is called the “Nuremberg ‘defense'” because this “defense” is really no defense at all) or in other words “complies” without question.

      Never bothering to Query them then when they get into trouble blame it on the policy, FO, ED or Ron instead of their own stupidity.

      A good example is the franchise fiasco which was done in total violation of the HCOPL Ethics and Franchise that was *allegedly* “ordered” which is *junior* according to HCOPLs Issues; Types of and Seniority of Orders (never mind common sense and decency) to policy.

      Instead when Ron again allegedly ordered CMOI to take down the mission network they supposed gave the Ol’man or whoever truly ordered it a cheery “yes sir” or “wilco” and throw out the baby with the bath water.

      Same with GAT which is totally in violation of HCOPL Drills Allowed based on an order which was in fact only a recommendation in the lecture “A Talk on a Basic Qual”.

      Now aside from the fact that the above was tried with what were known as the “Auditor ‘Expertise’ Drills” back in the ’70’s is the fact that that policy was never canceled.

      So not only was there the fact that writing a bunch of stupid drills that basically altered *Standard Tech* was already proven to be unworkable was the fact that such drills were against policy.

      Yet some bozo named Miscavige who’s job is supposedly to insure the tech remains pure meaning unaltered has this “bright idea” based on what he calls an “eval” which is a meandering bunch of utter bullshit with not a single out/plus point count or even noting a situation never mind a possible ideal scene to resurrect the stinking rotting corpse of the “Auditor Expertise Drills” and turn it into the Frankenstein monster known as the “Golden Age of Tech” despite its previous dismal failure.

      Because Ron recommended these drills back in ’71 in a lecture most public have never even heard.

      Having done the Briefing Course I can tell you Ron recommends lots of stuff that never made it to Red on White.

      So what?

      It still doesn’t change the fact that Standard Tech is that tech contained in HCOBs.

      It’s good data to have but I doubt if say having every student do Aircraft Recognition drills is going to do any more than just doing the E-meter drills.

      Or having the supervisor stand in front of the course room pointing to a representation of an earlier incident as the source of BPC is going to increase anyones understanding the subject more than just studying the bulletins and listening to the lectures using study tech.

      As I wrote one has to be able to think with the data and *evaluate importances* that is to distinguish the importance of a policy compared to say an order or recommendation or even be able to determine if there is a contradiction between policy and tech and actually decide for one self using logic which you say you studied on how to proceed.

      Instead of just robotically applying policy or tech and then blame them for your own damn idiocy.

      • remoteviewed, well said. I would hazard a guess that, even having completed the Briefing Course, you won’t claim to be, much less insist that you are, an “expert” on the subject. Still, I admire your knowledge and use of LRH references in your arguments, and in my opinion you’re far more “expert” than anyone I’ve ever heard claiming to be.

      • CMO was hardly in a position to disagree with “Source,” when he ordered them to loot the franchises in 1982. It was “LRH Intention” they were trained to uphold. “Source” was senior to Policy.

        There are layers of policy. Not all policies are created equal. There’s a stratum of LRH instruction that is confidential, and is not to be found in the Green Volumes.

        The Scientology organization, per its founder’s mostly confidential instructions, has been run like a criminal conspiracy since the 1960s. That’s one reason there’s so much yelling in Orgs. The lower level staff and upper level Execs from “up lines” play by different rules, but the lower level staff are never let in on the secret.

      • Thanks Dave for the kind compliments.

        B Partz sometimes I wonder if you’re working for the FBI or some other Government criminal conspiracy.

        ( I mean it takes one to know one. Ya know what I mean 😉

        Think CoIntelPro for lawlessness in the guise of “law enforcement”.

        But anyway…..)

        Obviously you have a misunderstood on source since source refers to the actual Policies, HCOBs and other writings and lectures. Not just a persona

        Here look it up:

        source [sawrs, sohrs] Show IPA
        any thing or place from which something comes, arises, or is obtained; origin: Which foods are sources of calcium?
        the beginning or place of origin of a stream or river.
        a book, statement, person, etc., supplying information.
        the person or business making interest or dividend payments.
        a manufacturer or supplier.

        Thus it doesn’t mean Ron exclusively but can include his writings as well.

        Unless you can show me one of those of those oh so sekret references that you referring to then I’ll stick with the ones I got such as Seniority of Orders and Issues; Types of both which specifically say policy is senior to any other issue.

        Funny you guys pull the same crap that Davie does when he claims he’s channelling Ron.

        Are you sure you’re not buds?

      • Wh-wh-what?

        Did you just say it’s not LRH’s fault for ordering the mission network to be destroyed, but CMO Int’s fault for complying?

        Are you serious? What…do you think the SO has three branches of gov’t or something?

        Sure, an order can be queried. And for all you know, it might have been. But how do you remove responsibility from LRH in that equation. I mean, he is SOURCE in this example, in every sense of the word.

        By the way, your tendency toward ad-hominem attacks makes you a bit hard to take seriously.

        So Remote, do you know anyone who has accomplished full, stable exteriorzation at will with full perception? If not, why not? If so, please introduce me.

    • Oh so we’re in the “minority” now Chris as if the truth was running for election or something.

      Funny how I mentioned earlier that many “soft sciences” as they’re called “evolved” under peer pressure and thus seek majority approval and you just proved my point.

      Thanks Chris 😉

  8. For years it’s been impossible to do an honest Doubt formula on the Church, because no one who was in the Church was ever allowed to look at both sides. Now many of us have done our Doubt, and it’s interesting to watch as we naturally go on with the next formula to find out who our friends are. I’m a Scientologist. I really don’t care if LRH was an asshole. He was my friend, and I do have friends who are assholes, personally, but who do good work. The old trick of “sully the man and you sully his work” won’t work with me. The man and his work are two different things. I need to believe this because I’m a songwriter. I’m also an asshole, by many accounts. But I need to believe that my body of work will stand despite my personal failings. As to Ron’s physical condition in later life, it was, to me, only a sign of the enormity of what he was up against, and we only need to observe what’s being done to the Ethics, Admin and Tech by the US Government-owned and -operated Church of Scientology, and by guys outside the Church (no doubt supported in some way by that same government) who pretend to be “experts”, and even call themselves Scientologists, but insist on perverting the tech with their own “research” (as if Scientologists around the globe are going to agree with them taking on the Research Hat) to begin to get the idea that what Ron was up against to the very end of his life is still there and going strong. It’s a fight all Scientologists have to continue. And I believe we’re going to win it. But ain’t it just the Wild West out here! What fun! Scientology is fun again!

    • Rather than debating, you need to continue reading, and looking, and pondering. It takes years to sort out the Scientology puzzle. No disrespect intended, but many of you guys are just beginning.

      And that’s OK. You’re newly out. That’s the way it is.

      For many of you, your views in a year or two, will be very different than your views now.

      • Oh please Partz.

        Stop being so damn patronizing.

        I’ve read much of your suggested reading list and also obtained information through FOIA so I probably have more of a grasp of the scene then someone who just surfs the web, reads a few books and then implies that they are an “expert”.

      • By the way, David Soroka, LRH’s was not in good health from a very young age and not just in later life. Does seem as though you need to investigate more facts about LRH and the true state of thing.

        B. Partz, I’m finding still a strong koolaid mentality out here and agree with “You’re newly out.” When I was first recommended a book written giving facts about LRH’s drug taking, his cruelty, plagarism, polygamy, his hiding away from the law for three, four decades and the total madness witnessed by the SO around him, I couldn’t take it. I didn’t want my illusion of the man to be sallied.

        It took be a few weeks of bracing myself to confront what I deemed must be confronted. Whew!

        So you guys, do the same. Get up your confront and you’ll sound less silly in your comments. That’s all I can say.

  9. Seems to me there’s some laxity regarding the definition of a Scientologist. I don’t think that someone who spends all their time actively demonstrating a clear intention to get people to NOT be Scientologists can be thought of as a Scientologist. Call me crazy. I mean, this may be an unpopular point of view, but is it not OK to expel someone from a group if they don’t belong there? Are we just that “politically correct” that we’ll let anybody join us even if they’re out to destroy us? I mean, this group calls itself Scientologists Getting Back In Comm, so I kind of thought that here I would find just that. Instead I find myself having to defend my religion as even being a religion. AGAIN! Can’t we ask that anti-Scientologists, people who are actively fighting Scientology and trying to destroy our religion, go form their own group? I’m looking for places online where one doesn’t have to constantly engage in this debate, the workability or unworkability of Scientology, over and over and over and over again. It’s getting old, and it seems quite pointless, as the people engaging in it have already made up their minds. I keep joining these groups that are billed as Scientologists, like this one, and I keep finding them swarming with anti-Scientologists. I’m looking for groups where a person can get on with the “next” conversation, which would be a fun discussion of wins, sharing references, keeping up with each others’ lives and current events in the Field, making new friends, getting back in touch with old ones, planning for the future of our overall 3rd Dynamic, that kind of stuff. These grinning skunks, these self-proclaimed “experts”, who are openly doing the US government’s bidding (destroying the religion of Scientology) outside the Church as well as in, only serve to piss me off and distract me. Maybe we need to go somewhere and start a group of Scientologists and at the top of the homepage put a few LRH definitions of “Scientologist”, and welcome any who will sign on as that, and whenever someone turns out to be our enemy, have the balls to call them enemies and get rid of them. I know, I know: now I’m the asshole. Ask me to leave and I will. By the way, I ran my wife on a pretty cool assist process last night for a toothache. It was fun! She had a win! She cogged: “Unconsciousness is a ‘something’! Consciousness is a ‘nothing’! It’s so much easier to mock up a ‘something’, so we mock up unconsciousness!” Last week she ran me on “From where could you communicate to a victim?” using the paper trick! Over the course of two sessions (we got interrupted the first day and had to continue the next) we ran the TA into it and then ran the TA out of it and I EP’d exactly according to the HCOB and the wins from that process kept coming over me like waves for days! It was fantastic, and so simple! Gotta tell ya all, we’re having fun out here!

  10. Comments on this post are now closed. The conversation has gone off topic and has become hostile. Please see our moderation policy. This will be addressed in an upcoming post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s