Travers Harris – my life in SCN & the SO

Travers Harris

Travers Harris

Editors Comment: We were sent this article by Travers Harris – a fascinating account by a genuine old-timer of his early pioneering experiences and adventures in Scientology. Our thanks to Travers for sharing his story with us. 

When I was introduced to Scientology in 1964 it was called The Hubbard Association of Scientologists (HASI). I attended an introductory lecture and later did some of the basic courses. I was very impressed and later signed up for The Hubbard Professional Auditors Course.

At the time I thought there was nothing like it in the Western World. It was about the philosophy of spirituality, of love and of friendship.

I was so impressed with the information that when I was asked to join staff by the head of the organisation, Alison Parkhouse,  at that time I joined without any hesitation and signed a contract for 2 ½ years. Much to the disgust of family and friends I gave up my profession and worked for a few cents a week. The course room was packed with students learning about Hubbard’s philosophy and really having a ball.

From around 1964 Hubbard introduced his ethics policies, and in my opinion that was the beginning of the demise of Scientology (although I did not realize it at the time). There were many policies he wrote about ethics and the ethics conditions and the formulas on how to get yourself out of these conditions. You may read about Hubbard’s ethics at this link:

Maybe there is some truth in what he wrote but my experience with it was nothing short of abuse especially when put into the hands of uncaring people. I visited Scientology Organisations in many parts of the world and I found none who liked these policies especially their formulas and penalties.

Organisations I visited were Malmo, Gothenburg, Stockholm in Sweden, and Copenhagen in Denmark. Then there were Lubeck in Germany, Johannesburg, Cape Town and Pretoria in South Africa and Bulawayo in Zimbabwe. My own experience was that it was degrading. Often when a senior executive was angry with an individual he or she would put you in a lowered condition to suit their own egos.

Hubbard became quite fanatical about his philosophy at the time and ordered the executives of organisations around the world to lengthen the evening training classes from 3 to 5 evenings per week and weekend courses to run the entire weekend. He wrote a short article called “5 YEARS” IN WHICH HE STATED THE WORLD ONLY HAD 5 YEARS LEFT BEFORE NUCLEAR WAR WAS DECLARED BY THE SOVIET UNION AND THE UNITED STATES AND THAT SCIENTOLOGY WAS THE ONLY HELP FOR THE WORLD.

Students were forced to attend courses 5 evenings per week which upset them as they say they had no family time left. There were some quite distinguished people, people in good positions in the work place, who could not always attend course or their counselling sessions.

And then an “ethics officer” was appointed to staff according to the new policies Hubbard had written and all hell broke loose. He started applying the ethics procedures to staff and public. Staff members were declared suppressive and kicked out and those who could not attend class 5 nights per week or attend their counselling sessions were declared suppressive.  My best friend at the time who I had brought into Scientology recently got married and was on honeymoon, he was declared because he was unable to attend class. The results were that the course room started emptying out and the once friendly public became hostile. This affected the income of the organisation and my pay dropped to a few cents per week. I became the only technical person in the organisation able to deliver services to the public which made it very stressful for me. The organisation could no longer afford the lovely premises they were in and they had to find alternate cheaper premises. My family was very upset with me as they had to support me. This all happened at the Cape Town Organization around 1965 – 66. Even the press started getting hostile with bad articles. I became extremely unhappy with this ethics rubbish. When my contract expired in 1966 I left Cape Town organisation and found a job in my profession in the printing industry to earn some money.

I was still very interested in the philosophy of Scientology and when I was informed of the newly formed Sea Organisation I joined it in 1968 at the Advanced Organisation in Alicante Spain.  I thought that this ethics nonsense would be discontinued or not abused as much as it was in Cape Town because I thought I was going to a higher level organisation, BUT OH MY GOODNESS, WAS I WRONG.

The first 3 months of my new career in the sea organization at the advanced organization in Alicante, Spain was absolutely brilliant. Lots of friendly students from around the world, and the staff were amazing and friendly. The commanding officer, a South African was quite level headed and social and did not mess around with this ethics stuff. This was however short lived as instructions from Hubbard were to close that organization down and open a new advanced organization in Edinburgh, Scotland as we were informed the authorities in Spain were about to raid us, I never knew the reason. I was assigned the task of getting all the students, of which there were around a hundred, transferred to Edinburgh which I arranged flights for. I hired a car and drove all the course materials to Edinburgh with the help of a colleague.

On my return from Edinburgh I was assigned as a crew member on the Station Ship Avon River (later renamed the Athena) a small steam boat weighing around 500 tons. I arrived on the boat fairly late and after filling in all the papers required of a crew member on a ship I got to bed at around 3 AM.

Ship Athena

Station Ship Athena

Later that morning at around 5:15 AM I was awoken by a 15 year old kid named Peter Gilham who informed me that I was scheduled to take the next quarter master watch. I had no idea what this was about but he gave me a briefing of what was required and showed me around the ship. I was still very groggy as I was still exhausted from the previous day and as I did not have enough sleep. I was quite astounded when being shown around the decks as there were young girls, must have been around 16 or 17, chipping the rust off the decks and themselves more than half asleep and battling to stay awake. It occurred to me that this ethics “stuff” has not gone away I was absolutely disgusted. I was then given a broken pair of old overalls to put on and at 6:00 AM started my QM watch.

At 9:00 AM that morning a beautiful girl named Nicki Freidman came up to me and assigned me a condition of NON-EXISTENCE FOR WEARING AN OLD PAIR OF OVERALLS while on quarter master watch and ordered me to report to the Master at Arms (Ethics Officer on dry land).

There are penalties that you need to perform while in a lowered condition. The lowered conditions are as follows with the penalty of hard labour as follows:

  1. Non-Existence –   24 Hours Hard Labour with no sleep
  2. Liability –   48  Hours Hard Labour with no sleep
  3. Doubt –  72  Hours Hard Labour with no sleep
  4. Enemy –   Put into the chain locker and do the formula
  5. Treason –   Similar to above
  6. Confusion –  Similar to above

So I was assigned the task of painting the bridge of the ship for the next 24 hours and was not permitted to eat with the crew. After performing my penalty I went to bed and slept until the next morning. The next day I was assigned to the engine room as a greaser, which had the task of oiling and greasing the machinery. I had no experience of steam ships but started learning fast. It was a few days as we prepared the ship to sail and we received orders to sail to an unknown destination.

We set sail for Melilla and then were told our next port of call would be Bizerte in Tunisia North Africa. During this trip we had tremendous problems with the engine and the rings of the 1st high pressure piston disintegrated. We had other problems with heat but we eventually arrived in Bizerte and we were all exhausted. The captain in the meantime assigned the engine room a condition of doubt with its penalties and we had to work to repair the broken piston for the next 72 hours without sleep and were not permitted to leave the engine room. We were not permitted to bathe either. We became filthy dirty and absolutely exhausted.

The Flag Ship Royal Scotman, later named the Apollo was due to arrive in Bizerte later with the commodore L Ron Hubbard aboard. Hubbard eventually arrived on his much larger ship with his crew and when he heard about our experience in the engine room, he recalled our chief engineer to his ship to face a committee of evidence with a charge of “CRIMINAL NEGLECT TO THE ENGINES OF THE FLOTILLA”.

Apollo Ship

The Royal Scostman Ship Later renamed to The Apollo

I was then assigned the post of Chief Engineer by the captain. The next day the Commodore sent a messenger over to me to ask me “when will I have the engine ready as he needed us to sail urgently”. I was still totally ignorant of the workings and the engine as it was partially dismantled so I informed the messenger to tell Hubbard that “we could probably sail in a couple of days if he sent me someone who knew what was going on”. So he returned the chief back to us and we fixed the engines and set sail for Corfu Greece.

After our arrival in Corfu the Flag Ship was already there and we docked close to her. There was a lot going on and we were going to build a university of Scientology on the island which would be the headquarters for Scientology world-wide. This would have brought a lot of money to the small poor island. From my view, Hubbard was undergoing a change of personality and was no longer this loving philosopher from St Hill East Grinstead Sussex, England. He started becoming a grouchy screaming commander of his ship and had everyone terrified of him when he became angry. He even wrote somewhere that “WHEN I BECOME ANGRY I CAN MAKE CAPTAIN BLIGH LOOK LIKE A SUNDAY SCOOL TEACHER”.



Hubbard later released a new course called the class 8 course. Students started arriving from all over the world to do this new course. But they had no idea what they were letting themselves in for, the penalty for making a mistake was that you would be thrown overboard.

The Apollo was a 3,500 ton ferry with a flat bottom and a rubbing stake all around the bottom of the ship and maybe as high as 30 feet from where terrified students would be thrown if they made a mistake.

From our vantage point on our smaller ship we watched students being thrown overboard from a dizzy and dangerous height for mistakes they had made. Some of these students could not swim and a life buoy was put around them making it even more dangerous. If by any chance you hit the rubbing stake you may have been badly injured or even killed.

I was never in favour of this practice and thoroughly condemned it. My “wife” at that time was thrown overboard and she told me she was absolutely terrified – . Pictures of these overboards were even printed in the local press. Around 8 months later we were advised by the Greek Authorities that we were no longer welcome in Greece and were told to leave Corfu, probably in part, due to this vicious and savage practice of throwing people overboard.



Mentioning “my wife” – Peggie. (Formerly known as Peggie Bull. Later she married Nick Labuschagne in South Africa).   We were married on the flag ship by Captain Norman Starkey but the papers were never sent to Panama where the ship was registered so the marriage was never registered. We never knew we were not legally married – something I only found out 7 years later. .

We were assigned a new Captain named Stella King and also received a new chief engineer, John O’Keefe with myself as 1st engineer  and we set sail for Copenhagen  with a staff to set up a new advanced organisation in that country. We docked in Naples and dropped of the staff for the new advanced organisation to be created in Copenhagen and we sailed the next morning for Copenhagen.

The trip was mostly uneventful except the hydraulic steering gear burst and we had to weld some pipes together. This resulted because Hubbard gave instructions to change the old rudder and put another bigger rudder on which put more strain on the steering gear.

We arrived in Denmark about a week later and docked in Helsingborg and later sailed on to Copenhagen and our mission was to oversee the well-being of the new organisations in Copenhagen and Sweden. We did a lot of sailing around between Malmo in Sweden and Copenhagen. Our chief engineer then left with his wife and I was assigned to that post, but by this time I knew the engines thoroughly.

Our new captain on a voyage to Malmo in Sweden ran the ship aground on the way back to Copenhagen. In the process she holed one of the fuel tanks which caused severe problems in the engine room but I managed to contain the damage however we had to go into dry dock to have the tanks repaired. This was the 2nd time she ran the ship aground. She was recalled to flag but was sent back later.



The mission of the ship was to ensure the viability of the organisations in Sweden, Denmark & Germany. We needed to get 2 staff members trained up on The Flag Executive Briefing Course for the Denmark Continental Organisation and I was appointed as the Commanding Officer to run that organisation while the 2 staff members went to the flag ship for training. I ran that organisation for around 3 months until the 2 trained staff completed their training and returned.

After returning to the ship I found the old captain was replaced by a new captain named Mitch Spence (now deceased) and there was also a new chief engineer. I was appointed as chief officer. I was informed by the new captain that we would be setting sail for Germany the next morning. I got the ship ready for sailing and the next morning we set sail.

I had a lot of experience on the Athena and knew her quite well. The weather was not good that morning,  ranging at about a force 5 on the Beaufort scale however the Athena was built for that weather and there was nothing to worry about. After about an hour or so out in the Baltic Sea the weather started deteriorating and it was now a force 7 bordering on a force 8. I was still not concerned but I started hearing a knocking sound coming from the engine room. She was a steam ship with a triple expansion steam engine weighing around 500 tons and she used bunker fuel to heat the boiler.

I went down to the engine room and located the knocking sound and found it was the fuel pump which pumped the fuel into the 3 fires to keep the boiler making steam which ran the engine under high pressure, it was behaving very erratically. I was not concerned as there was a 2nd backup pump so I changed over to that pump. But the 2nd pump also started playing up which really concerned me. By this time the weather was at a force 9 and virtually a storm and I became seriously concerned as if the pump backed up the ship and all its crew would be in grave danger.

I immediately informed the captain that we must change course and return to Copenhagen or risk sinking the ship in this vicious storm with all the crew. The captain immediately changed course and we set sail for Copenhagen. I returned to the engine room and took charge and nursed the pumps oiling the shaft regularly but that pump eventually packed up so I changed back to the first pump and nursed it until we arrived back at port. After docking that pump also packed up. If I was not on board and had the experience I had that ship could have gotten into serious trouble and we could have quite possibly have lost her and all the crew. I had the pumps repaired by an engineering company in Copenhagen



We undertook another PR cruise to Stockholm as we had an organisation there and we wanted to see how it was doing and see if they needed any assistance. Flag sent Bill Robertson (known as Captain Bill) to take over the reigns in Europe and supervise all the organisations on the continent. He was appointed Continental Captain thus relieving the ship’s captain of that duty.

Capt Bill Roberston

Capt Bill Roberston

After a few days Mitch our new captain received a message from Captain Bill that I must immediately catch a flight to France and meet him in Cherbourg as he had an important assignment for me. Well I quickly packed a suitcase and took a taxi to Stockholm airport and boarded a flight to Paris and later a train to Cherbourg. I arrived late that evening and Captain Bill was waiting to meet me and we then took a taxi to the military harbour in Cherbourg where the British station ship “Commodore Queen” was berthed in dry dock.

I was immediately appointed captain of the ship and ordered to take responsibility for her re-fit by the harbour workforce. Bill then left and returned to Copenhagen to carry out his responsibilities but returned every now and then to see how things were going. Then one day a mission arrived from flag consisting of Wally Burgess and Art Web. Wally was one of my ex captains from the Athena and I knew him well, a very nice guy and we got on very well. His first words to me were, “Travers!! What the hell has he done” (referring to Captain Bill). I asked why and they informed me that Captain Bill had gone over to England and hijacked the boat, sailed it across the channel to Cherbourg and there was hell to pay at flag. Now the reason the ship was in dry dock was because while captain Bill left the harbour in England, the ship started taking on water and started sinking as there were holes in the hull, so he radioed the port authorities in Cherbourg to prepare the dry dock. I was relieved of my command by Wally who took over the captaincy and we then re-floated the ship.

I then to Stockholm and Wally and Art were instructed to sail the ship back to England where the authorities confiscated the ship. Captain Bill was ordered back to flag where he was to be comm eve’d by orders of the staff captain. In his write up Captain Bill said he had to take the ship out of England as it was his responsibility as Continental Captain EU after hearing that the authorities were going to confiscate the ship.


After returning to Stockholm we sailed back to Copenhagen and I was transferred to the Flag Ship which was docked in Madeira, a Portuguese island off the coast of Africa.

I was then put on the flag internship to further my training as an auditor and in the process counselled many of the staff and crew clearing up their upsets etc. My then wife Peggie had 2 children back in South Africa who needed attention and we obtained a leave of absence for a year and came back to South Africa. After a year we went back to Portugal and joined up with flag once again.

LRH was not aboard the flag ship at the time and I was assigned the post of ships programs chief. This post put me in charge of all the ships of which there were 5 in the sea organisation including the flag ship, but this was only the running of the ships. There was another organisation on the flag ship which was responsible for scientology around the world. Hubbard left the flag ship as he was ill with lung problems and my first assignment was to check all the air-conditioning units in his living quarters and where he did his writing and have them repaired where necessary. He also suffered from various allergies from certain textiles and I had to check that none of these textiles were in his living and sleeping quarters.

I then personally experienced some of Hubbard’s viciousness after he accused me of sabotaging Scientology in The Western United States when I was not even there. What happened was that there were many of the staffers children at the advanced organisation in Los Angeles where public came to study and receive counselling and the executives of this organisation wanted to send the children to one of the ships during the day to be cared for after schooling. The result was that the ship’s captain and the execs of the LA org started fighting and Hubbard held me responsible. I knew about this situation and ordered all involved to handle it but Hubbard decided to blame me. He ordered a committee of evidence to be held on me and face a charge of sabotaging scientology in the Western United States. I was of course found guilty by the committee because if I was found not guilty Hubbard would have fired the committee and have another convened. I was then put in a lower condition once again but this time I was too angry to do any of the conditions and penalties.


We returned to South Africa shortly after and took over the running of the local sea org mission in South Africa responsible for the running of all the Scientology orgs on the continent. However I was still very angry and took a leave of absence and found a job and started making some money for a change.

In all my time in Scientology and the sea organisation pay was virtually non-existent except when on the flag ship who received money from all the organisations around the world. My wife Peggie and I split and it was only then that I discovered we were never actually married. I worked for a while and started earning money for a change but I was begged to come back and if I did not they would have declared me suppressive. I returned but I was already declared a “FREELOADER” and had to pay my freeloader bill which I did.

So once again I experienced poor food and no or little pay. I got over my anger and settled down. I was appointed chief officer and did what chief officers did. A while later, the commanding officer and her husband were transferred by their request to the Flag Ship and we received a new CO by the name of Norman Starkey. He was on a leave of absence from flag and when that leave was up he returned and took over the reigns of our little outfit.

Norman Starkey

Norman Starkey

Earlier when I was on the flag ship holding the post of ships programs chief, he was the captain of the flag ship and my junior but now he was my senior. This guy was a screaming shouting type of a character and I considered him quite insane. The 2 of us fought continuously and at one stage I landed up in the old Hillbrow hospital with ulceration of the stomach. I overcame that and Norman was later recalled to the flag ship. We received a new CO and a while later I was asked to run the Johannesburg Continental Org as it was not doing well and I ran that for a few months. During this period I got married again to my current wife. Peggy sadly died of cancer in 1994.


Around 1979/80 I was removed from the position of CO Johannesburg  – without any reason given and returned to the continental headquarters. This removal upset me and my wife and I decided to leave in 1980. My wife also gave birth to my daughter Natalie in 1979. So I got a job in my profession once again and started earning money and for the time being moved in with my wife’s parents until such time as we could get a place of our own. I then started my own business doing graphic arts for the printing industry and things were going OK.

And then in January of 1986 Hubbard died. I was very shocked and attended the “memorial service” event in Johannesburg where David Miscavige came onto the scene for the first time.

Approximately a month later I received a telephone call from Dave Engelhard and Sue Price who were senior personnel at the newly established Flag Land Base which was situated in the newly purchased Fort Harrison Hotel in Clearwater in Pinellas County, Florida USA.

They wanted me to return with my wife and children. They needed my expertise as they wished to purchase a new ship. My wife and I discussed the possibility of returning but we were not keen. We received quite a few calls from America over the next few days and eventually were persuaded to return. This was a bad mistake. We closed the business, sold the machinery and my car and purchased flights for the 5 of us and flew over to Clearwater USA. We were given a nice welcome and I was appointed to a position in the newly formed ship org. There were maybe around 15 of us. My wife was appointed as a registrar.

I was asked to go and see the owner of the ship who was based in Florida so I flew down to Florida and had an interview with the owner – a wealthy businessman.  Asking price was US$12M and we did a deal. He said he liked the look of our bank account which was sent to him earlier which was an offshore bank account in Europe. I did not see that account. He then gave me permission to inspect the ship which was docked in a port close to Clearwater. So myself and a colleague and myself visited the ship which I inspected and gave my approval. It was a nice ship!

Then some time later Engelhard was not happy with me for some reason or the other which was not explained to me and he took me outside and he started roughing me up but not hitting me. I exploded and nearly attacked him as in my younger years I trained as a boxer but I refrained but warned him that if he tried that again I would break his neck. This really upset me.

My wife was also not happy. As a registrar her job was high-pressure and she was on post phoning people  from after breakfast at 9:00 am until 10:00 pm. After that she was made to baby sit for another registrar until 2 or 3 in the morning. The baby was brought to our living quarters and none of us got a proper nights sleep. This carried on until one night I told this other registrar that we will no longer do this. She reported me to ethics for endangering her job. In addition to this we got our little  5 year old girl in a school but the 2 boys now aged 11 and 13 were not in school and my wife was not very happy about this.

So my wife phoned her parents and asked them to purchase tickets for us in South Africa as we were coming home. They purchased tickets for us which we collected and one morning early we left and flew home to South Africa.

My wife’s parents were not very happy with me. At this time at the age of 46 I decided that I had enough and would resign from scientology for good. But I owed my wife’s parents a lot of money for the 5 airline tickets they paid for. My family and I were now penniless and homeless and in debt. So I went to see a lawyer and asked him to send them a lawyers letter at the Flag Land Base in Clearwater demanding that they refund me for the airline tickets we purchased. They refunded the money without any problem whatsoever and I settled my debt with my father in law and purchased a small vehicle to get to work and back and lived with my parents in law until we could get our own place.

I got a job once again at the Star Newspaper and at the age of 46 had to start over from scratch, get the children educated, which we did and also purchased a house. There was just not enough time left to save for mine & my wife’s retirement although we had a house and transport. Then at the age of 63 my job became redundant world-wide and went digital. At our company alone over a 100 people lost their jobs. The company paid me a retrenchment bonus and paid out my pension. There was just not enough money in the pension fund to retire on so I had to take the money and start a business. A year later my wife got retrenched in part due to BEE and was paid out her pension which was also not enough. As we could not afford to invest our money in a pension fund we had to pay tax which was nearly half the pay-out..

We started a business in the bridal industry and did very well for a while then were hit by a series of events that we could never recover from. We got robbed of R15,000.00 due to cable theft we lost our phone lines and internet for 6 weeks which were crucial to the success of our business. Then the Chinese came into South Africa and undercut our prices followed by the Global Credit Crunch which, all combined, destroyed us. We went bankrupt and lost everything and ended up owing the bank in excess of R100,000.00.



The lower organizations around the world were a type of pyramid where they would be allowed to deliver lower less secret services to people they recruited using advertising and other means to recruit them at their own expense and then feed these  people to the higher organisations for the more advanced secret services and then ultimately to the Flag Ship or Flag Service organisations.

In the early days higher services were delivered at Saint Hill in East Grinstead, England but from the late sixties onward higher level structures were created called Advanced Organisations where higher services were delivered.  I am not 100% sure today but probably the same or similar structure still applies. Class 4 orgs would recruit, train and process individuals and send them to AOs or Flag where they paid much more in order to go up the bridge.

When I was the Commanding officer of the Johannesburg org we had around 60 staff members on staff. Then we had the Guardian office and the Continental Liaison Office (FOLO) each with their own staff.  All these staff members were paid by the training and processing done by the Johannesburg Org. Also the rent for the Guardian Office and Liaison office plus payroll and food for the liaison office. There was never, never, never enough pay to go around for all the persons in these different organizations.

When I was on the station ship in Denmark the AO had to support us and most of the time we received no pay and often had to eat fried bread as there was just no money. But when I later transferred to Flag the food was fabulous and we always got paid. This was because at that time the Flag Ship was at the top of the pyramid. This applied to the organizations in Europe, Africa and the United States. The lower level orgs had a form to fill in at the financial week end at 2 PM on Thursday which broke the income up into different categories as follows: 10% to the Guardian Office, 10% to the FOLO 5% to St Hill etc.

As far as I was concerned there was no need for AOs but this was set up to support the ships and keep them operating in order to control the AOs and keep the money flowing to Flag who stuck it away in offshore bank accounts.

A class 5 organization could have run all the courses and processes up to the top of the bridge eliminating the need for AOs and eliminating the cost of extra staff and buildings and payrolls and ships. Another sticky point for the lower orgs was that they employed staff to sell books and proceeds all went to Publications organizations which was another Sea Org institution. When we did not get paid which was nearly always LRH would say “If you don’t get paid you can blame the person you see in the mirror”, thus not taking any responsibility for the way he set up the orgs around the world. The FOLOS  also had a registrar who made tens of thousands of of dollars every week which was sent to the AOs but the office received nothing for the work done.

LRH set up the AOs due to the so-called confidential nature of the materials but this was nonsense.  I have managed to read all the confidential materials such as NOTS, the L rundowns and OT8 which I downloaded from the internet and I was not impressed in the least.

And now you know my story of the +/- 24 years I spent in service of Scientology & the Sea Organisation.

Love Travers Harris


77 thoughts on “Travers Harris – my life in SCN & the SO

  1. I would like to add the following to this article. The ethics policies of LRH can be very helpful as witness when I used them on a PC as an auditor without eval or invalidation to help him or her through the conditions. But when put into the wrong hands by evil people or used as punishment can be quite devastating to the person it is incorrectly applied to.

    • The Conditions are fundamental truths, if you look at them with depth.
      CONFUSION: Find where you are.
      (Factor #3 “The first action of beingness is to assume a viewpoint.”)
      (Factor #4 “The second action of beingness is to extend from the viewpoint, points to view, which are dimension points.”)
      TREASON: Find out that you are.
      (This has been a huge problem of lack of data – there is much to it, but it’s fair to say, I think, that no one defined WHAT a thetan is, or what “life” is, so there was no success or fulfillment of finding THAT you are [a thetan with a set of capabilities].)
      ENEMY: Find out who you really are.
      (Choice of do good or do bad, but no one had defined good or bad. People get the impression that “Axioms of Scientology” says “Axioms of Life.” Axiom #31, “Goodness and badness, beautifulness and ugliness, are alike considerations and have no other basis than opinion” is exactly, exactly correct as an axiom of Scientology.)
      (All of Scientology fulfills the formula for non-E for life itself. What is needed and or wanted is knowledge. Do and or produce it.)

      If you notice all of this revolves around one point, which is self-determinism. And Factor #2 “In the beginning and forever is the decision and the decision is TO BE.”

      I speculate that NOTs is based on the Conditions of Confusion, Treason, and Enemy. Some guy who used to be an ethics officer and used to post on Marty’s blog stated in summary that ethics was never applied as intended. When done correctly, it is ARC and helpful and bring understanding and works wonders.

      In my opinion – and this is jus speculation on my part – Hubbard was trying to prepare the church for being a big organization.

      • Nickname, you wrote:

        “TREASON: Find out that you are.
        (This has been a huge problem of lack of data – there is much to it, but it’s fair to say, I think, that no one defined WHAT a thetan is, or what “life” is, so there was no success or fulfillment of finding THAT you are [a thetan with a set of capabilities].)”

        I never understood why so many people had the idea that on the Treason formula the response was always supposed to be “a thetan.” LRH even gave an example of how that formula is applied when being done on one’s post.

        From HCO PL “HATS, NOT WEARING”:

        “The formula for Treason is very correctly and factually, ‘Know THAT you are’.

        “It will be found, gruesomely enough, that a person who accepts a post or position and then doesn’t function as it will inevitably upset or destroy some portion of an org.

        “By not knowing that he is the _____________ (post name) he is committing treason in fact.

        “A person in a group who, having accepted a post, does not know THAT he is a certain assigned or designated beingness is in TREASON against the group.”

        As I see it, the conditions formulas refer to operating conditions in life and thus apply to some area of life – either a whole dynamic or a portion of one. And in any of those instances, the person has “accepted a post or position.” Thus, if he is in Treason, it would be because of not functioning in that post or position (examples of position: husband, daughter, friend, neighbor, student, club member, etc.)

      • Btw, Nickname, I liked most of what you wrote. Just wanted to make one other comment, on this part of your post:

        “ENEMY: Find out who you really are.
        (Choice of do good or do bad, but no one had defined good or bad. People get the impression that “Axioms of Scientology” says “Axioms of Life.” Axiom #31, “Goodness and badness, beautifulness and ugliness, are alike considerations and have no other basis than opinion” is exactly, exactly correct as an axiom of Scientology.)”

        As regards “…but no one had defined good or bad,” we do have the definition of ethics as a stable datum: “rationality toward the highest level of survival for the individual, the future race, the group, and mankind, and the other dynamics taken collectively. Ethics are reason. The highest ethic level would be long-term survival concepts with minimal destruction, along any of the dynamics.” (*Science of Survival*)

      • Marildi,

        It’s a big issue and has gotten very confused by many, perhaps especially those who who look to the church as “salvation.” Organizational ethics are not the same thing as personal ethics, which are not the same thing as universal ethics. They are related, and ideally could be the same thing, but there is reality to as-is (fully understand).

        Universal ethics are senior, then comes personal ethics, then organizational ethics. It is a gradient of realities, e.g. Bodies are a means most of us use, and we cannot ignore maintaining a body; neither can we ignore the other hats (Dynamics) we have accepted (the hats of others), as these are all interrelated and supportive in society. “Flag SO” may disparage “wogs” but in doing so are to some degree not-is-ing society (a very large organization in which the church is “an individual”), and their use of and reliance on electricity, concrete, water, food supplies, commerce, clothes, weather reports, the seasons of the year, orbit of the Earth, and so on. Some sects or groups or whatever have become so out-of-touch (disassociated) they want their own “communes” so they can “boast” about no connection (dependence) to the rest of the world. As groups, their ethics are out of alignment with society’s, and as individuals, they are presumptively not fully “social” with most of the others in the society. It’s disagreement, dis-alignment of Admin Scales, even an ideological conflict to some degree.

        I wanted to, in my first post, validate the Conditions and show the self-determinism of ethics (to me, ethics is really Admin Scales, before Conditions). To me, this seems like it would be very important to many. It goes deep, but is intuitively understandable. In practice, it is a gradient, and where someone is on that gradient will vary.

        If someone has resolved on their self-determinism to dedicate their lives to “the service of the church,” then the presumption is that they are a thetan, and that is not an issue to the organizational ethics of hats and Conditions (organizational ethics only address organizational function of hats and Conditions, as I understand them). The issue is the degree of agreement (coincidence of admin scales), within the group.

        It is one’s personal ethics responsibility to check the coincidence or alignment of one’s own goals and purposes with the goals and purposes of the organization, and (technically) assign the organization an ethics Condition based on one’s own ethics. The Doubt Formula may apply. (The sad reality is, I fear, that those who should be assigned a Condition of Doubt are assigned a Condition of Treason simply because it “sounds cooler.”) “Being a Thetan” is a personal, not an organizational, issue (but being a thetan also involves a full understanding of all the capabilities and functions of a thetan, amongst other thetans).

        I can’t be sure I adequately addressed your reply, but I hope I brought some things up for consideration.

      • Marildi,

        Your second reply is a subject of great fascination through the ages, and many really, really good minds such as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle have brought it up for analysis. The issue is the definition of “good.” It’s easy to go into circular references on this. “Reason and the contemplation of optimum survival” is fine, and intuitively functional, but how does one define “optimum survival?” I’m fishing around relying on the philosophers, but Aristotle brought up two really good pints that caught my attention, personally. In Nichomachean Ethics, he pointed out that when we are talking about the good, something for which men aim, we are talking about two things” the goodness of the means, and the goodness of the ends. the second point, in Eudemian Ethics he comes up with a definition for good. Translations from Ancient Greek do vary, but Anthony Kenny has it this way: “What really is the chief good is the purpose or end that is the cause of what leads to it and is the first of all goods. It is this, then, that goodness itself must be: the end of everything attainable by human action.” To me it means that the purpose, or intention, or impetus towards good, is the chief good. I get some intuitive sense that Aristotle was somewhat frustrated at being egged on to define good. He might have said, “Hey – if you don’t know what you’re doing, you’re not good.” LRH pointed out that the goodness of a being is proven by the withholding of oneself, the limiting of one’s scope and actions, by oneself, following an overt act. Socrates said words to the effect that he wasn’t sure about the definition of good, but he dearly hoped he was. (I should dig up the reference, but it is found in John M. Cooper’s “Plato Complete Works.”)

        Scientology is geared towards getting the individual up to a point where they can have their own determinations of good, and of how to pursue or accomplish that, both in ends and in means. And LRH, though very well versed and steeped in philosophy and study, focused on the arriving or actualization of man’s inherent basic goodness. So his definition is both easily understandable and intuitively useable.

        But – and this is my motivation, or whip, really, to dig into Universal Ethics – the church has gone horribly wrong. I think the reason is a lack of definition of personal ethics in alignment with universal ethics, or a lack of a definition of good at the most esoteric levels which can be connected to an immediate functionality in the present real world of the San Diego Freeway northbound at five in the afternoon.

        The best I have come across as here-and-now-to build-on is admin scales. I think the admin scale is a template for the logic of life, and as such, is a template for reason in “reason and the contemplation of optimum survival.” Admin scales all fit together, or integrate. It truly is fascinating (to me). You make coffee as part of breakfast as part of getting ready to leave for work, as part of “living” – all the way up to religious beliefs. Most in the USA I think have “big admin scale” goals of “family, house, cars, kids, die and hope for Heaven.” And admin scales of the delivery guy interact with those of the recipient of the package – a society. It is the upper end of the range of admin scales which lacks definition..

      • Nickname, you wrote: “I wanted to, in my first post, validate the Conditions and show the self-determinism of ethics (to me, ethics is really Admin Scales, before Conditions). To me, this seems like it would be very important to many. It goes deep, but is intuitively understandable. In practice, it is a gradient, and where someone is on that gradient will vary.”

        That is well said! I agree with each point you made, and I did get that you wanted to validate the conditions and the self-determinism of ethics.

        With regard to people varying on the gradient, that is one very significant aspect of LRH’s genius in putting together ethics tech, admin tech, the tech of auditing and even word clearing. People vary as to the depth of their cogs, understandings and abilities gained, in accordance with their spiritual state to begin with, IMO. I learned that as a student auditor on the practicals (never did an internship) and as a word clearer.

        As regards what you wrote about “’Being a Thetan’ is a personal, not an organizational, issue,” what comes to mind on that is what LRH wrote in at least a couple of policy letters – which was that “you can’t put a datum where a being ought to be.” In other words, mechanical or rote following of policy and handling of one’s post just won’t work. I think that particular “policy” would need to be in effect in any organization, not just scientology, because of just what you stated – that all dynamics are interrelated.

        And I do agree with you that “It is one’s personal ethics responsibility to check the coincidence or alignment of one’s own goals and purposes with the goals and purposes of the organization.”

        Yes, you certainly did “adequately address” my reply. Great post otherwise too. Thank you! 🙂

      • Nickname, I just now saw your reply about universal ethics.

        You wrote: “…a lack of definition of personal ethics in alignment with universal ethics, or a lack of a definition of good at the most esoteric levels which can be connected to an immediate functionshows the expanding BEING in terms of an ever-wider area of space.ality in the present real world of the San Diego Freeway northbound at five in the afternoon.”

        Wouldn’t the meaning of ‘good’ be implied in the definitions of each of the dynamics, keeping in mind that LRH later changed their definitions from a thrust towards optimum SURVIVAL on each to “BEing” each of the dynamics.

        In the quote below, where it refers to “Figure II,” it is talking about a diagram of concentric circles representing each of the dynamics – the first inner circle representing the first dynamic, etc., on outward to the eighth circle representing the 8th dynamic (you probably recall the diagram):

        “A complete person is BEING at least seven dynamics. Such a person would be a god compared to normal human beings, but there seems to be no reason why there should not be such a person. There may be a lot of work involved in becoming such a person, but there was a lot of work involved in building the pyramids, too, and there they are.

        “Figure II shows the expanding BEING in terms of an ever-wider area of space.

        “This figure is included to correct the possible impression that various dynamics lie exclusively at certain points on the tone scale. We see here that in order to reach the borderline of the second dynamic, we first must pass the borderline of the first. However, the second does not begin at “I,” it begins at “O.” All the dynamics begin at “O.” The first begins at “O.” The second begins at “O.” And so do the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh. The boundary lines express rather the accomplishment of BEING those dynamics. They show that one has to accomplish a little to BE the first dynamic, more to BE the second, more to BE the third and so on. But we might infer from the figure that when one had reached the second, one would have succeeded half way in BEING the fourth. This inference, while uncertain as to proportion, is correct in principle. The achievement of BEING the first and second dynamics is part of the achievement of BEING the fourth dynamic. This is the accumulation of BEINGness, which was mentioned in the last section. We shall see in the next section what happens when the accumulation of BEINGness is disregarded in the journey outward to the edge of the circle.” (*The Second Dynamic* book)

      • p.s. Sorry. In my cutting and pasting I messed up on what I quoted from your post, with some words inserted incorrectly. What you wrote was as follows:

        “…a lack of definition of personal ethics in alignment with universal ethics, or a lack of a definition of good at the most esoteric levels which can be connected to an immediate functionality in the present real world of the San Diego Freeway northbound at five in the afternoon.”

      • Marildi,

        Thanks much for your validation, it is deeply appreciated. I hope that some of what I write – just my takes on how to use existing straight Scn tech to improve conditions – is readable and useful. As you said, “People vary as to the depth of their cogs, understandings and abilities gained, in accordance with their spiritual state to begin with, IMO. I learned that as a student auditor on the practicals (never did an internship) and as a word clearer.”

        What others make of admin scales and Conditions will vary, and I’m not trying to be sway people to my views (some probably think I’m nuts), just to look at and use the tech (and forget about abusive seniors and such). As you said, as a person with own opinion and choice and thoughtfulness. “… what comes to mind on that is what LRH wrote in at least a couple of policy letters – which was that “you can’t put a datum where a being ought to be.”

        I really admire your abilities to handle considerations with precision – it’s almost like you have medical grade lights and equipment to see and handle considerations, I mean, to understand and handle them correctly, not just originations, but data as well. People seem to think there are only originations or comments. There is also exchange of ideas and viewpoints, and those can contribute to another’s overall understanding. LRH was exceptionally, exceptionally good at that, like Mozart with music, but not all tech is only LRH – others are capable of contributing bits and pieces once they grasp the standard tech template. TRs were, I’m told, the result of a group study of how LRH audited, and what he did that others didn’t. It was submitted for approval. It went under LRH’s name just as GE Labs inventions belong to GE (standard practice). All of Scn is laid out in communication, but it is up to the individual to “get it” and see life itself,independent of Scn..Scn isn’t “life” – it is a wholly consistent science (prediction of cause and effect) which helps or enables the individual to view life through their own glasses, and establish their own ethics of being, doing, and having. I don’t think LRH ever imagined anyone who would NOT do that, but that’s just my speculation.

      • Hi Nickname,

        Thanks for your validations too! I am very much in agreement with you that the exchange of ideas is quite helpful. It is also valuable to do what you are doing when you compare scientology ethics to other systems – good application of Logic 8.


        Along the same lines, I don’t recall the reference but I remember LRH saying that by studying scientology a person would better understand his own religion. So it works both ways, and I too have found that studying other systems of thought has increased my understanding of scientology!

        As an example, recently I’ve been learning a bit about Eckhart Tolle’s views (author of *The Power of Now*), which are amazingly similar to scientology in many ways, including his construct of the ‘pain-body’. From what I can tell, it’s the same thing as the reactive mind. There is also what he calls the ‘egoic mind’, which would include the pain-body and all the conditioning of the analytical mind as well.

        His methodology is similar to that of both scientology and Buddhism but significantly different in some ways too (at least with respect to some Buddhist sects) in that, for one thing, he has the student practice being “mindful” (meaning, non-egoic) in everyday life.

        Speaking of TRs, my comparison of scientology to Tolle’s teaching would be to say he essentially teaches them to use OT-TR0 – to simply “BE there” in llife – and then to respond or act only after pervading the area. That is to say, after LOOKING, which is essentially TR-0 – BE there and confront. Basically, his students are taught to LOOK with awareness (or consciousness, as he usually terms it) at what is presented to them in life, and as they do, their responses are not based on ego (which fundamentally is fear) but on direct perception.

        In effect, the person would see the situation for what it is, without any ‘filters’ or biases but rather with an understanding, first and foremost, that most people are “unconscious” (his word) and that “they know not what they do” (he quotes Jesus). Eventually, they would gain an understanding of the Oneness in the workings of all actions and all beings in the universe. In other words – enlightenment.

        What occurs with the practice of this method in life is that the “egoic mind” is gradually weakened and (I assume) ultimately has no effect at all – similar to the concept of clearing in scientology, except that the egoic mind would include both the reactive and the analytical, the latter being all conditioning – right down to conditioning as a human, due first of all to having a body and a brain and the restrictions they present.

        In short, Tolle’s students become cause over both the reactive and analytical minds by becoming cause over the egoic mind through practice; whereas, in Scientology, one becomes cause over the reactive mind primarily with auditing, and the analytical mind primarily with training and education.

        I sort of got on a roll there! 🙂 But this is a good example of how I have gained a more in-depth understanding of scientology by studying other systems.

      • Marildi,

        Wow! After years of comm you’re the first person to suggest or point to a definition of good (other than quotes). Being the Dynamics is very interesting. Funny how words trigger thoughts and how a being can change as a result. There are many goods. Talking about them, kicking them around, bouncing them off the walls can’t be bad, can it? But not many people do it, that I have heard. Christians give you verse (some of it very good – and some Christians really do live it, all their lives – and you have Buddhists who can do things we don’t consider possible – sitting calmly in self-immolation is just a dramatic example, and one must wonder about all the other less flashy things the guy could do or be or have, what wisdom is present, what will, what considerations of harmony). I tend towards precisions, like mathematics and admin scales, while being Dynamics is more like a big broad rainbow brush over the landscape. I wish I had something that gave direction, as a general rule to measure by, that others could use, too. Music is, I’m told, 95% technique – you have to understand the math, the scales, the harmonies, and practice, practice, practice (and more practice, practice, practice). Then you can play and you know things literally at your fingertips, see relationships like magic An example of someone who needs something “hard and precise” to “compute with” is Heber Jentzsch. He doesn’t seem to be being many Dynamics, and if he looked at that, perhaps he’d change his mind about being as he is, “atoning.” But then you also get the potential value equation of strength in DMSMH, and building pyramids. Arguably, he’s not functional. You could almost say he’s wrong (in not standing up and “handling the situation as an internal ecclesiastical matter of the church”). I’m seriously looking and working with what you said, thank you! If one extends it to include furthering others’ Dynamics as well, I think you get creation of energy, granting of beingness.

        For your interest here’s a link to an article I posted elsewhere.
        It got too compacted, trying to keep it short. I no longer post there because the moderator allowed what I consider to be a troll, and I just don’t mess with people who insult me, or moderators who think insults are “free speech.” There are two Class VIII’s who also post there, and not one of them posted anything in the comments. Not one. Another example of overts of omission because there is no direction. Moderation is necessary on a blog, not optional. There is positive, and there is negative, and the two don’t mix well. There must be a definition of positive. Not just a “whatever.”

        I want to be sure you get that I got what you said about being Dynamics, and I do appreciate it, and I’m looking and working with it. I’m seeing links and interconnections there with my approach. It is, I think, a question of how to get people to engage with life and knowledge, and you point to being, which is, imo, correct.

      • Nickname, you wrote: “Funny how words trigger thoughts and how a being can change as a result.”

        That is so true. With some words I’ve cleared, I felt like a meaningful chunk of the universe was opened up for me. A wonderful feeling!

        To answer your question, yes, I did get that the piece of tech I reminded you of, as regards BEing the dynamics, is something you are seeing all kinds of interconnections with your approach. Glad to hear that! You may remember the dissemination tape where LRH stated that every living organism, even things like grass, are existing in order to HELP! What a concept, for real.

        And incidentally, what I get from you is that HELP is a key part of what you are attempting in your thorough examinations of the tech. I read the article you posted on the Milestone Two blog and thought it was a very informative piece of writing. Good job!

        A couple other pieces of ethics tech I thought might be helpful to remind you of are the following (quoted from the Tech Dictionary):

        EXCHANGE BY DYNAMICS, a person who doesn’t produce becomes mentally or physically ill. For his exchange factor is out. The remedy is rather simple. First one has to know all about exchange as covered in the product clearing policy letters. Then he has to specially clear this up with people who do not produce. Clear up the definitions of dynamics then have the person draw up a big chart and say what he gives the first dynamic and what it gives him. And so on up the dynamics. Now, have him consider “his own second dynamic.” What does his second dynamic give his first dynarnic. What does his second dynamic give the second dynamic and what does it give him. And so on until you have a network of these exchange arrows, each both ways. Somewhere along the way he will have quite a cognition. That, if it’s a big one is the end phenomena of it. And don’t be surprised if you see a person now and then change his physical face shape. (HCO PL 4 Apr 72) [The above is a brief summary of the action. Full data can be found in the referenced HCO PL.]

        CONDITIONS BY DYNAMICS, an ethics type action. Have the person study the conditions formulas. Clear up the words related to his dynamics one to eight, and what they are. Now ask him what is his condition on the first dynamic. Have him study the formulas. Don’t buy any glib PR. When he’s completely sure of what his condition really is on the first dynamic he will cognite. Similarly go on up each one of the dynamics until you have a condition for each one. Continue to work this way. Somewhere along the line he will start to change markedly. (HCO PL 4 Apr 72) [The above is a brief summary only. The full procedure will be found in the referenced HCO PL.]

      • Well hello Nickname 🙂 Great to ‘see’ you here, doing what you do best!

        It’s been a full 5 months since, that farewell you bade us on MS2, with that ‘insulting’ episode. We had several chats which I appreciated.

        In fact, I was the first, to comment, on your article, as well as the last whom you acknowledged, where I tried to encourage you to ‘stay.”

        In my case, given the leeway to respond freely to ‘insults’, etc (not acceptable to moderators, though) I relish the opportunity to give as good as I get (with interest!!!) 🙂

        Though I still have the greatest respect for Lana, and the work she is doing, (which is very admirable) I have found it pointless to continue there with comments ( I have lost interest via the ‘silent treatment’ or total lack of responses.) I still wish ’em well though… 🙂

        I certainly enjoy the free flow of comments and lack of ‘cliques’, on this very blog, (BIC rocks, baby!) As well as the blog of Geir Isene, and of course Mike Rinder. In these, there is no exclusive ‘hero worship’ thing going on, but rather a preponderance in the direction of friendliness toward persons, who have had genuine gains, from the subject of Scientology, and its founder, LRH, yet are now also freely looking at the broader life experience and knowledge thereof.

        Looking forward to your regular postings here. 🙂

        Kind regards, Calvin. B. Duffield Durban.

      • Hi Marildi,

        I’d heard of Tolle but never looked into what he wrote. Truth is there to be had, everything else is just descriptions. Comparisons are useful. It is a fascinating area, easy to get on a roll about, isn’t it? Not evaluating for you of course, but I think what you got on a roll about is what you see for yourself.

        I like the philosophers because you can see where LRH drew from truths they uncovered, and reading the originals shows how much sense and integration LRH provided. Aristotle talked all about men and different trades and professions, as well as states of mind, and at different ages in their lives, about excesses in either direction and their results – he covered the area with amazing comprehensiveness, and logic like a vise. But it took LRH to come up with the admin scale.

        It occurred to me, thinking over and experimenting with beingness and all, that being one’s Dynamics is the implementation of admin scales. And associated tech of exchange by Dynamics (VFPs exchanged). I still think that admin scales are perhaps the “reason” part of “reason and the contemplation of optimum survival,” and perhaps the “optimum survival” part is the area of ideal scenes – but the implementation has to happen somewhere along the line, once one has mapped out where to go. One should have some notion of what those admin scales are, before living them. Or live them, but look at what the admin scales are as one lives.

        These posts are getting a bit out of sequence, and the single column format isn’t as good for replies. We should pick this up later sometime! But just one more lengthy piece.

        You do have LRH’s definitions of the ninth (aesthetics) and tenth (probably ethics) Dynamics, as well. But this is an individual choice alone, if we are to value what we conceive of as freedom of choice.

        That is where universal ethics is above personal ethics. It gets into very, very dangerous territory to try to prescribe ethics, because it invites a “one-way-only” regime, in which everyone must follow the orders issued (and that is backwards, from ethics).

        So Scn does NOT prescribe ethics (the closest I guess is TWTH). Scn is there to enable the individual to determine his own ethics. But so many have not done that. Why? How not? How does one get a man to look? Is there no tool in Scn which provides some help in determining what one should and shouldn’t do? I think there is, and that would be ethics tech, but it must be used. Ethics – personal ethics – with admin scales and other ethics tech – should be coached from very early on. It does not require much effort or time or expertise. And as auditing and training progress, personal ethics should be reviewed and updated periodically, regularly, to develop the individual’s self-determinism and rationality. I do that. PC has a good session, comes in the next day, I pull out an admin scale at some point. “Wow … what’s this?” they ask. Usually, you just take five minutes to show the references and how to use it, then have them do one, and coach them over technical mistakes and confusions, and they get the idea. I do it as freebee, because the pay-off is so great in the progress they make, because they intuitively blow away a lot of confusions and misdirections and develop a much better notion of where they want to go. You get to sit and watch the little wheels go round and round, lights come on, etc.. You ask for updates, later on, ask for how things have changed. I mean, if you have “the stones” to audit, then you certainly have enough to review admin scales. It’s an objective “process.” You can even ask them what “good” means. “What is beauty?” LRH did order “train and audit” and he’s right about that, but at some point one has to ask, “Why?” I mean the real why, one’s own motivation. And from there, structure how best to learn and accomplish that.

        The church is collapsing not because of Miscavige. It’s collapsing because too many individuals failed to establish their own ethics. The ethics tech was not used. I’m not the former EO who posted and very succinctly explained that fact, I just observe what happened and deduce the only possible conclusion I can see. In archeology, one doesn’t go into the field with a pre-deduction, rather, one collects data and “you let the bits and pieces tell you” – you have to listen very carefully, then just as carefully form hypotheses. As you pointed out, you need a being on post, not a datum. One can BE one’s Dynamics, but isn’t it true that one also needs to evaluate and know that one knows how to establish programs? And as I pointed out, one must evaluate the admin scales of an organization (not just stated goals, but actions or implementations). One evaluates these against one’s own admin scales and notions of what is right and what is wrong. We are very good at noting what is wrong, but not quite so adept at finding what is right. But in order to evaluate against one’s own admin scales, one must have one’s own admin scales to begin with, and most people do not have those at the highest levels at all, not of their own, and dream of 40 virgins in Heaven – or 70 virgins now, due to inflation. (Do the women get 70 “studs?” I’m not sure I would want virgins – they tend to be “hesitant,” and a little inexperienced. And 70 hot-blooded broads would probably kill me … oh, wait ….) (Sorry, maybe a little too colorful, but it illustrates how someone can “get into” some subordinate admin scale and just go haywire following where it might lead, out of curiosity, and you see people do this all the time, in what I guess is a form of non-confront of the real senior admin scales. It sounds pie-in-the-sky to expect that most people will be examples of ethics and independence, as opposed to followers doing what they are told, believing what they are told, but that is the star-high goal of Scientology, to bring true freedom.)

        Ethics are self-determined, but sometimes people need a little help. I see that working with admin scales and drawing similarities amongst them, building them, integrating them, must lead one to “some overwhelming question” … AND the answer to it.

      • Hi Nickname,

        Thanks for all your well-informed views. And the colorful parts were okay too, some fun “side color.” 🙂

        Firstly, you wrote: “Not evaluating for you of course, but I think what you got on a roll about is what you see for yourself.”

        If I understood that correctly, I would say it was a good observation! What I did there was more or less an exercise in putting my own understandings into words – one of the main benefits of blog exchanges. Incidentally, do you recall where LRH wrote (or stated in a lecture – I can’t recall the reference) that he wouldn’t be able to teach us anything if we didn’t already know it? That was always intriguing to me. I’ve wondered at times since I first heard that if he was alluding to the Akashic record, wittingly or not, because I can’t help but think there might very well be such a record – especially if it is true that we are ultimately all ONE, one Consciousness, which many teachers from Buddha on forward have concluded. Or even if it only means we are all interconnected by the “universal mind.”

        Interesting enough, I was going to mention TWTW next myself, because that is probably a “whole tech” in itself. BUT – what you now bring to mind, in your quest for a system of life orientation is…the Life Orientation Course! If you’ve had experience with that course on any flow(s), or have read comments about it on the various websites, you probably are aware of all the different pros and cons from one extreme to another. Myself, in addition to having done the course, after reading the comments of various tech and admin terminals who were on posts that were privy to what went on behind the lines in the early years when the course was piloted and first released, I am convinced that it was designed to do the very kind of thing you describe! It seems that you are in good company with LRH in seeing the necessity for orienting one’s life around ethics.

        As I recall, the LOC course started out with some sort of de-PTS’ing cycle (hard to remember specifics that go back to over 2 decades ago) and then involves a thorough study, together with clay table processing, of the dynamics and conditions, followed by O/W write-ups (on all dynamics, I believe) Exchange and Conditions by Dynamics and RPEC (Repairing Past Ethics Conditions). In addition, the student learns all about the org board and then creates his own personal org board. And all this leads to being able to work out one’s own Hat in Life. Note, it was only at some point after the initial release that DM forced in the arbitrary (among others) that you had to work it out so that your hat in life was your current post. That set many students up for a big loss.

        In any case, the thing I am getting at is your idea about the Admin Scale being a product of genius on LRH’s part and a great example of his brilliance in integrating the wisdom handed down through the ages and modern times too. I most definitely see how the Admin Scale could work as a tool to ethically orient an individual in life. However, my guess is that it would possibly be too steep a gradient for the vast majority of people, unless they happened to have a good teacher like you to work one-on-one with them on it. This may have been the reason LRH broke down the gradient the way he did on LOC. In applying the Admin Scale, not everyone is up to “knowing how to establish programs,” for example, as you pointed out. In any case, kudos to you for thinking with the tech and its application. Keep up the good work!

        JFYI, there is a way to reply to a post so that your post ends up right under the comment you are replying to. You just have to click on the “Reply” button at the bottom of the email notification of the comment you are replying to. That will take you to a reply box at the bottom of the whole page, which will say right above it “Leave a reply to Nickname” for example (which is above the reply box I am typing in right now). Then, after you hit “post comment” it will end up in the right place.

        Otherwise, thanks for the comm! As you say, we can pick it up later some time. 🙂

      • Marildi wrote:

        Incidentally, do you recall where LRH wrote (or stated in a lecture – I can’t recall the reference) that he wouldn’t be able to teach us anything if we didn’t already know it?

        This comes from Plato, a dialogue called “Meno”

        Sorry. As you know, Marildi, when it comes to philosophy, I always love to quote “Source”!

        Alanzo (:>

      • Wow, Al, I hope Nickname is still reading the comments on this thread, because I think you have just pointed in the direction of the answer to his question – What is “good”? – which is also referred to as “virtue” by Socrates and Plato.

        The article you linked lead me to another article that does an overall analysis of Plato’s “Meno” dialogue. Here’s an excerpt from it:
        In the end, Socrates has in fact made a few substantive points about virtue besides the point that to learn it (if it were knowledge) would actually be to recall it. The most important such point is that the good or virtuous depends on wisdom: “All that the soul undertakes and endures, if directed by wisdom, ends in happiness.” This will be a recurring theme in the rest of Plato’s work – true virtue is not a matter of custom, but rather of knowledge.

        In the Meno, however, this is not stated clearly. There is a lingering conflict between the conclusion that virtue is, “as a whole or in part,” a kind of wisdom and the conclusion that no one can teach it (so that it cannot be knowledge). The Meno leaves us hanging between defining virtue as straight knowledge or as a kind of mysterious wisdom revealed to us by the gods “without understanding.” It is seen as likely that most virtuous men are so by holding “right opinions” rather than true knowledge. Right opinions lead us to the same ends as knowledge, but do not stay with us because they are not “tied down” by an account of why they are right. Thus, we can only depend on semi-divine inspiration to keep us focused on right opinions rather than wrong ones.

        What I got from that article is something I have always “known” about the truth of Ron’s Optimum Solution as “the solution which brings the greatest benefit to the greatest number of dynamics” – i.e. that underneath this Solution, and basic to it, is an innate sense, a Knowingness, of what is good or virtuous. Otherwise, we would get tangled up in an endless figure-figure as to the greatest good across the dynamics. LRH’s tools of ethics are brilliant “reminders” of what we already know to be “good.”

        Thanks, Al!

      • Is that any worse than “all roads lead away from Scientology:? 😛

        Actually, the truth that both Plato and LRH stated goes back at least as far as Buddha (farther, no doubt) in his analogy of the finger pointing to the moon. What all three are all saying is that the teacher can only point (usually with words) to the moon – to truth. The student then has to make the quantum leap of “seeing” (knowing) the actuality of the moon,. How could one possibly do that without already having the potential knowingness of it within himself?

        Deal? 🙂

      • I think that is one interpretation. And an excellent one at that.

        And I might add that it is one of many valid interpretations of the passages you read and put together from the three sources you drew from – all without MU’s or overts or PTSness blocking your ability to see your own correct interpretation and valid exegesis of these sources.

        So well done.

        But I see things differently these days. If you study a little more Plato, especially his Theory of Forms, you get into more of what he means when he says that knowledge is already inside us and we are just being reminded of it.

        Once you begin on that path, Plato’s path, it leads to a different destination than the route Hubbard took.


      • Al, why do I sometimes get the feeling that you are patronizing me? 😕

        And then you go on to try and snow me with a bunch of significance. 🙄 Btw, did you even read that article yourself? It actually isn’t all that favorable to Plato’s Theory of Forms. Here’s another critical take on it, succinctly phrased in a single sentence:

        “Plato himself was aware of the ambiguities and inconsistencies in his Theory of Forms, as is evident from the incisive criticism he makes of his own theory in the Parmenides.”

        Seirously, why not give some substance to your statement that Plato’s path “leads to a different destination than the route Hubbard took.” All style and no substance makes Al a dull boy.:D

      • Beautiful posts on ethics, reason and philosophy in general! Its a discussion I find almost angelic as it resonates within, true source! Thank you all!

        Now Alanzo..after reading your blog and getting to know you a bit better I wanted to respond to the comment you made “all roads lead back to scientology” as well as your viewpoint on seeing things more differently now if thats ok?

        I find it absolutely remarkable how no matter what camp one belongs to haters, moved beyond or graduated from Scn and indie groups we all seem binded in some intangible way to it!!

        From what I see you are well aware of this and although you disagree with Scn you cannot allow yourself to disown the subject completely and chuck the whole lot!

        I cant help but admire you for that and for probibably being a likable rogue! My point is that you are too smart to become a hater and the upper levels done outside the church are loads
        of fun!

      • Hi sheeplebane,

        Al’s comment that “all roads lead back to scientology” was a mocking commentary on my post. That’s why I replied in the same vein, with “Is that any worse than ‘all roads lead away from Scientology’?”

        You see, Al thinks I give far more credit to scientology than is due, and in turn I think he is unwilling to give any credit at all unless pressed into it – and even then, he adds qualifiers that nullify any previous credit given. Maybe not on the same thread, but on another one later.

        He says things like, “Yes, TRs had some good aspects,” and in the next breath: “…but ultimately they resulted in hypnosis of the most insidious kind.” (Loosely paraphrased but close enough.) Depending on which blog he’s on, he either tippy-toes around about scientology – or stomps down hard on it. So I’m calling his bluff a bit on this thread. 😉

      • Sheeplebane:

        From what I see you are well aware of this and although you disagree with Scn you cannot allow yourself to disown the subject completely and chuck the whole lot!

        I spent a lot of time in Scientology. In many ways, it saved my life.

        And Scientologists are some of the best people I know on Earth. They are very much like me.

        Believe it or not – and many scientologists don’t – I care very deeply about what happens to Scientologists in Scientology.

        I cant help but admire you for that and for probably being a likable rogue! My point is that you are too smart to become a hater and the upper levels done outside the church are loads of fun!

        Keep reading, Sheeplbane.

        Keep examining whether “hater” is a correct label for Alanzo.


      • Marildi Third Partied:

        “He says things like, “Yes, TRs had some good aspects,” and in the next breath: “…but ultimately they resulted in hypnosis of the most insidious kind.” (Loosely paraphrased but close enough.)”

        Oh tsk tsk, Marildi.

        You asked me this direct question. And I answered you directly. Your paraphrase is not at all close enough and I have a had time believing that you do not know that.

        Have you forgotten how to create a link? Exactly what I wrote is here:

        “Depending on which blog he’s on, he either tippy-toes around about scientology – or stomps down hard on it. So I’m calling his bluff a bit on this thread. 😉

        Hmmm. Looks like Sheeplebane, and others, will have to be the judge of that.


      • Al, a few posts down on that exchange you ended one reply with the following:
        Alanzo | October 19, 2014 at 9:09 pm | Reply

        …What I said was that the problem with hypnotic states is that they make the person susceptible to suggestion.

        It is the reason that licensed hypnotists are licensed.

        Implanting someone’s mind with suggestions, especially as deeply as Scientology invades a person’s mind, is dangerous if you intentionally use suggestion against a person’s own interests, as L Ron Hubbard did.

        Licensed hypnotists always tell their clients they are undergoing hypnosis. Hubbard lied to Scientologists and told them that they were undergoing the OPPOSITE of hypnosis, and then applied hypnosis to them, and implanted them with suggestions.

        L Ron Hubbard was the most unethical hypnotist in world history.


        In spite of several attempts at TR-3 on my part, you never did answer LDW’s question of whether or not you could name, specifically, one thing you thought was good or beneficial about scientology. And in the end, you blew the comm cycle and disappeared altogether from that thread.

        So will you now answer the question directly? And not add the kinds of things you have in the past, such as “However, any gains a person got was only because of their own doing – in spite of Hubbard, not because of him – and besides, they eventually lost all gains anyway.”

        If I am exaggerating you are welcome to correct me and put the matter to rest by finally answering LDW’s question. I thought it was a good one.

        Btw, a Third Party by definition is unknown. I am challenging you openly/

        p.s. Don’t forget to reply to my other comment about Plato. I would hate to be left with another incomplete cycle! 🙂

    • Exactly – “when put into the wrong hands by evil people or used as punishment”. Unfortunately, that is exactly what the “church” does today – ethics is punishment, pure and simple. You cannot apply the conditions on your own determinism anymore – you have to have the “cognition” THEY want you to have, and you aren’t climbing out of it until you do.

      I remember something about LRH saying to be very cautious in using SCN ethics as it’s like greased lightning, and another saying the typical Ethics Officer should have the personality of a gentle shepherd to his flock.

      Well, since the SO took over, that went out the door, and today it’s a bunch of wolves having a bloodbath and “get ’em” attitude. Ethics is supposed to be a personal issue, but the Church has mushed this all up with Justice instead – it’s now brutal enforcement and punishment by the group. How many times have I heard “he/she is out ethics” being spread by staff and SO when referring to public? Too many.

      • In Hinduism, the fundamentals of ethics are: Cultivating friendliness towards happiness, compassion towards misery, gladness towards, virtue, and indifference towards vice. This helps clarify the mind.

      • Boggle – not too long ago, you were posting on this blog as B.V. Orts. At that time your were cautioned about your continued efforts to derail topics by mocking and/or denigrating Scientology and LRH. There are many people supporting this blog who still consider themselves Scientologists and are applying this tech/philosophy to their lives. This blog is intended to provide a safe forum for everyone – those both in or out of the Church.

        Whereas we encourage robust discussion, sharing of ideas and debate, our moderation policy is clear when it comes to ad-hominem attacks and denigrating remarks intended to provoke or upset other visitors to this blog. Please either adhere to this policy or seek an alternative platform to publish your comments.

      • I find that some of my posts on this blog simply do not get published with no feed back to me. One of those posts that did not get published contained a rational analysis of Scientology Axiom #1. I do not understand how that analysis made Scientologists feel unsafe.

        Are we applying a policy similar to the verbal tech policy on this blog where discussions on tech get discouraged. This is the part of this blog’s policy that I do not like, and it discourages me to post on this blog.

      • The reason that post was not published was because of this: “Even when we separate Church and the tech we find hidden curves in the tech that are very harmful. Here is an example.”

        Our moderation policy is clear. This is not an anti-SCN blog. Therefore, stating that the tech has hidden curves that are very harmful is clearly an anti-SCN remark. As you had already posted this article on your own blog, we did not feel it necessary to re-publish on BIC.

      • +1
        Shelly, you are so right!
        As early as 1972, even in missions, ethics was perpetually used as punishment, if one was able to notice it.

    • MODERATOR COMMENT: Hello lrhbt. We cannot publish your comment due to upper-level references which are against our moderation policy. We have sent you an email.

  2. Thanks for sharing Travers.
    Important History.
    There are no mistakes ever made in Scientology.
    There are only *CRIMES* !
    These *CRIMES* stem from malice to Destroy Scientology !
    And the longer and harder one has served and worked for the Church the more
    Evil and Criminal one is in the eyes of the Church…hence the Top Execs who have served
    the longest have all been declared “Provisional SP” and tossed into SP Hole.

    Lord have mercy on us all 🙂

  3. Video featuring interviews with people who had worked personally with L. Ron Hubbard, many of whom witnessed the time period described in Travers’ excellent article:

  4. Hi Travers. I remember you as the Ships Programs Chief on Apollo. That must have been 1972. I was the SE US Programs Chief at that time. Those were interesting times. I had no idea what was going on in the background at that time.

  5. Great history! I love history. On the issue of confidentiality I totally agree with you. Confidentiality is a scam and a via to attribute more importance to the materials than they deserve. Since leaving, I have done some solo session that I spent all of four hours hatting myself up for, and more to the point I go out of my way to be out-security. And I MEAN go out of my way – to prove a point (like when I was a kid I’d say F**k you God, to see if he’d strike me down). I audit in my office, without so much as locking the door. I leave my materials lying around. In fact right now, they’re in plain view in a corner of my office. NOBODY CARES. Read my worksheets and they mean absolutely nothing to anybody.
    That doesn’t mean I don’t have any wins from it (considering its free – if I was paying $7,000 an intensive I’d say there’s no wins) – just the security side is all hype. I’ve messed up sessions and had no health issues,. Never gone PTS from the data. The OT3 data is completely irrelevant to what you’re auditing. It’s just case.

      • Just so you know april fool I paid next to nothing for my upper level and its a gift that keeps on giving. Maybe its not for you but why spoil it for others who may want it? Inval just gets too easy. Im sure if we did a thorough investigation without inval to you or your case the right why could be found. OT levels done proper actually do work. If this irritates so be it.

  6. Thanks for sharing your story with us, Travers. It’s good to have you back in the “Indy” fold where you can hook up with old-timer kindred spirits that were castaway (literally) by the “church”.

    You guys were all pioneering heroes, and your stories are crucial in terms of accurate historical accounts of the early days. No “PR” involved – just the plain, cold truth – told as it was at that time.

  7. Excellent article, Travers.

    If Scientologists were allowed to compare notes like this while in the Church of Scientology, well, what would have happened?

    People would have had the information they needed to make informed decisions about their own involvement in Scientology – that’s what would have happened.

    This is one of the reasons I think the Back in Comm blog is one of the best on the Internet. It treats people like grown ups who can make their own decisions and adheres closely to the ideals of the Creed – which were the ideals of the group that we joined when we first signed up for Scientology.

    Whether that group ever actually existed is another issue entirely.

    Thank you again, Travers, and thank you again to the Back in Comm blog for continuing to seek to live with the truth.


  8. Travers, what experience and adventure. Pity about the ending, though. You should have received your pension instead you had to start all over again when not young and a family to educate. So glad you got out and with your family entact.

    Not only you, but I, too, threw up a good job with good money to follow the dream. I gave up family, too. I’m back to being the Master of My Fate again and never been happier.

    Two (maybe three but can’t now remember the third) things that struck me and that was when the heavy ethics entered, the academies emptied. They’re still empty or those there are there because they’ve been threatened with ethics.

    The other thing was how many times you went back. I’m not judging, I’ve just noted it. It’s seems to be quite common. It’s the carrot that scn is helping people and it’s your eternity, blah, blah. But still….

    I never joined the SO but I did join staff. I routed off quite early, not completing my contract and vowed I’d NEVER be on staff again. NEVER! And I wasn’t. It killed me spiritually. I took a long time after leaving to feel whole again. It was a slow process.

    But we still stayED in as publics. ?????? That carrot of it’s your eternity and scn is the only group who can save the planet. What crap, hey? But we all bought it.

    • MODERATOR COMMENT: Vinaire, your comments are usually well received, but we cannot allow comments that are off-topic and in violation of our moderation policy. Please stay on topic and take into consideration remarks that may offend other Scientologists visiting this blog.

  9. Travers, thanks for posting your experiences. You were an able-bodied seaman, indeed! I hope that for all you contributed you also had some great wins in your auditing and training.

  10. Thanks for the interesting story Travers.
    You are obviously a very competent person. It really does seem that LRH went off the rails around the early 60’s in terms of adding inapplicable harshness and such. You must have been a very loyal person or very impressed with the tech to have put up with all of that suffering.
    It also shows me that you have a big heart and you really care about people.
    Thanks for your help flow and communicating what actually happened.

    • Yes, thanks Travers. Very interesting story, and much appreciated.
      And, you are right, Tony. Interesting out points in the early 60’s.
      Does anyone have any idea on what triggered the outpoints? (Were there outside influences or some kind of undermining going on around that time?)
      Having a more global view might help to explain the why behind some of the out points.

      • 1984, Remoteview has a good handle on what went on back then. Omar Garrison wrote a good book about the FBI attacks, (cant remember the title). Tom Martiniano has written some interesting stuff about plants.
        Ive met past lifers with some savage stories to tell about attacks from as early as the early 50’s. Even the church knows the FBI had at least one plant in in the early 50’s.
        Those of us who have come to know Ron through his tech know there was no paranoia and there wasnt. Personally, I marvel at the fact he lived to die of natural causes and I think it says a lot for the policies he did implement.
        Unfortunately, I believe he had to take a hard line, and some suffered for it unnecessarily, I do believe he would handle those arcxs if he could.
        But, and this is a big but, the ethics tech in the wrong hands is dynamite and even before dm, morons with a penchant for harm, dug this tech a little too much.
        So I believe its a valid tech and very useful, has been for me, but by god, how do you choose who gets to use it on the group? Thats the question!

      • 4a, yes, I would be very interested in reading up on these first-hand stories. Do you know where they are available?

  11. I too fancy history, I find it fascinating how things in the now were caused by actions in the past. Its like a large chronospheric jigsaw puzzle one can look back on from then to now, with the added benefit of hindsight. Travis you have given us yet another interesting portal into the past. Cheers for that, enjoyed reading it as much as you did delivering it I hope.

    Ive come to realise that the ethics tech as its own separate body of knowledge is dynamite. You may blow someone or yourself eads off if you aint careful! For this reason it should only be used at least in an organisation by a true master. Problem was there were none. Even LRH had a hard time getting this baby to be applied well all the time. I feel many people had the short end of the stick, especially you. (Me too). Ive found the gentlest approach always works best.

    Another true test of its power is how much harm can be done if you intend actual harm. The havok that plays out we have all seen. Maybe this is why some measure of security should be maintained with certain materials. To protect. After all nuclear technology can be used for good or bad yet mankind or rather a small percentage of mankind have prefered the H bomb bias!

  12. It appears that my answer to the latest accusations has been blocked along with the earlier post which presented information that challenged the idea that Scientology Ethics was “greased lightening.”
    MODERATOR COMMENT: Boggle we have sent you an email – please look out for it.

    This article is not about opinions, attack or debate about the validity or “harm” on SCN ethics tech. Please re-read Travers’ statement on his viewpoint of this. The topic here is a personal life story told by an Old-Timer pioneering Scientologist sharing his all-encompassing early adventures in SCN and the SO. Please find something positive to comment on, and we will gladly publish it!

  13. From reading books about LRH: In early 1960 he purchased the property at East Grinstead and moved there with his family. Shortly thereafter, LRH Jr. – known as “Nibs” – blew from Scientology for the first time. LRH was reported to be very upset about this. In addition, his mother died right around this same time.

    Scientology was growing and LRH traveled giving speeches. He was apparently well received by his admirers. In August 1962 he wrote a long letter to President John Kennedy advising the president that Scientology could assist the astronauts who were preparing for the American space program. LRH was prepared to fly to Washington DC from England to assist with the influx of astronauts expected at that facility.

    Kennedy never answered his letter and no astronaut sought out Scientology. But what did happen is that in January 1963 agents of the FDA (Food and Drug Administration raided the DC Scientology Center and confiscated 2 tons of books and e-meters. The charges involved the e-meters being mislabeled as medical devices. LRH was outraged and vocal about this action by the US government.

    Apparently after this event his actions and edicts became increasingly bizarre.

    • Okay… wild speculation here… and in the spirit of whole track…what if… someone else was already on (or in) the moon and JFK leading America and eventually the world to the moon was a big ‘no-no’ ? The ‘markabs’ or who have you’s reading Hubbard’s A History of Man etc, saw potential trouble were he to be proven right… thus 3rd party CofS to the FDA to separate the two groups (USA & Sci) and more drastic measures culminating on November 22 63… Didn’t Hubbard write or have something to do with the booklet “Fortress in the Sky” about using the moon as the ultimate defensive offensive high ground for earth?

  14. I suppose I put a lot of doom and gloom in my article but on the bright side, after the heavy ethics period, we had a ball that was incredible. We sailed around Europe and North Africa and the people I worked with were just incredible. Many of the people I will never forget. Stella King, Wally Burgess, John and Joke O’Keefe, Janis and Terri Gilham, Hanna Eltringham, Ron & Peaches Pook, Joe van Staden the list goes on and on.

    I saw so many different countries. Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Norway, England, Scotland, Sardinia, Italy, Greece, Tunisia, Morocco, and more. We sailed the Med, the North Atlantic and the Baltic Sea. Conning a ship in the middle of the night with the stars shining in abundance is an experience I will never forget.

    The heavy ethics period did not last all that long so I wonder why DM had to bring it back.

  15. Travers, so generous of you to have shared your amazing life long journey, while actually exposed to the ‘rough end’ of life, working alongside what became the very worst behavior and moods of LRH and Scientology.

    To date, I have read extensively of many opposing accounts of the subject, including Janet Reitman’s “Inside Scientology” (IMHO, the most thorough, incisive and widely researched treatise to probe the movement. In this masterly handling of a most controversial yet convoluted inquiry, Ms Reitman, in her totally unbiased approach, yet manages to salvage, the essential core benefits, and positive elements, contained therein.)

    There are, as can be expected, a great many negative experiences, arising from personal conflicts and struggles centered around efforts to “control”. “Control” that is, when viewed both subjectively and objectively

    Possibly, one of your greatest achievements, as I see it Travers, is that you have managed to maintain your dignity and the retention of your inherent goodness, after all you have been put through. Refusal to be consumed with hatred and bitterness, too.

    I applaud you, Sir! For THAT, is my understanding of REAL integrity!

    At the end of the day, what “richness”, surpasses “understanding”?

    — Calvin 🙂

  16. BV Orts aka Boggle – wow! You certainly are one tenacious bugger! Too many of us needing re-education perhaps? Something is driving you to persist in doing what you are doing the way you are doing it! I cant help but speculate? Ex OSA troll turned hater? Could be. What I do know is this. You would be more welcome elsewhere dontcha think?

    • I addressed this BV ORTs/Boggle matter earlier but it was blocked. This may be blocked too, but I’ll try. When I transitioned from my old (Windows XP) computer to my new (Windows 8.1) computer there were remedial actions done on the old computer, then transferring of files from the old computer to the new one, then several days of familiarizing myself with the new (8.1) system and undoing its kinks. During this time, I looked at this blog, and posted something, and an old moniker “Boggle” appeared. It’s that simple. There was no sinister plot.

      • Thanks for the explanation. As stated earlier, we have sent you an email. We are still waiting for your reply.

        BIC ADMIN

      • Thanks Admin, I did reply, here, and it was nuked.
        It’s impossible for me, and it seems for some others also, to determine with certainty what will be acceptable or what will be unacceptable to the Admin. There’s such a wide variation in what’s acceptable.
        I calmly accept that I will eventually be banned.

      • Boggle – we sent you an email to get this issue out of the way. Please respond via email.

  17. Wow Travers, that was a very punchy essay! I like the way you write, straight and to the point. The Church of Scientology has been able to stay open and expand on some occasions, because they have no payroll. Any organization that does not have to make a payroll can usually keep the doors open with free labor/volunteers. If the Church ever had to make a payroll, it would have folded as early as the D.C. Founding Org.

    The Flag Land Base could make payroll and still, David Miscavige does not provide it. It has become a custom that there can be no payroll, and anyone who can’t live and die with that is cursed by the high priests.

    I have just very recently, surveyed my own track. Which parts of it were lived in very high ARC, which parts were lived in low ARC. It became that simple for me, looking back over my life. The parts I lived in high ARC having great fun, were the reward for my living. The parts that were lived with low ARC, were my penalties for living. At this point, I am not bankrupt from those rewards, as the pleasure periods stretched further than the penalty periods. At the end of the day, I am ahead. Times when that margin came close to going in the red, I switched gears.

    It sounds as though you had many great adventures and rewards, in terms of pleasure, for living.

    Thank you for sharing those adventures with us. I think in our future lives, we will be able to kick it up a notch or two, and really shake things up! It might not be comfy running against the wind. But that is how we earn our wings and learn to fly.

  18. Interesting… I was in the SO in LA 1979-1984… Reading your write-up about Hubbard over boarding (going overboard on the ethics) I wonder if Hubbard was attempting (experimentally) to see if he could super apply the conditions formulas and end up with some kind of super Sea-org Juggernauts in condition of POWER? You and me would never apply such drastic formulas’ and maybe he presumed that others would not be so intense (or insane) about it either… but he was wrong, there is a log of monkey-see monkey-do in the sea org. Oh, and sorry I called you a food Nazi in response to your post about sugar but come on, we are talking about feeding ourselves!

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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