Disconnection policy that ought to be written

Another policy Miscavige ought to write, by Motti Morell


MCO Policy Letter of August 6th, 2014

Gen Non-Remimeo
Exec Sec Hats
CO Sec Hat
C/S Hat
Legal Officer Hat
LRH Comm Hat



Despite the bad PR our disconnection policy has suffered from the growing hordes of squirrels, I can assure you that disconnection policy is our number one survival point.

A recent confidential poll conducted among Scientologists in good standing has shown conclusively that if disconnection was dropped as a policy, 78% of all Scientologists would walk out on the Church.

Independent Scientology is gnawing at our clientele with the lure of cheaper rates and softer ethics. Our saving grace is the fact that most Scientologists have family members, friends, employers, employees and business associates in the Church. Fear of disconnection keeps them within the fold. Most of them do not want to be separated forever from their loved ones, fired from their jobs, lose their businesses and their livelihood.

Furthermore, they do not want their loved ones to get into trouble, heavy ethics, Sec-Checks or have their bridge progress blocked.

So those 78% who are disaffected with the Church grit their teeth and keep their mouths shut and stay in. They don’t even share their thoughts with their closest relatives and friends for fear it will all come out in the confessionals with dire consequences to everyone involved.

I must commend those 78% for withholding their critical thoughts; Responsibility is ‘able to withhold’ (HCOB 21 Jan 1960, RESPONSIBILITY) and these individuals do it for the greatest good.

That’s why, with all the attacks we endure, we still manage to keep our membership and stream of donations waning at a moderate rate rather than crashing down at once. Had the disconnection  policy been canceled, as a certain SP long since removed attempted it at one time in the past “in order to get good PR”, the Church of Scientology would have come plummeting to oblivion.

Therefore, the policy of disconnection is reaffirmed here with a vengeance, as it is just about the only glue that keeps us more or less intact.

Pain of disconnection is our lifeline. Use it.



David Miscavige

48 thoughts on “Disconnection policy that ought to be written

  1. What a joke. Probably, most of the world consider DM’s disconnection policy as lunacy, which it is. It is also a policy based on fear which also creates fear. The Scientology staff probably have so many witholds that they are, more than likely, terrified of going into session.

    While there are many decent people in the SO, I have long since disconnected from the brand of psychosis that DM offers his staff and public.

    By the way, what is Dm’s education level? Did he ever go to school?


    • Let’s be accurate: it’s LRH’s Disconnection policy.
      Both Marty Rathbun and Mike Rinder have, in recent times. clarified the matter of Disconnection, and it’s fake “cancellation” in 1968, and the confusion around its re-affirming in the early 1980s, when it had, in fact, never actually been discontinued.
      Others have been saying this for years, but there are those who will listen to Marty Rathbun and Mike Rinder who wouldn’t listen to others who spoke out earlier.
      Just as LRH used the idea that “Hidden crimes = leave” as a manipulative mechanism to control and dominate Scientologists, so he used Disconnection. Both David Mayo and Bill Franks confirmed that LRH confided in them that Scientology would fall apart unless he equated leaving with having crimes (“overts”).
      So it is with Disconnection, and, for that matter, with the key “button” of Scientology, “Survival”, which has been used to keep Scientologists in Scientology since its inception: “Mankind’s only hope,” etc.

      • BV Ortz – I wish to correct something here. LRH did not say that ALL people who leave do so because ONLY because of overts. There is an HCOPL (and I cant remember it’s title but think it’s the Leaving and Leaves HCOPL) where he says something along the lines “of course you can also make a persons life so difficult that they feel they have no reason but to leave”. So he did see that side. And also the “overts” issue was more of a sudden departure “blow” – not routing out or leaving standardly. I understand that Mike, Marty, the Headleys, Debbie, Jeff, and all the heroes that have “blown” had no choice but to do it that way – life for them was hell on earth, and they had NO choice. Per policy, these sudden departures had nothing to do with overts – they HAD to blow for self-preservation and their very lives in some cases. In other words, they fell into the other category that LRH talked about.

        Let’s be sane about this. I have employed many, many people in my life. I have never treated my staff badly and always considered them THE most important part of my business, as I recognised that without them, I didn’t have a business. Occasionally one would suddenly blow – no phone call, no notice – nothing – just gone. And then I would start looking and I ALWAYS ALWAYS found the overts – abusing or stealing company resources, stealing clients and doing private jobs behind our backs, cooking the books – outright theft of large sums of money – you name it – the overts where always there, and they weren’t meek ones like slipping some paper out the door or something – they were real malicious damage. So in this case, I agree with this “philosophy” or observation – it is true for me.

      • He then wrote” a person does not blow due Overts or Witholds. He blows only due to ARC BKs”.
        If anyone is interested in the alleged story, he can google the above quote.

      • Shelly,
        Here’s ‘Leaving and leaves’ of 7 December 1976:
        Not exactly a warm and fuzzy attitude towards “leaving.”
        “As the actual reason behind blows is overts and withholds, the excuses for leaving are usually simply justifications… therefore, informing fellow staff that one is leaving is hereby properly labelled a suppressive act.”
        LRH’s “Reform Code” of late 1968, which “cancelled” Fair Game, Disconnection, and Security Checking, was insincere, and was done to handle a public relations flap. The term “Fair Game” was no longer to be used publicly but the practice of Fair Game continued; Disconnection was to be better camouflaged but the practice of Disconnection would remain; and Sec Checking would continue but would be re-named “Integrity Processing,” that is until LRH, some years later (early 1977), ordered that it once again be called Security Checking.
        Let me ask you this: What do you think would have happened, in, say 1975, if a Scientologist walked into an Org and said, “I met someone and she loves pets just like I do, so we’re going into business together and opening up a pet store. Her name is Paulette Cooper, and I know she wrote a book critical of Scientology, and is regarded as a Suppressive Person, but Disconnection has been cancelled, so it’s OK for us to associate and go into business together.”
        Do you think it would have been OK?
        All that said, the main point is that Disconnection is LRH’s baby, not Miscavige’s. Miscavige is continuing the tradition.
        And it’s not “anti LRH” to say so. It’s simply realistic.

      • Dear Moderator : I thought this was a
        Pro- LRH , Pro-Scn blog. I am not trying to step in on your hat but , Are we just going to let any misinformed person arbitrarily denigrate LRH and SCN with no kind of moderation whatsoever ?

        I mean “freedom of speech” as its limits and more so when the “truths” uttered by the grossly misinformed are just plain natters and a desire to enturbulate others.


      • Dear moderator, I thought this was a
        Pro-LRH , Pro-SCn blog. Are just going to let the grossly misinformed to just denigrate Scn and LRH ?

        I very much believe in “freedom of speech” but it certainly has its limits. These “facts” are just plain natter and an effort to enturbulate. And we are just to sit and do nothing ?

        To you B.V. Orts, I’ll have a very informative response for you latter on during the afternoon. I am very much familiar with your posts at several blogs. Let’t see how good you are at argumenting with real facts.


      • Hi Thetaclear,
        Do you consider it anti LRH to say that the cancellation of Fair Game in 1968 was a ruse?
        What happens when something that is true is perceived as “anti LRH” ?
        Is it entheta to think about that?
        Oh well.

      • You are misleading. LRH wrote the disconnection as a tool for PTS to cease to be PTS. Those two friends of yours implemented the disconnection policy to control the members not to de-PTs them.

        LRH study technology works very well. Studying RTC PTS/SP Course you will notice that some issues are contradictory with each other. The EO/MAA may give you a different handling based on what statistic need to be handled. But studying LRH PTS/SP course you will notice that the handling is very very easy. You need to be de-PTSed by handling or disconnecting. There is no LRH issue I know that said disconnect from… to control you. If you have the original real to real LRH tape or LRH handwritten policy about your version of disconnection please lets have it.

    • Travers – answer to the education level of DM.

      Per Wiki ; “On his sixteenth birthday (1976) he left high school with his father’s permission to move to Clearwater, Florida, and joined the Sea Org”

      Based on that, he probably has no more than a Grade 9 or 10 education. (In South African old speak that would be standard 8 or 9).

      Full article can be read here:


      • B.V. Orts ,
        As I said before, I am fully aware that you go around Pro-Scn and PRO-LRH blogs generalizating entheta and “interpreting” Policy as you see fit your purposes. Coincidentally leaving out details of such policies where the basic for the LRH reasoning is well explained. So I’ll do the professional thing and properly prepare and answer covering every detail of your replies. Don’t get me wrong. I am not doing it for you. I am only doing it for the benefit of other posters who might be less informed in some specifics LRH Policies. So be patient, would you ?

        I think we’ll really enjoy ourselves.


      • BV – I didn’t think you were ignoring me. As I said, I :thought” the policy may have been Leaving and Leaves – I could be mistaken. But there is DEFINITELY a PL where he states that people’s lives could be made such a misery they have no option but to leave – it could have been something with the title “blow off’s: etc in the title. I am too lazy to look it up, but I know it is there (maybe someone can help here?).

        I know this, because I have personally seen it and in fact brought it up numerous times at the org which was a hell-hole and VERY unpleasant environment to be working in. Every time someone wanted to leave the instant declaration was “OVERTS” and I disagreed – strongly and verbally so (not making myself popular in the process). More than once I had to stick the Ethics Officer’s nose in that little paragraph.

        As a personal comm from me to you BV Ortz, you really do come across as nit-picking and trying your best to find all the “BAD” in Scn and LRH. Your bias is plainly evident, and I for one take exception to your comments of constantly op-terming with the majority of people on this blog who still believe in the workability of the Tech, but have a problem with the current RCS Management.

        As a very old timer having been around since the late 60’s, I can tell you that the environment back then is a polar opposite to what it is now. My mother knew and worked with LRH personally. She told MANY stories of how incredibly benevolent he was, how he treated his staff with dignity and respect, and how he considered his staff to be extremely valuable, ensuring they were processed trained and gotten up the bridge. He bought his lady staff beautiful evening gowns and expensive perfumes, and likewise kitted out the gentlemen in upstat attire. He even purchased a brand-new little Mini vehicle for my husband’s mom and had her initials monogrammed on the door in gold letters – and left it in her driveway at home as a surprise for her when she got home. Does this sound like a nasty raving lunatic – as you are trying to make him out to be?

        Your constant attempts at trying to denigrate LRH leave a very bad taste in my mouth, and I tend to view anything you have to say at the tone level they are being communicated which is around the bottom somewhere around covert hostility, anger, resentment and just plain rudeness. When I see your name before your comment, I roll my eyes and think “what next”.. Although I do admit at occasionally being nicely surprised on the odd occasion you have something positive to say.

        Lighten up, dude, and maybe people will start taking you seriously. Otherwise go and gush all your ANTI everything-to-do-with-SCN-and-LRH propaganda on ESMB – they love that kind of stuff.

    • When a person is connected to a suppressive person, per LRH that person has two options-handle or disconnect.
      David Miscavage is a suppressive person. The Church of Scientology has become a suppressive group.
      To continue to support a suppressive person or group would be a suppressive act per “Intro To Scientology Ethics” page 207. “to fail or refuse to disconnect from a Suppressive Person is supportive of the Suppressive-in itself is a Suppressive Act.”
      Therefore, when people leave today’s Church of Scientology, they leave not because of “overts” but to follow the tech of Scientology and disconnect from a suppressive group.

  2. Keep up the good work, moderator. I’m not going to say I find these postings funny (like your one on the tone scale) – to me they cut too close to the bone. But I understand that’s the entire purpose of irony. The more these issues are held up to the ridicule they deserve, the faster the tyranny will dissolve. I hear people say CoS will slowly fade away – but concepts such as apartheid and soviet communism did not fade away, they crashed and burned incredibly rapidly under the exact public scrutiny and mocking now under way towards CoS.
    Disconnection, I believe, is not being enforced DIRECTLY by CoS, but by individuals wanting to remain in good standing and wanting to show their dedication by ‘unfriending’ anyone not regularly on lines. It is exactly the same with fundraising – it’s done by OTCs, thereby giving the official organisations of CoS complete deniability.

    • Sean – re your comment about disconnection not being enforced directly by the Church, I hate to crash your delusion. I have had more than 20 people telling me that Gaby, Angelo, OSA Staff, Gillian Andersson, Shaleen Wohrnits and others employed in the Church are demanding public MUST disconnect from the “SP’s”.

      They are doing this via private facebook message, phone calls and one-on-one meetings with public. My mother was deadfiled by the org and forced to sign some weird legal waiver before being allowed in to see the GAT2 event – because she lived with me ( and I had net even been comm-ev’d yet).. She had pressure put on her to disconnect from me and at one point was even looking at alternative places to stay because of pressure put on her from my sister who WAS BEING RUN BY OSA. Not that my mom had 2 cents to rub together to live anywhere else as we were almost totally supporting her and she was living rent-free with us.

      And how do you explain the fact that Melissa Hogarth and Tyler Hogarth were both summarily declared without being told? They weren’t even ASKED if they were going to disconnect – if that’s not enforced disconnection I don’t know what is. I myself was declared because I told the Storm Troopers I refused to disconnect from Ryan and the other “Jobur 18” as I didn’t believe they were SP’s (and per LRH, they aren’t). It is a HIGH CRIME to refuse to disconnect from an SP……………. so carry on believing the fairytale that the CHURCH are not enforcing the disconnection. It’s simply not true.

      • Ok, jeesh I recant! Didn’t know all that detail. I especially didn’t know Melissa and Tyler were expelled.

      • Dear Shelley, B.V.Orts and Thetaclear, there is a policy wherein LRH does mention about thing being so bad that one just has to leave. However, the overriding policies are Leaving and Leaves, Blow Offs and so on.

      • Dear Shelley, B.V.Orts and Thetaclear, there is a policy wherein LRH does mention about things being so bad that one just has to leave. However, LRH was prone to contradicting himself and the overriding policies are Leaving and Leaves, Blow Offs and so on.
        Thetaclear, how can quoting LRH’s PL, Leaving and Leaves, be nti-LRH? It’s what he said and what he thought. And what he pushed, no hold barred.
        Even if a Sea Org Member leaves per the standard routing form and does his Sec Check and all that he has to in order to get out, he will be labelled a DB, a Degraded Being. He will be held in contempt. This is LRH, not David Miscavige or anyone else.
        Time to face facts. Time to get real. Time to practice good TRs and be prepared to confront the truth that is available.
        Time for the ‘believers’ to grant the non-believers the right to voice their opinions as the heading of this blog says this blog stands for – freedom of speech. Some of us have had the guts and the audacity to confront the truth about LRH and Scn. We didn’t want it to be so. But is IS so. Against our wishes.
        Let us be. This is our blog, too. But now that we’ve seen things for what they are and we live with it. We’ve confronted some awful truths, felt betrayed and gone through a gamut of feelings due to what we’ve found out. Don’t make us wrong for it. We didn’t engineer what LRH did. We just found out about it.
        The Fair Game policy is LRH. If quoting LRH is anti-LRH then I’m afraid LRH brought it on himself. He wrote some damn awful policies; and he did some godawful things.
        I hope the moderator sees fit not to curb the free speech on this blog whether it’s pro-LRH or not. It is what it is and it’s time we grew up and admitted that things were not hunky-dory during LRH’s time and that some mean stuff occurred that he engineered himself.
        Let’s not be sissies here. As I’ve said before, it is what it is.
        I’m expecting a barrage of lectures about my negation of all that’s good and great about Scientology. Please save yourselves the trouble. I use what I like and don’t use what I don’t like.
        So no need to patronise me.

      • gc880 I dont have time to answer this as Id like to but if you really believe that
        LRH would just sit back and let a person suffer, for no good reason, as in a disconnection, that does no good for himself or the group, unjust in other words, then you and BVOrts, really have missed, bigtime, the point of Scientology, and what he was trying to achieve with it.

      • “Disconnection Policy” is an interesting study, and the arguments being brought up are informative. I would note that the Time element is somewhat missing.
        “Policy is what works” and it evolves over time to solve a problem which also may change over time. If the problem disappears, so too should the policy be put on hold (otherwise it could become a stop).
        LRH was capable of making a mistake (and he was capable of correcting it). I would assume that he was logical and well meaning. So, what was the problem that he was dealing with, and how was this whole situation changing over time?

      • 4a, you use the word ‘belief/believe’. Ouch. None of it is about ‘believing’, surely. It’s about what is and what isn’t. Never about ‘believing’.

        All I have to say to you, 4a, is go out and get the truth. LRH started the religion to make money, which he did; he made bucketloads of the stuff, contrary to what he said.
        Google Gerry Armstrong’s story. He’s got LRH’s true life story in black and white. It’s verified kosher. LRH lied to us all along the way. Yes, he did do some good stuff; but not all of it was for our betterment. More for his.
        There is good and bad in Scientology. You need to know both before you can make valid comments to me and before you can judge me or others like me who’ve stuck out our necks and confronted things – how they REALLY were/are. We didn’t want to ‘believe’ anything other than what we’d been fed over the years. It was one of the most rude awakenings I’ve ever experienced.
        Or you can continue to live in your bubble. But then you should refrain from criticising those, like me, who’ve burst theirs.
        We have the priviledge now to choose. We’re out of cult-think. It’s an eviable state. However, it took courage and balls to get to it.

      • gc880 my original statement stands. As for “balls and courage”, try mus, overts and finally, personal agreement. You took the, apparent, easy way out and you have constructed your own personal bubble on the other side of the pendulum. Enjoy yourself!

  3. Greetings Motti,
    How good to see you as a contributor here, and with satire and wit !
    Do you remember me ? Flag Land Base Class XII CS office

  4. Made my day!
    Oh yes had my fair share of the non-existent Disconnection Policy!
    There are active field members who DEMAND members of their family
    disconnect from anyone who is remotely connected to the SP rebels –
    their fear is installed with HEAVY the new definition for Tone 40 =
    Brutal Force and Threats if they do not disconnect!
    Then there are the group of Staff members who decide who will be
    declared – straight rebels or you have resigned from the Church
    and it is all hush hush
    In fact you on ly ever find out these days on the rumor line.

    Great this is on the blog in a new unit of time for new bloggers to
    be aware of this suppresive – disgusting – destructive POLICtY issued
    by the great leader – he altered the policy it is not to handle the real
    SP but the rebels who have WOKEN UP and such a huge threat that
    they have to be given the label of SP.

    To all our Special People we will bring this BEAST down –
    Theta – persistence – Education – In Ethics – LRH Tech –
    Trust and Loyalty to LRH and Freedom to Communicate
    with a commitment to Free all Beings!

    • Right on Goldie – the real purpose of the disconnection PL has been so warped that it now means “you have to disconnect from anyone WE (the Church) don’t like or approve of”. Whether the person being disconnected from actually fits the criteria and 12 traits of a REAL SP is totally immaterial and has no bearing on the issue. This is dictatorship at it’s worst. And what’s worse, is that other “OT’s” who should know better and just 2 years ago were “best friends” with the now-declared people have bought into this BS lock, stock and barrel. It just shows how going up the bridge in the RCS causes one to become an unthinking, cowed, robotic kool-aider who will follow any order given them – whether it makes sense or not. And even worse than that they think they are acting on their own determinism – just shows how far down the rabbit hole they have fallen – down, down, down.

  5. Although satire, I can totally see the “think” on this for DM and it’s probably not far off from what he really thinks about the subject.

    The International Media eyes are on this very subject right now – many stories being run on prime TV channels about this despicable activity of disconnection and ripping apart family and loved ones in RCS. There are just too many speaking out about this, and it’s time us here in South Africa do the same. The next time I hear about “so and so” contacting one of my friends or family members telling them to disconnect from me, I am going to phone said person and blast them from here to kingdom come.

    Does anyone realise that in this country, telling ANYONE to disconnect from someone is actually against the law and person so doing is committing a crime? This very subject is contained in our Bill of Rights and Constitution under “freedom of association”. Every Magistrate Court now has a “discrimination and harassment” section, and any magistrate can hear and rule on your case.You can handle and lodge the case yourself – no lawyer needed.. Do some research on this.

    Discrimination in this country has no place and is a dirty word – our history speaks for itself. Discrimination and harassment (telling people who they can and cannot associate with) is a hot subject in this country – let’s take advantage of it.

    • Wow, this is great news, Shelley. Thanks for sharing.
      Of course, you’re right. Apartheid was built on discrimination.
      I love this blog. One learns new things all the time. Thanks for posting this.
      And yes, the koolaiders are indeed a robotic lot – unthinking and delusional. I studied the OEC and throughout LRH talks about keeping the tech as is and not meddling with it. Unfortunately, there are very few people actually studying the tech these days, admin or otherwise. They don’t know.

  6. Good issue to bring to light. All the injustice and lunacy of the CO$ has to be uncovered and untangled. All the crooked thinking has to be straighened out.

    Have to use Hubbard’s words:

    Any datum is only as good as it has been evaluated.

    Every word in scn has to be evaluated, front, left, center, behind, and under many times over.

    Most datums will be found to be no good, when thoroughly disected, parsed, scrutinized, evaluated and exposed to the light of day .

    Geoffrey Filbert said only less than one percent of everything Hubbard said was true.

    I would add, bonafide, ………..without fraud or deceit, coersion, or subversion or other embedded or hidden lies or agenda.


  7. “Geoffrey Filbert said only less than one percent of everything Hubbard said was true.” That’s interesting, wherever it comes from. This was one of the major milestones in me leaving. I had already decided not to go into the org anymore, but was still doing the Basics and Lectures by correspondence. Because I no longer had to sit in a courseroom faking VGIs so as not to have to clear my ‘MUs’ I used to honestly give my opinion to my 2D. What I found myself telling her most often was: “Only 5% of that lecture was of interest – but the 5% was vital data. Later, I realised that the 5% was contained in red volumes anyway so why was I listening to this crap for a bit of data I already knew?” Of course, another milestone is reading these posted articles (like the overseas posting on the PTS/SP tech) which demonstrates that even some of that 5% is untrue.
    After a while I found I could no longer bring myself to listen to lectures or read the Basics. But believe it or not, I miss it! I just don’t want to be bullshitted any more.

  8. Happiness and strength endure only in the absence of hate. To hate alone is the road to disaster. To love is the road to strength. To love in spite of all is the secret of greatness. And may very well be the greatest secret in this universe. LRH new Slant on life.

  9. An Eyewitness Account of David Miscavige “Coaching” a GAT Auditor

    beatingsGwyneth Rolph has returned to share one of the most intriguing stories I have ever seen about the person who currently manages the Church of Scientology. Once you read this, you will have no doubt about the future of this organization.

    DM and his GAT Drill

    It was October 2004, during the few days running up to the IAS event. I was on my Supervisor internship at Saint Hill.

    DM and his entourage were in town for the event – we TTC’ers knew this, because we had all had to find alternative accommodation in East Grinstead so that DM and company could take over the Sea Org boarding house were we had been staying while on training.

    For several days now, all the staff and public at Saint Hill had been anticipating a drop-in visit by DM. There had been an intense call-in campaign to get anyone and everyone to come in on course during the days leading up to the event, so that should DM or any of his staff walk into the course rooms, they would see the place (uncharacteristically) bursting at the seams.

    I spent quite a lot of time studying or drilling in the Internship over those few days, as bizarrely there had been an order that there were to be no sup Interns in the course rooms when or if DM visited. (I have no idea what policy this was based on.) So some course periods I would be making progress on my checksheet, and other times I would have to make myself scarce. It was a bit frustrating.

    Late one evening after course, I had some admin to complete, and I went down to the Internship to sit there and finish it.

    An auditor called Eoin, whom I remember as an outer org trainee from Dublin a few years ago, was now a member of Snr. HCO and was apparently on his NED internship. He was watching one of his session videos on the TV in the corner.

    Standing watching over his shoulder was a fairly short man in a smart suit. Two female CMO members stood either side of him. At first I didn’t recognize him, because from my perspective as I walked in the door, he was standing sideways on. He was saying loudly and repeatedly to this guy, “You know you’re going to get roasted, don’t you?”

    I sat down and got on with my work, but the chewing out continued.

    On the video, I heard the auditor’s voice call an F/N. I couldn’t see the TV screen from where I was seated, and I have no idea whether the auditor was correctly calling reads and F/Ns or not, but obviously this one prompted some disagreement.

    “Oh, my GOD!” bellowed DM. “What do you call that?”

    A few more seconds of video.

    “Do you call yourself an auditor? What are you?” DM thundered.

    “I’m an intern, Sir,” the auditor replied weakly.

    “We’re going to do a little Golden Age of Tech drill, right now,” DM ordered, dragging the auditor over to the middle of the room and pulling up two chairs. Seating the auditor in one and sitting down himself in the chair opposite, he ordered his lackeys to fetch a pile of tech volumes off the shelves.

    “This is what it is like for the pc when you do that,” he said.

    Picking up a pile of about three or four tech volumes, he slammed them down in the auditor’s lap, while demanding loudly, “Has a withhold been missed?” Then again, “Has a withhold been missed?” – SLAM – another pile of volumes. And again, “Has a withhold been missed?” – SLAM – in rapid succession. Finally, he produced a bottle of water from somewhere, chucked it in the auditor’s face, and yelled, “Your needle is floating!”

    By this time, the Snr. Intern Sup and the Qual Sec, who had walked in to find out what all the shouting was about, were standing there staring, speechless.

    “That was distilled water, so it won’t mark your clothing,” DM said to the auditor, as if that made it all right.

    “Now, you’re going to do the same drill on the Qual Sec,” DM instructed.

    The CMO lackeys scurried off with the bottle to refill it with water.

    The Qual Sec sat in the chair while the auditor repeated the procedure on him with DM and his staff watching.

    I kept my head down during this exchange and continued writing. DM, the CMO members, the auditor and Qual Sec left the room. I finished up and left the org for the evening.

    The following lunchtime, one of the CMO members saw me and approached me in the corridor. “You were in the Internship last night, weren’t you?” she said. “Do you have any concerns about what you saw?”

    I knew that this was a conversation I really did not want to have. “No,” I replied. “Why would I?”

    The CMO girl was visibly relieved. “That’s good, that you have that viewpoint,” she said. “Well, if you have any questions, come and find me, OK?”

    I never did find out what happened to the auditor.

    This is an illustration of how dangerous it had become to be an auditor in the Church under DM.

    In fact it illustrates how the Church had become such a dangerous environment that self-preservation was higher on our list of priorities than calling out-ethics and out-tech even when it occurred right in front of our very eyes.

    This story therefore is my belated Knowledge Report.

    • Good God Tony – what a hectic story. DM sounds like a complete raving lunatic – and I am sure it just got worse over the years. We had similar going on here in Joburg but a very small microcosm of what you witnessed. I was screamed at, spat on and dressed down in public on more than one occasion – it was humiliating and totally interiorising – and I was an Exec!

      Thanks for sharing this with us.

  10. Greetings everybody !
    I said that I would write answer B.V. Orts about this subject and his misguided comments and here it is.
    If LRH refs are ”quoted” w/out showing the entire ref ( just as DM does ) , then you are left in the dark about why LRH said what he said. If portions of LRH refs are quoted that can look ”questionable” or ”unclear” or ”contradictory” w/out also quoting others LRH refs where the ”questionable” , ”unclear” or ”contradictory” data if further explained and clarified , one is then left with a false impression o f the subject in question. That is exactly what B.V. Orts did and I will explain. I will also explain why I said that his comments were anti-LRH and anti-Scn and that his comments just have been moderated or at least refuted right away by the blog administrator.
    B.V. Orts : ”Let’s be accurate: it’s LRH’s Disconnection policy.”
    Of course is LRH disconnection Policy , but not only LRH’s , is society’s disconnection Policy. Here is a quote from HCOB 10 Sep ’83 , ”PTSness And Disconnection”
    ”Perhaps the most fundamental right of any being is the right to communicate. Without this freedom, other rights deteriorate.
    Communication, however, is a two-way flow. If one has the right to communicate, then one must also have the right to not receive communication from another. It is this latter corollary of the right to communicate that gives us our right to privacy.
    These rights are so basic that governments have written them into laws—witness the American Bill of Rights.
    However, groups have always regulated these rights to one degree or another. For with the freedom to communicate come certain agreements and responsibilities.” LRH
    ” The basic principle of handle or disconnect exists in any group and ours is no different” LRH
    Disconnection is a practice used widely in all societies. It is a right not a privilege. A right that can’t be denied to anybody. Now I agree It can not and should not be imposed , it is a self-determined decision and that’s exactly LRH ‘s viewpoint on it :
    ”The term “disconnection” is defined as a self-determined decision made by an individual that he is not going to be connected to another. It is a severing of a communication line.
    The basic principle of handle or disconnect exists in any group and ours is no different.
    It is much like trying to deal with a criminal. If he will not handle, the society resorts to the only other solution: It “disconnects” the criminal from the society. In other words, they remove the guy from society and put him in a prison because he won’t HANDLE his problem or otherwise cease to commit criminal acts against others.
    It’s the same sort of situation that husband Pete is faced with in the example mentioned above. The optimum solution is to handle the situation with wife Shirley and her violations of their group (marriage) agreements. But if Pete cannot handle the situation, he is left with no other choice but to disconnect (sever the marriage communication lines if only by separation). To do otherwise would be disastrous, for he is connected to someone antagonistic to the original agreements, postulates and responsibilities of the group (the marriage).” LRH (same HCOB as above)
    True ”disconnection as a practice” was abolished in 1968 and later on reinstated. And here is why :
    ”Earlier, disconnection as a condition was cancelled. It had been abused by a few individuals who’d failed to handle situations which could have been handled and who lazily or criminally disconnected, thereby creating situations even worse than the original because it was the wrong action.
    Secondly, there were those who could survive only by living on our lines—they wanted to continue to be connected to Scientologists (see the HCOBs on the characteristics of an SP). Thus, they screamed to high heaven if anyone dared to apply the tech of “handle or disconnect.”
    This put Scientologists at a disadvantage.
    We cannot afford to deny Scientologists that basic freedom that is granted to everyone else: the right to choose whom one wishes to communicate with or not communicate with.” LRH , same HCOB
    Now , this tech of disconnection was not to be used arbitrarily and suppressively either. It had and has a very exact use. here it is :
    ”An Ethics Officer can encounter a situation where someone is factually connected to a suppressive person, in present time. This is a person whose normal operating basis is one of making others smaller, less able, less powerful. He does not want anyone to get better, at all.
    In truth, an SP is absolutely, completely terrified of anyone becoming more powerful.
    In such an instance the PTS isn’t going to get anywhere trying to “handle” the person. The answer is to sever the connection.” LRH. Same ref as above.

    That’s the real use of disconnection tech , no other one. It was not devised to separate families . In fact , here is LRH’s view on the matter :
    ”In the great majority of cases, where a person has some family member or close associate who appears antagonistic to his getting better through Scientology, it is not really a matter of the antagonistic source wanting the PTS to not get better. It is most commonly a lack of correct information about Scientology that causes the problem or upset. In such a case, simply having the PTS disconnect would not help matters and would actually be a nonconfront of the situation. It is quite common that the PTS has a low confront on the terminal and situation. This isn’t hard to understand when one looks at these facts:
    a. To be PTS in the first place, the PTS must have committed overts against the antagonistic source; and
    b. When one has committed overts, his confront and responsibility drop.
    When an Ethics Officer finds that a Scientologist is PTS to a family member, he does not recommend that the person disconnect from the antagonistic source. The E/O’s advice to the Scientologist is to handle.” LRH. Same ref.
    Please realize that LRH only adviced in the exact case where the person was connected to a real SP per definition , not just somebody who disagrees with you are is antagonistic to you in any way . Perhaps one is maintaining that antagonism in the first place by mis-applying basic Scientology principles to the situation !!!
    ”There is of course another technical way to handle PTSes and that is to get them through all problems they have had with the terminal involved and the PTSness will disappear (Ref: HCOB 29 Dec. 78, THE SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN, A MAGICAL NEW RUNDOWN). But it still requires that during the handling the person disconnects.” LRH . Same ref.
    Please see how LRH even developed this RD to help the individual handle the suppression.
    ”The whole crux of PTSes is HANDLE . And the misunderstood on it is how gently one can handle.” LRH (from HCOB 16 April ’82 , ”More On PTS Handlings”).
    Notice LRH says ”HANDLE”. For an incredible and very detailed account on how exactly , the subject of disconnection has been perverted by DM , please see Jim Logan’s article at “Scientology Cult” from 4 feb 2010 titled ”3D Engram”. As a master Qual terminal , Jim really does an incredible “cramming cycle” on this for all of us. By the way , the above quote was altered by the Church so that it reads : ”The whole crux of PTSes is HANDLE OR DISCONNECT” instead of the original : ”The whole crux of PTSes is HANDLE”

    As regards to “Leaving And Leaves” , here is LRH’s reasons for that and you’ll understand :
    ”It has occasionally happened in the past that a staff or crew member has used the fact that he or she was leaving an org to spread upset.
    It is a common make-wrong in children to threaten to run away. And it is a common action of suppressives to spread upset and dissatisfaction by saying they are leaving.
    There are some people who leave wherever they are obsessively and the most casual check reveals they have seldom remained anywhere; committing continual overts, they are routinely running away from any job, any post, any group and from themselves and life.
    As the actual reason behind blows is overts and withholds, the excuses for leaving are usually simply justifications and are actually a third party action of associates, usually false reports.
    Therefore, informing fellow staff members and others that one is leaving is hereby properly labeled a suppresive act.” LRH
    Now the real definition of the verb “to blow” is defined in HCOB 31 Dec ’59 , ”Blow-Offs” :
    ”Scientology technology recently has been extended to include the factual explanation of departures, sudden and relatively unexplained, from sessions, posts, jobs, locations and areas.”
    Note that is says ”sudden and relatively unexplained”. Here LRH explains further :
    ”The auditor is doing his best for the preclear and yet the preclear gets meaner and meaner and blows the session. The wife is doing her best to make a marriage and the husband wanders off on the trail of a tart. The manager is trying to keep things going and the worker leaves. These, the unexplained, disrupt organizations and lives and it’s time we understood them.” LRH , same ref.
    That’s a blow , it is not anything else.
    B.V. Orts : ”Just as LRH used the idea that “Hidden crimes = leave” as a manipulative mechanism to control and dominate Scientologists, so he used Disconnection. Both David Mayo and Bill Franks confirmed that LRH confided in them that Scientology would fall apart unless he equated leaving with having crimes (“overts”).” B.V. Orts
    Now what do you call this statement if not just a clear attempt to enturbulate and slander LRH ? He (B.V. Orts) has access to all this Bulletins and yet he purposely leaves out portions of the refs and fail to mention others ? Here is the reason why LRH was concerned about blows :

    ”It is an irresponsibility on our part, now that we know this, to permit this much irresponsibility. When a person threatens to leave a town, post, job, session or class, the only kind thing to do is to get off that person’s overt acts and withholds. To do less sends the person off with the feeling of being degraded and having been harmed.
    By permitting a blow-off without clearing it we are degrading people, for I assure you, and with some sorrow, people have not often recovered from overts against Scientology, its organizations and related persons. They don’t recover because they know in their hearts even while they lie that they are wronging people who have done and are doing enormous amounts of good in the world and who definitely do not deserve libel and slander. Literally, it kills them, and if you don’t believe it I can show you the long death list.’ LRH , same ref.
    Does this seems like an ”effort to control” or an act of extreme kindness ? I rest my case.
    Now , of course that there are reasons to leave other than O/Ws. Let’s not play silly here. Here LRH on it :
    ”One can treat people so well that they grow ashamed of themselves, knowing they don’t deserve it, that a blow-off is precipitated, and certainly one can treat people so badly that they have no choice but to leave, but these are extreme conditions and in between these we have the majority of departures” LRH , same ref.
    Note LRH says “treat people so badly” as happening right now in your current Church’s scene. LRH never predicted that a super duper SP would take control of the Cof S. He was too busy taking care of a lot more dangerous future consequences for this planet. Ones that I hope nobody ever find themselves in the position of having to confront it. Cause it won’t be any comfortable for any of us , I assure you. Hopefully nobody will even notice it if he does his job.
    LRH was not a perfect man by no means. He wasn’t a god either . He was simply a man who did a lot for everyone of us and for this dying planet ( cause it is dying at a very rapid rate ). Just one of his discoveries, anyone of them , would have been enough to declare him one of the greatest leaders of humanity. Just imagine what the Study Tech is able to do : it saves lives from ruin !!! Take the technology of handling overts and withholds : w/out it you wouldn’t have stable families and effective workers. Criminality would have no solution whatsoever. Take just the technology of the “Ethics Conditions” and their formulas : with them nothing is left to chance and any dwindling spiral can be reverted. Any singular discovery from this eternal friend of humanity could and actually does have the potential of changing the world.
    And are we going to start complaining now whether if he should have said it this way or that way or whether or not he failed to clarify something well enough that , for sane individuals , would not have needed any clarification at all ?
    Are we going to concentrate on whether or not he had other wives or whether or not he just earned 2 or 3 war medals instead of 4, 5 or 10 ? Or whether he actually got a full college degree or just a partial one ? Really ?
    Are we going to act this ”theetie-weetie about this ? I guess not. Leave that to Rinder’s blog with all due respect to him and for what he did in the past. Not here . The title of this blog is “Scientologists Back In Comm”. Note that is says ”scientologists”. Just be true to that name.
    B.V. Orts and others anti-LRH , anti-SCN posters can be easily explained with two refs
    1. HBOB 5 Nov ’67 , ”Critics Of Scientology” and
    2. “Certainty” magazine article from vol 7 NO. 2 ” Why Some Fight Scientology”
    I sincerely hopes than in the future the Moderator has these refs in mind.
    ARC ,
    Peter Torres

    • I’ll keep this brief, as I have no guarantee that the Admin will permit it. My last few posts have been blocked and have not appeared.
      If you wish to believe that LRH – as announced in the “Reform Code” – actually and sincerely discontinued the practices of Fair Game, Disconnection, and Security Checking in 1968, then that’s your prerogative.
      For others, I suggest reading HCOPL 23 March 1965, ‘Suppressive Acts, Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists’, which can be found, amongst other places, in the 1974 edition of OEC Volume 1, HCO Division. The list of Suppressive offenses is quite long, and includes such things as “public disavowal of Scientology,” and “public statements against Scientology.”
      At no time in Scientology’s history was it OK for a Scientologist to be associated, freely and without Scientology supervision, with a Declared SP.
      For those curious, here’s a comprehensive look at Scientology as it existed in the 1960s and 1970s. Despite the title, it contains a surprising amount that is positive.:

      In some of my blocked posts, I provided some background regarding 1960s and 1970s SP Declares and other relevant matters. There is much that could be said but, unfortunately, restriction on communication on this forum make that difficult.
      This is not a criticism of the Admin who has been quite fair, all things considered.

      • Hi Admin,
        In the event that my post to Thetaclear, and its well documented link, is not allowed, at least permit me to quote from one of the items Thetaclear includes as recommended reading. It’s called ‘Critics of Scientology’, and was published in ‘Ability’ magazine in November 1967, and later issued as an HCOB.
        It states:
        “Never discuss Scientology with a critic. Just discuss his or her crimes, known or unknown, and act completely confident that these crimes exist. Because they do.”

      • Hello again Moderator:
        In as much as Thetaclear has cited the 5 Nov ’67 issue ‘Critics of Scientology’ as applying to me, in effect, accusing me of being a criminal, PLEASE, at least, permit the publishing of the quote from that issue that I provided.
        Thank you.

      • B.V. Orts,

        I already said all I was going to say in my previous and very detailed post. It doesn’t get any more clear than that. You are just Q&Aing with the subject and twisting it. How is that you are not postings these ideas of yours in Rinder’s blog for example ? , where anti-LRH and anti-Scn comments are very much allowed ?

        Why do you come to a blog that is pro-LRH and pro-Scn to post those comments instead of using the correct forums for this ? If you read moderation policy , and the purpose of this blog , it clearly states that it is intended for scientologists getting back in comm. If you are obviously in disagreement with LRH and Scientology policies, then you must not consider yourself a scientologist , right ? Then I am curious as to why are you even here. What possible purpose could you have ? Why not use other blogs where you can more easily express your “realities” as they are not “with Scientolgy” and “with LRH” ?

        Why put youself in a position to be moderated ? I just can’t understand you. What product are you trying to get exactly ?

        I won’t speak about this subject any more publicly in this blog as I considerer it very rude from you to even having brought your misguided comments in here. Cause they are misguided. However, should you wish to be heard privately , I am more than willing to give you your chance at comm. Just don’t expect very much agreement from me. But I am willing to get into private arguments with you with the purpose of helping you clear your confusions. I am against your comments here but I am not seeking your destruction or punishment. I tend to seek rehabilitation and understanding rather than doing people in. So if you want to give it a try here is my adress : thetaclear68@yahoo.com.


  11. To thetaclear and others,

    As a never-in who has “no dog in this fight” I must say that it seems that many here, in the time you have now been out of the “Church”, have not availed yourselves of the vast amount of documented information that is (and has been) available about L. Ron Hubbard, his life and his writings.

    You certainly have the right to adopt and embrace whatever belief system you desire. But in the sense of making points in arguments about things like Fair Game Policy or Disconnection Policy, just going back and quoting pronouncements isn’t quite cutting it anymore.

    For one thing, have not many of the Church-approved publications been “worked over” as the years have passed? There is information about changes, what it used to say and what it says now, freely available online to all who seek it.

    There are now independent scholars – not hate-filled apostates – who have written about the Church of Scientology, its doctrines and its founder.

    Everyone here owes it to themselves to become educated to the current knowledge about these subjects.

    As always, I wish each of you the best!

    • B.V. Orts,

      On second thought , better stay on your side of the fence. I just read all your post comments in all articles here and I am even impressed as to why were they even allowed. I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I am more than clear now that the HCOB “Critics of Scientology” describes you perfectly. You apparently has a pattern of going around every blog you can and spread your lies and confusions. Guess why you don’t do it at MS2?
      Cause you’ll be thrown out of there in the blink of an eye. They won’t just allow it.

      So I’ll not waste my valuable time in you anymore. What I had to say, I already said it and is clear enough. I’ll pay no more att to you. Go to MS2 with this and I’ll take care of you again.

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