Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology
From: [email protected] (The Pilot)
Subject: SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 17 - Christmas 1997 PILOT POSTS
Date: 22 Dec 1997  14:00:31


POST17.txt

SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 17 - Christmas 1997 PILOT POSTS


==========================================

Contents:

subj : Super Scio - CHRISTMAS TRUCE
subj : Super Scio Humor - CHRISTMAS RITES CORRECTED
subj : Super Scio - About Germany (Answering Klaus and Ruanaidh)
subj : Super Scio - DEAR OT 8
subj : Super Scio - Discussing the End of Scientology
subj : Super Scio - Signs of Implosion (Attn Bernie)
subj : Super Scio - To Klaus about Circular Reasoning
subj : Super Scio - Thanking Cornelius for another Book Site
subj : Super Scio - A Thank You to FZA
subj : Super Scio - Answering JF on Xenu and Reform
subj : Super Scio - Continuing Sea Org Under Pressure
subj : Super Scio - Answering the ClearL Survey
subj : Super Scio - To Heidrun and Others About the Book
subj : Super Scio - Answering Pierre
subj : Super Scio - Answering Ralph About Orgs Etc.
subj : Super Scio Tech - About Running Implants (to Robert)
subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Steve and Sarah
subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering CBW about the new book
subj : Super Scio Tech - About Feedback (To Nogoot)
subj : Super Scio Tech - About the Fountainhead

==========================================


subj : Super Scio - CHRISTMAS TRUCE


CHRISTMAS TRUCE


Sassie10 has proposed a Christmas truce and there has been
much discussion of this on ARS, with RonsAmigo trying to
derail the proceedings and get people back into a fighting
spirit.

I will agree to the truce and I would suggest that the
critics do the same for the following reason:

A Christmas truce might make the difference between some
OSA and SO staff who are handling the internet getting
to take the day off or having to be on post.

Just guessing now (no insider info or OT powerz at work),
I would suspect that Sassie is staff and it would make
the difference in her getting to go home for Christmas.
And I would suspect that RonsAmigo is a big league FSM
moonlighting for OSA on his home computer, so it doesn't
make any difference to him at all.

Now I sympathize with staff, having been in that position
myself.  Sometimes getting the holidays off was taken
for granted but usually it required extensive CSWs
(Completed Staff Work - a detailed writeup, in this case
an explanation of why one should get the day off, which
must be approved by one's seniors).

And it is in keeping with the spirit of Christmas.

But for those critics who don't agree with either of these
reasons, I would point out that there is also a vested
interest both for themselves and for me.

It is that some staff might go home for Christmas and
have a chance to reconnect with their familys and have
some time to think things over.

I don't want to discuss the implications in detail
least some fanatic design a "home for the holidays
sec check".

So here is my Christmas gift to OSA.  You can take
the day off.  There will not be a series of wild
pilot posts on Christmas day to set off your alarm
bells.

Merry Christmas

The Pilot

==========================================


subj : Super Scio Humor - CHRISTMAS RITES CORRECTED


CHRISTMAS RITES CORRECTED

Tilman's fake HCOPL about Ethical Christmas Trees was quite
funny.  I really liked the part about the ethics officers
playing the 3 wise men in the nativity play.

But of course Scientology doesn't have nativity plays.

So here are the true secret rites performed at midnight
on Christmas Eve.

First, a great Christmas tree will have been erected in
the ballroom of the Ft. Harrison.  Initially, it will have
been decorated in the usual fashon with many Christmas balls
and an angel on top.

The staff and various public who pay especially for this
privilege will gather there at midnight.

Next, the commodor's messengers select various solo nots
students and graduates from the audience, hand them brooms,
and escort them to the tree.

There they use the brooms to knock all the balls from the
tree.  This symbolizes purging the tree of its body thetans.

Next, the angel is removed from the top and replaced with
a likeness of Hubbard.  This is the signal for the Christmas
Hubbard to enter the ballroom.

The staff will have competed all week long to determine
which of them gets to play Hubbard.  The winner is the one
who has placed the most other staff members into the RPF.

The Hubbard arrives on a sedan chair carried on poles by
twelve RPFers wearing raindeer antlers.

Then the three wise men come out.  These are Class 12
case supervisors who are dressed as Eienstein, Edison,
and Freud respectively.

Freud bows and begs Ron's forgiveness for creating
the evil psychs.

Eienstein bows and begs Ron's forgiveness for not
giving him a nuclear physics degree.

Edison bows and begs Ron's forgiveness for inventing
the light bulb before Ron had a chance to do so.

This all occurs amid much cheering and applauding.

Then the Hubbard dismounts from the sedan chair and
opens his bag of gifts.

These gifts are various Scientology books, tapes,
jewelry and so forth.  The people who are to recieve
them will have paid for them at the bookstore earlier
that day.

Then one of the cadets will read "The night before
Hubbardmas" to the audience.  I forget most of it,
but it goes something like:

'Twas the night before Hubbardmas, and all through the org
Not a squirrel was a stirring least they be thrown overboard
and the staff members tiptoed through the land base with care
in the hopes that the Hubbard soon would be there'

Then comes the carroling, with traditional songs such
as "Oh little town of Tilden" and "Deck the halls with
heads on a pike".

Finally the Hubbard is presented with his gift, which
is always a bottle of fine scotch.

He drinks it down to prove his OT powers as the MAAs lead
the crowd in "Hip, Hip, Hurrays".

And a grand time is had by all.

The needles are floating,
The reges are gloating,
The PCs emoting,
and Ron is besotting.

And thus is Hubbardmas celebrated at the Flag Land Base.

Give the gift of joking and degrading at Christmas time,

Seasons Greetings,

The Pilot


PS. In truth Ron actually liked Christmas (he used to get
gifts from all over the world because it was known that
he would personally read any cards or letters attached)
so there would generally be a Christmas tree and some
singing and egg nog flowing and a pleasant time at Flag,
at least in the old days.

The individual orgs varied.  Sometimes they would say
to hell with the stats and take some time off.  Sometimes
they would have Christmas trees.  Sometimes they would
sing Chirstmas carols at the last academy graduation
before Chirstmas.

And occasionally it would be the opposite and there would
be a reign of terror because of the crashed stats and
they would try to get people to be on course Christmas
day and so forth.  That always acted as a footbullet.

It all depended on who was in charge.  There were no
policies on it.

==========================================

subj : Super Scio - About Germany (Answering Klaus and Ruanaidh)


ABOUT GERMANY (ANSERING KLAUS AND RUANAIDH)

On 7 Dec 97, [email protected] (Ruanaidh) continued the
discussion on subject "Super Scio - World Takeover (answering Anonymous)"

> In article <[email protected]>, Klaus Bloemker
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > The Pilot wrote:
> >
> > > WORLD TAKOVER (ANSWERING ANONYMOUS)
> >
> > > On 21 Nov, 97, Anonymous <[email protected]> asked:
> >   ....
> >
> > >> 3. Do you think the German Government is overreacting to
> > >> Scientology?
> >
> > > Definitely.
> >  ....
> >--------------------------
> >
> >I would like to make a little comment on the subject, as a complete
> >outsider to Scientology:
> >
> >1.
> >In the light of the fact that Scientology has not even been able so far
> >to get political control over a small city like Clearwater, the German
> >government's reaction definitely looks like an overreaction.
> >(Having put Scientology under surveillance.)
> >
>
> Hubbard was a corrupt personality, this seems clear. His lusts were for
> money and power, (sex comes a poor third?). Scientology indulges these
> lusts, in addition to this his novels (eg, Battlefield Earth), express in
> fantasy his lust for conspiracy, revenge and power.
>
> But clearly he is no match for someone like Hitler, whose lust for power is
> deadly, exact and brilliant. The Nazi SA was a Nazi army in waiting,
> designed to replace the German army upon the seizure of the state. This
> actually created a problem for Hitler upon the seizure of power, that the
> SA under Roehm expected to take over or become the army power. Hitler wasnt
> ready for this, as the German Army represented the only force that could
> challenge him. His solution? The night of the long knives, to murder Roehm
> and his followers and a thousand others. The army was grateful but
> enslaved.
>
> Hubbard set up his Sea Org, complete with snazzy uniforms, but it is
> regarded as a joke by every serious politician. Hubbard was a madman, like
> Koos.
>
> >2.
> >But the very fact that this news exchange between Anonymous and you is
> >anonymous, makes one wonder what kind of organization these two people
> >belong to.
> >And: I just read your 'Reformer's Homepage'. It was the strangest
> >reading I have had so far on Scientology. Why?  Not because of the
> >content, on the contrary. -  Because it's published anonymously!
> >And one wonders: What kind of organization is that where such an honest,
> >well worded and loyal critic is not tolerated and the author seems to be
> >at risk.

Yes, it is amazing.  It is one of the things that I hope to see
reformed.

> >Another, related point, you say:
> >
> >> ... it is wrong to persecute Scientology as a religion [in Germany].
> >
> >Yes of course that's wrong  - but do you think that's the case?
> >
> >Or let me put my point this way: If you published your 'Reformer's Page'
> >tomorrow in Germany and had it widely distributed -- do you think
> >anything would happen? Do you think people or even the government would
> >say: 'No, this kind of religion/philosophy and this kind of organization
> >Pilot is outlining is not tolerable in Germany'? -:)

I believe that it is already up at website in Germany.  And I don't
believe that it would have any problem from anyone there who read
it.

Also, I have not heard that they are suppressing Scientology
liturature.

But let us say that I was working there instead of here.  I do
computer work and sometimes I contract with companies that do
work for the government and who have to follow governmental
guidelines.

I do still consider myself a Scientologist even though I have
serious disagreements with OSA and the Sea Org.

On that basis I might be fired from a job or lose a contract if
I were working in Germany even though I agree with them about
the bad behavior of the organization.

That is what is wrong.  Their target is too broad and their
statements are too vague.


> It is exceptionally independent, brave and courageous of �The Pilot� to
> criticise the cult and post to usenet, but is he brave enough to answer
> this?
>
> >The Germany-Scientology thing has absolutely nothing to do with
> >religion/philosophy or system of belief or anything of that kind.
>
> Well Mr Pilot?
>
> >
> >  Klaus Bloemker
> --
> Ruanaidh

What Germany is actually objecting to has nothing to do with the
religion or philosophy.  But the manner of their objection was
slopply and lacking in precision and has crossed the boundary
and become religious prejudice even though that might not have
been intended.

They could have voiced their concerns about people who were
actually in the pay of the official Church of Scientology
and made that their criteria.  The fanatics who are not
direct employees do recieve sales comissions (FSM or Field
Staff Member comissions) so this does serve to identify
all who might be untrustworthy due to fanatic obedience to
the Sea Org.

The vast majority of Scientologists are hiding on the sidelines.
They do not like the organization's behavior but they do
consider themselves to be Scientologists.  They hope for
change but are not allowed, per policy, to push for reform.
They are in a quandary, unwilling to leave and unwilling
to become active in the organization.

This might well represent 90 percent of those who still
consider themselves to be Scientologists.  This includes
myself and many of my friends.

Specific attacks against those who are in the pay of the
CofS, with well documented explanations of the reasons for
this (operation Snow White, etc.) would raise further doubts
about the organization within their minds and aid in pushing
for reform and overthrowing the current CofS management.

Vague attacks against Scientology in general serves to
strengthen their support of the fanatics who are currently
in power.

The CofS management presents the German attacks to the
membership in a manner most calculated to inflame their
worries and build solidarity against religious persecution.

In its current form, the German situation is strenthening
Scientology management rather than weakening it.  This
is undesirable for all concerned whether loyalist, critic,
or reformer.

Merry Christmas,

The Pilot

==========================================

subj : Super Scio - DEAR OT 8


DEAR OT 8


Welcome to the top of the bridge.

I know that you have made gains from the tech.  Otherwise
you would not have stuck with it, put up with the arm
twisting, and spent all the big bucks.

I made lots of gains too.  Really.  Of course a lot of my
gains came from training or from unrestrained solo auditing
on my own.  But I really did make gains on the PC side of
the standard bridge.  The tech does indeed work.

I would say at this point that about 30 percent of my case
has been handled.  Of that, perhaps 10 percent was as a
PC/PreOT and the other 20 percent by training or soloing
on my own.

The remaining 70 percent is not usually keyed in heavily.
I'm not walking around all caved in.  After all, I am
clear and I can usually keep some separation from my case
instead of dramatizing it and pulling things in.

So I usually do well.  But I can get charged up or key
in occasionally, and I still have the occasional cold,
and I certainly don't go around walking through walls.

Eventually you come down off of the high of the last level
and take a look around and see that there is a hell of
a lot more left to handle.

This would be fine if there were a lot more case handling
levels left for you to do at the org, assuming of course
that you don't mind the excessively high prices.

One of the big PR statements about solo nots was that it
was the last of the negative gain levels.  All the others
were to be positive gain.

Of course you are probably hankering for a positive gain
level right now because they should have been giving you
those to do all along (a balance of negative and positive
handling).  That might be fine too if they had more
case handling levels to do after you beefed yourself
up with a few positive OT levels.

Unfortunately, there is no further case handling left
on the standard bridge.

Remember, Dianetics, and then Grade 2, and then Clear,
and then Nots were each supposed to be the full handling
of somatics when they were released.

Maybe you think that you don't have any somatics anymore.
You could test this by banging your head against the wall.
I think that it will hurt.

But, you say, that is purely physical.  Oh no.  The pain
you feel when you bang it is physical (actual impact),
the pain that you continue to feel after you stop is
a somatic.

Want proof, run a contact assist on it.  Notice that this
still works.  If it were purely physical there would be
nothing for it to run on.

If any assist ever works, then obviously you still have
somatics and there is some part of your case that is
still present which is causing this.

Now don't let this invalidate the state of clear.  Once
you can confront the pain in mental image pictures, you
really can confront it and it is no longer the why.

Don't let this invalidate your grade 2.  If you have
confronted your overts, don't let anybody (especially
the org with its endless sec checks) convince you that
you are still pulling in motivators when you are not.

Most especially, don't let this invalide the cause over
life cog.  Once the Nots stuff comes under your control,
it is no longer going to be the source for anything no
matter what the org says.

These are all real gains.  The pain is probably less and
a hell of a lot easier to confront than it used to be.
The odds of your accidentally banging your head are
probably less as well.  And if your really blown out,
you might even avoid an injury or heal something by
postulate once in a rare while.

But I think that you will find that you are still mostly
human and still prey to a lot of charge and maladies.

You have made some good begining steps but you are
far from done with handling your case.

Want an example?  Let's take something that you do
know something about because the org does handle it
occasionally as a button.

The button is protest.  The thetan will mockup things
compulsively to protest something.  It is such a hot
button that it will make the meter read on an
uncharged question if you protest it.  Now that is
a pretty hot button.

The org just hasn't cognited yet that you need to run
it as a grade, just like all the other key factors such
as problems, overts, and ARC breaks.

There are plenty of others.  I know some, but I don't
know them all.  The research is very very incomplete.

And the org doesn't believe in research.  It thinks
that it has all the answers.  That kind of leaves you
up the creek without a paddle.

What will happen is that gradually you will bump into
the remaining factors and the org will start overrunning
you and doing unnecessary actions and unstabilizing the
gains that you do have by assuming that there must be
something wrong with the areas that you really have
handled.

But what about OT 9 to 12?

These will almost certainly be a reissue of old OT 4 to 7.

Those levels really were great.  I loved them.  I got
lots of TA action and had lots of cogs.  I moved an
object once and had a clear exterior view of the street
outside one time while doing these levels.

They had absolutely zero case handling.  Nada.  Zilch.
Just wonderful OT drills, and far from enough.  Just the
barest beginings.  The materials are on the internet if
you feel like running them now instead of waiting.  And
yes, they really were quicky levels, just a few pages of
material on each.  If you are really in the mood to do
OT drills, there are ten times more in the Self Clearing
book which you can also pickup on the net.

But what about handling the rest of your case?

The handling just isn't there at the org.  You've already
got what they were willing to give.

Of course you could do what I did and begin studying the
1950s tapes like mad.  That will give you more case
handling.  And you will be self auditing and arguing with
the fanatics at every step, but it can be done.  In fact,
I recommend it.

But it is probably out-gradient unless you are also highly
trained, and its damn hard to go at it completely alone
and rethink everything to pull together the old ideas
and modern discoveries.  And when you finish, there will
still be a lot missing.

It is a lot easier to follow in the footsteps of somebody
who has already been there.

As I said, I don't have all the answers.  But I have a
lot more than what is used in standard tech.  At least
you can knock those out of the way easily and then
concentrate on helping with the effort to figure out
what's left.

And I put everything on the net.  You don't have to pay
for it.  You just have to do it.

The self clearing book has 48 chapters, each of which
could be thought of as a grade or OT level.  You will
have done about a third of them.  There is a lot more
that you can handle.

And the book is designed to teach you if you are not
already an auditor.

Beyond that is the huge super scio book and lots of
material by various freezoners and all sorts of other
areas to explore.

You can't stop halfway on the road to truth.  If the
pavement has ended, then you'd better get out your
machetee and start clearing a path.

There is no sense waiting for the org to bring up
some bulldozers and cement trucks to extend the pavement.
All their construction workers had their licences revoked
long ago and are off in the freezone.


Yours in total freedom,

The Pilot


==========================================


subj : Super Scio - Discussing the End of Scientology

DISCUSSING THE END OF SCIENTOLOGY

On 12 Dec 97, Arnie Lerma Clear#3502 posted on subject
" THE END OF SCIENTOLOGY"

> In article , otviii says...
>
> > The time has come for all former SO, and Staff members to join together
> > to help the mass exodus that will occur when the CO$ is finally put out
> > of business.  Hundreds of good, loyal, hardworking people will need
> > our help in getting their lives back in order, reunited with their
> > families, and into normal society.  This event is inevitable, and
> > we need to prepare for this, the liberation of our friends. They
> > will need our help and assistance. They need to know that there is
> > some place to go, and that there are people that understand them
> > and are willing to help them. They will see this and leave, together,
> > (if they have fear) they will be secure to know that there is safety
> > in numbers. Think about it - Where will you be the day Scientology ends . . .
>
>    The motto of the Sea Org was "We come back"
>
>    Perhaps it is time..
>
>     I want my old best friend
>     to walk with me in the morning dew.
>
>     again..
>
>   The sooner this  beast is slain the sooner the pain will end
>    and healing can begin.
>
>    A Pheonix of truth shall rise from the ashes of the lies.
>
>    Arnie Lerma
>    http://www.lermanet.com

Nice sentiments.

But this is NOT THE END OF SCIENTOLOGY.

IT IS THE BEGINING.

Neither Arnie or OTVIII in his earlier posting has shown anything
about Scientology ending.  They have only discussed the end of
a particular organization known as "The Church of Scientology" or
the CofS.

No matter what the org pretends, this organization acts in a manner
that is hostile to the spread of Scientology and works to
suppress the use and evolution of the tech.

When this suppression is removed, the subject will boom.

I would prefer to see the organization transformed, its collapse
would be a terrible waste because there are many good people
there and much resources that are supposedly comitted to helping
mankind.

If only they could really help instead of harm.

But even now, with the sue happy church stomping on every
appearance of the tech, there is more of Ron's tech available
through operation clambake than there is at www.scientology.org.

Its really shameful.

As I recall, somebody was going to put up the entire Philadelphia
Doctorate Course on the net, and the CofS blocked it.

Why?  Isn't that insane?

Shouldn't they be giving people awards for making the tech
more easily available and spreading it around on the internet?

Shouldn't they be putting tons of grades and briefing course
materials up on their website to offset the foolish idea that
all they have to offer people is one second rate incident on
OT 3?

Shouldn't they be encouraging freezoners to experiment with
tech so that they will eventually map out the remaining
OT levels and set us all free from the trap?

It's like watching the Jewish Defense League fund Hitler.
It's almost incomprehensible.

Given that pandora's box was opened and the ideas promoted
by Scientology in the 1950s were going to spread around
no matter what, I can think of no better way to keep the
subject suppressed and the tech out of use than what the
modern CofS has done with it.

From 1965 onward, the organization has gradually been twisted
back against itself until now it is its own worst enemy.

I'm still hoping for reform.  Without it, collapse is
inevitable.  Time IS running out.

The freezone should be gearing up.  Even a reform will
flood them with people.  There must be nearly a million
people sitting on the sidelines who will get into motion
one way or another when the suppression ends.

I think that the self clearing book is going to have
a tremendous impact because it makes the tech available
to untrained public.  All the previous stuff that has
been put on the net (Ron's, my own, and freezone) was
geared towards people who already knew how to audit.

And the critics are really giving the CofS a beating.
I have already heard twice about the Lisa Macpherson
stuff appearing in New York, and that's at long distance.
That's from loyalists who never knew anything about it
until a few weeks ago.  I'd never heard a single hint of
it from loyalists before this.

Which is the reason I never comment on it.  There has
been nothing about it and I really have no data except
for what I've seen on the net.

Many of their moves have the feeling of desperation.

Unfortunately, many people whom I care for have the
subject and the organization confused together and
think that the one will fail with the other.

Please let us work to reassure these people.

They should not be working to keep their suppressors
in power.

Let them know that the tech is there for them once
they have thrown off the yoke of oppression.


Merry Christmas,

The Pilot

==========================================

subj : Super Scio - Signs of Implosion (Attn Bernie)


SIGNS OF IMPLOSION (ATTN BERNIE)


On 11/29/97, [email protected] (Bernie) wrote on subject
"Re More signs of CoS imploding? (was Re: $cieno cult, led Travolta etc.)"


> Magpie880747227(demon.demon.co.uk) wrote in article
>
> >I think this is a very germane point. I said as much to Bernie as long
> > ago as 11 nov, but haven't had an answer (by which I mean to express
> > no more than mild disappointment, and prefer to think that the reason
> > is that he didn't see the original posting). Perhaps this repost
> > will get an answer? Are you there, Bernie?
>
> Yes. Sorry. I saw your post but didn't get down to it yet.
> I wish more idiots would killfile me so that I can better answer
> to more interesting posts. Here we go.
>
> > > In article <[email protected]> Bernie wrote:
> > >
> > > >  ................ The CoS has adapted itself to changing
> > > > conditions and fierce opposition during the last 40 years. You
> > > > underestimate their capacity to find original solutions and
> > > > surestimate the impact critics have.
> > > >
> > > That's an interesting position, Bernie, in the light of the material
> > > we've seen about the Sanctity of Source, the dangers of
> > > "squirelling", "verbal tech", and so on. While "Source"
> > > was alive, it was possible for "Source" to issue new directives
> > > in the light of changing conditions. But my impression
> > > from outside is that since the death of Hubbard, there's no longer any
> > > (significant) adaptation mechanism - unless it's issuing "new editions" or
> > > "newly discovered" material allegedly from Hubbard's writings.

He's right, the efforts of modern policy, SO management, and
standard tech have all been to freeze things into an unchanging
mold.

>       The question is open. When I was in the CoS, I went to the
> wisest person I could find and asked "if LRH is Source, then
> what would happen when he dies". She answered, "well, do you
> think LRH will ever die"? :-)

As Ron said, the fanatics will always be with us.

>       The whole episode surrounding the events starting around
> 1982 will probably stay a mystery. Was LRH effectively cut from
> Mayo's communication lines by Miscavige, or did Miscavige act
> upon orders of LRH? My personal opinion is the later. I can't
> imagine a fanatical freak such as Miscavige doing anything
> against LRH express wish, nor even taking such initiative on his
> own.

I disagree.

Imagine a crowd of yes men surrounding a CEO like lapdogs, all
longing to be petted and win favor from the big thetan.  They
may act visciously towards each other in a covert manner, all
heavily justified as defending big daddy from the other fawning
snivilling 1.1s who are trying to ingratiate themselves.

In this case they disobey orders covertly to snap at each other.

I have heard many stories like this of the top people surronding
Ron in the 1970s.  They went after each other whenever his back
was turned.

Read Capt. Bill's debrief which can be found in Homer's archives
or at the European FZ website.  Bill talks that way about Bob
Thomas and Jimmy Mulligan (agents in the pay of the enemy etc.)
and I'm sure that they said the same of him and probably of
each other as well.

>       As you may know, the CoS is effectively waiting the return
> of "Source". If "Source" took a body immediately after his
> death, then Source would be 11 years by now. I remember in my
> local org, where I still had some contact at the time, to
> witness a sudden "baby boom" around that time. I guess more than
> one scienos secretly hopes that Source would choose the body in
> his/her family. Hey -  I am not saying that such a return will
> happen (although Tibetan Buddhism seem to survive quite well on
> this very notion...)

This is a popular idea, and totally unjustified.

He never said that he was coming back.  He said "I'll see you
at the end of the bridge".  There is also a BC tape where he
says that there is a far planet where the hills are ripe for
songs and so forth and don't expect him to stick around here.

Since there is no solid reference about this, it is quite subject
to debate between the members.  Maybe he left some secret
instructions for Mayo or Miscaviage and maybe not.

>       As a matter of fact, I found that quite a few things
> improved upon LRH departure. For examples, I always found that
> the book and magazine covers were ugly. I read somewhere that
> they were the direct product of LRH, or at least made under his
> supervision. They quickly changed that, and they improved it,
> IMHO.

His book cover designs are from 1968 (part of the "Mission
International Books" stuff).  It might well be that staff had
some fear of changing them until after he was gone.  But they
were not actually in policy, just mission orders, and I'm not
sure if he actually sketched them or simply said make a book
cover that pushes such and such a button.  My data is all verbal
from the briefing given by the Mission International Books
missionaires when they arrived and tookover (almost destroyed)
the org.

> > > Can you give an example or two of the Scientology organisation
> > > finding original solutions and adapting itself in the
> > > post-Hubbard era? That would be most illuminating.
>
>       I am not sure. To leave this newsgroup on its own was
> certainly a good move.

But they didn't leave it alone.  They came up with "brilliant"
ideas of spams and cancelbunnys and posting good theta and
really made a bad mess of it.

But it is true that they did find original (if stupid) solutions.

> Granted, they didn't arrive at this
> solution directly. The way they bankrupted CAN wasn't bad
> either, and I for one support them in that. Critics may not
> realize it, but the way the CoS use the German situation to gain
> credibility and sympathy is quite clever (except for the Nazi
> add they ran, which was stupid).

Here I agree.  They are building loyalty and support among the
membership by pushing buttons about the supposed German
persecution.

> The "reversal" of Jon Zegel,
> Gary Scarff (partly), Snorri, and maybe others we don't know
> about, were clever moves as well. They also successfully twarted
> Mayo's attempt at creating a "New Church". All of that is
> post-Hubbard, right? That's why I say that you should not
> underestimate them.

I see the push against Mayo in the early eighties as having been a
short term and short sighted victory.

The lawsuits eventually reversed on them if I understand
correctly.

The members who left never came back and are lost to them.

They strengthened the freezone movement by fighting against
it.

They trashed the mission network and the Scientology business
community.

Gross incompetance and footbulleting.


>       Another reason is that the "tech" contains a lot of
> principles and applications that, if used wisely, can be useful
> too. I am not a believer in the tech, in that I think that,
> ultimately, it doesn't work. But it is a tool that still could
> be put to good use and, in some case, may present an advantage
> over the outside world just as well.

The tech would save them if they could think about it instead
of worshipping it.

>       Still another reason is that there are a lot of intelligent
> individuals in the CoS. This is often mentioned by outsiders who
> post with questions in the newsgroup. For example, just today
> someone made a post that finished by "The fact that this
> extremely bright co-worker of mine would be so ignorant bothers
> me".  Look also at some ex-members. I don't make it a secret that I
> don't like Dennis Erlich, but I admit he is intelligent, and so
> is Ralph Hilton, even though he can otherwise demonstrate a
> fabulous lack of insight that further proves the uselessness of
> the tech at this level. They both were long time Scientologists.
> David Mayo, Sarge Gerbode, Joe Harrington all have, IMO,  a
> superior intelligence. I find Heidrun Beer, RonsAmigo (current
> member), NoGoot, Jack, and others, like Martin Ottmann, The
> Pilot, the Worm, etc, to be bright as well (ah, and Martin Hunt
> also, even if he is incredibly childish and significantly lacks
> insight, always IMO). By extension, you have to count on the
> fact that other bright individuals are within the CoS, with the
> corresponding potential for an adequate reaction to the current
> situation.

At one time it was thought of as the high IQ religion.

>       All of these are a few reasons why I was prompted on one of
> your statement (don't remember which) to state that you should
> not underestimate the potential for the CoS more or less
> adequate and maybe even surprising reaction.
>
> >I note that in a recent post (subject: "Xenu Infiltrates
> >Scientology: 0-8_", documents
> >a non-trivial amount of editorial change between the 1982
> >and 1988 editions. So it seems there is some "tweaking" going on;
> >but I'd still very much like to see
> >instances of *substantial* "adapting" in the post-Hubbard era.
>
>       I doubt they will make any substantial changes. As I said,
> they are waiting for the new Messiah/Ron. The changes they make,
> IMO, are only cosmetic or aimed at surviving in the meantime.
>
> Bernie

It is really a mixed bag.

Some wait for the second coming.

Some don't understand the tech and have this crazy idea about
putting Ethics in on the planet.

Some believe in the tech and fight to get the early tech
back in use and available to the membership.  They hope that
more understanding of the early materials will wash away the
later fanaticism and insanity.  You could include me with
this group.  There are all sorts of hints of people pushing
this line in upper management and I don't want to call attention
to who is thinking or acting this way because I don't want
to aim the sharks in their direction.

Much of the later stuff was only ordered by Ron rather than
actually being written by him.  They have had missions and
big arguments as to what was really meant versus what was
issued, especially when the writer was, for example, David
Mayo.

Many execs think that other execs are SPs or idiots and they
snap at each other.  There is much more internal conflict
than is obvious to the outside world.

The org is a place that should be brimming over with ideas
and new innovations.  That is heavily suppressed by KSW and
standard tech.  That you do see some occasionally is a
testament to how much potential there is, it bubbles over
even when the SO tries so hard to keep a lid on it.

Dispite my disagreements, I thought that this was an
intelligent post and well worth thinking about.  The question
of whether they can change or not is a good one.  It should
be obvious from some of my other posts that I am hoping
that they can change, but sometimes I have these thoughts
of mamouths sinking into the tar pits.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================


subj : Super Scio - To Klaus about Circular Reasoning


TO KLAUS ABOUT CIRCULAR REASONING

On 19 Dec 97, Klaus Bloemker <[email protected]>
posted on subject "Super Scio <1 of 11> SELF CLEARING BOOK"


> The Pilot wrote:
>  ...
>
> > If we continue beyond the withering and death of our mortal shells,
> > then the most reasonable conclusion would be that we live many
> > lives. ...
>
>   Very reasonable conclusion!
>
> > If one lives again in the future, then the logical conclusion is
> > that one has lived before as well ...
>
>   Very logical!
>
>   But why isn't it the other way round: 'If one has lived before,
> then    the logical conclusion is that one will live in the future as
> well'..
>
> I like your circular reasoning - it really puts my mind at ease.
>
> Thanks for your SELF CLEARING BOOK - it's a nice honest failure.
>
>   Klaus Bloemker

You seem to have made a strange assumption here and mistakenly
thought that I was trying to prove the existance of God or an
immortal spirit.

The entire argument begins with "If we continue beyond ...".

In mathematics one may have an unproven first assumption and
yet derrive an entire logical framework and series of operations
from it.  If the framework is self consistant and the operations
prove useful, one takes the original premise for granted even
though it has not been proven directly.

The entire book is the series of useful operations which one
might try and use for the purposes of self improvement.

Let us say that I am unable to prove the existance of numbers.
But given that there are numbers, I can show that there should
be multiplication as well as addition.  This is the type of
argument presented in this opening section, namely that if
one is going to work with numbers (which might not exist), then
one should at least begin to multiply as well as adding them.

I think that I am working with a better framework than earlier
belief systems.  I find it to be useful in practice.  I therefore
assume that my premises are closer to truth than others which
are available.

I present these premises in the opening sections even though
they are not essential to the use of the techniques derrived
from them.  I do this to avoid the bait and switch approach which
others have used in this field.

Now let us say that I am wrong.  I do not believe this to be
the case, but I am not so arrogant that I would put others
at risk if I should be mistaken.  So I do consider the possibility
to ensure that all will be well even if I have failed.  So
let us say that perhaps man is mud and there is nothing beyond
one lifetime.  Let us say that the tech is nothing more than
placebos and self confidence.  Even if this is the case, the
book provides everything that was attainable from Scientology
without having to mortgage one's home or destroy one's life.
On that basis, it is still a good thing and will be of great
benifit to those who practice the subject.

The book represents freedom for all whose souls are now owned
by the Sea Org.

Whether or not the book produces a fantastic level of ability
or only yields a "feel good" effect is a test whose results
we will see over the coming years.  I expect the former and
you will probably expect the latter.  But in either case,
we will have won.

With this one step, the subject has been moved out of the realm
of money grubbing organizations and into the realm of pleasant
and easy self help books.

I have many good hopes for the future.


Seasons Greetings,

The Pilot

==========================================


subj : Super Scio - Thanking Cornelius for another Book Site


THANKING CORNELIUS FOR ANOTHER BOOK SITE

As always, Cornelius has proved himself helpful to one
and all.

Having multiple sites for the Self Clearing book significantly
reduces the possibility of attacks by OSA.

And his version is gzipped which is a boon to Unix users.

On 20 Dec 97, Cornelius Krasel <[email protected]>
posted on subject "Super Scio <0 of 11> SELF CLEARING BOOK"

> The Pilot <[email protected]> wrote:
> >       SELF CLEARING #0: INTRODUCTING THE NEW BOOK
>
> The whole series can be downloaded as a single file from
>
> ftp://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/pub/ss/selfclear.gz
>
> This is a gzipped version of the concatenated textfiles. You need
> gzip or a gzip-compatible program to uncompress it. (gzip-compatible
> programs are, for example, MacGzip or recent versions of WinZip.
> pkzip will NOT work.)
>
> If you use ftp, don't forget to switch transport mode to "binary". If
> you lose the connection, try to issue a "reget" command which will
> avoid retrieving material that is already sitting on your harddisk.
> (Sorry, WWW users -- I don't know of any browser that can use "reget".)
>
> I don't endorse this material. I only make it available.
>
> --Cornelius.
>
> --
> /* Cornelius Krasel, U Wuerzburg, Dept. of Pharmacology, Versbacher Str. 9 */
> /* D-97078 Wuerzburg, Germany   email: [email protected]  SP4 */
> /* "Science is the game we play with God to find out what His rules are."  */

Thank You and Happy Holidays,

The Pilot

==========================================


subj : Super Scio - A Thank You to FZA


A THANK YOU TO FZA


On 7 Dec 97, [email protected] (FreeZone America) wrote
on subject " ATTN: PILOT  ---> A message from FreeZone America"

> Greetings Pilot,
>
> I wanted to give you an update re: your msg tag lines and 'The Pilots
> Home Page' at FreeZone America.
>
> FreeZone America now has it's own domain name. The
> super.zippo.com/~freezone reference in your tag line is no longer
> valid. Our new location is: http://fza.org. Listed below are the URLs
> of various pages related to you and your work:
>
> The Pilot's Home page: http://fza.org/pilot/index.htm
> Super Scio: http://fza.org/pilot/sscio/index.htm
> Reformer's page: http://fza.org/pilot/reformer.htm
> Reform Now! page: http:/fza.org/pilot/reformnw.htm
> Pilot's Posting Archive: http://fza.org/pilot/posts/index.htm
> Extracted Pilot Articles: http://fza.org/pilot/tech/index.htm
> Pilot's Guestbook: http://fza.org/pilot/pilotbk.htm
> Pilot's Mailing List: http://fza.org/maillist.htm
>
> A zipped Super Scio is also available on the 'Files' page at:
> http://fza.org/files.htm
>
> There is a growing number of entries in the Pilot's Guest Book, so I
> hope that you will take the time to look over what other people are
> saying about you and your work.
>
> The Pilot's mailing list that I maintain is strictly for notifying
> people when you post to a.c.t. The amount of people on the list tells
> me that there is a lot of interest in your posts. Additionally, there
> are many people sitting on the edge of their seat just waiting for
> your clearing book to come out. When it does, I will be giving it top
> priority in making it available at FZA.
>
> Super Scio helped a great deal in providing the spark that created the
> FreeZone America site. I called our main Pilot page 'The Pilot's Home
> Page' because until hiding no longer becomes necessary for you, until
> you take on the task of creating your own site, you have a home on the
> web.
>
> My best to you .
>
> Paul Misiunas

Yes, I think that you are doing an excellent job.  The website
looks really nice.

I have started checking the guest book occasionally and it
is very encouraging.  Let me also say thank you to all the
people who went to the trouble (and sometimes risk) of placing
a message there.  It not only helps to encourage me but it
also lets others know that they are not alone.

It was good to see how fast the new book came online.

I only wish that there was a way to put a copy in every
staff member's in basket.

I think that the book might actually be easier to read than
Fundamentals of Thought and easier to run solo than Creation
of Human Ability.  And it goes much much further than they do.

I am really wondering if doing the book might occasionally
get somebody into the keyed out OT state.  Not the consistant
and stable super state that I don't think anybody reached but
the sporatic occasionally something wild happens kind of
state that used to be attained occasionally.  The book
includes pretty much everything that ever worked in the
old days to produce that state.

I am also wondering if freezoners will step up to the plate
and help people out with reviews and handholding.

And of course I am wondering how much I accidentally left
out because I take so much for granted and have lived with
the subject for so long.


With Thanks,

The Pilot

==========================================

subj : Super Scio - Answering JF on Xenu and Reform


ANSWERING JF ON XENU & REFORM

On 5 Dec 97, [email protected] asked
on subject "Pilot, A Question"

> Hello there fly boy!
>
> I read your home page and I must say that I am impressed.  You had to
> take a lot of time and look inward to put all of that on paper.
> Obviously you belived in reincarnation or you would not have spent so
> much of your life revolving around the tenets that you belive.

I grew up with a vague half-belief in reincarnation.  It improved
to a strong belief while in Scientology and I had many past life
recollections, but I did not actually trust them, being a bit
of a doubting thomas or open-minded sort of case.  I was always
quite happy to run a past life incident but also willing to
find out that much of what I had run was half wrong or even
imagined.

It was only in recent years, while pushing forward on my own,
trying to go far beyond the orthodox levels, that I proved to
my own satisfaction that I actually had lived before and was
recalling real events rather than imaginations.

My proofs for myself would not prove it to you because it was
by remembering things and then finding them in the history
books (sometimes very obscure things) and of course I could
have looked them up first and it is only that I known that
I didn't.  This is written up in detail near the end of
the Super Scio book.

And I still do not remember very much, and there is a lot
that is still vague (the vague recollections are usually
half accurate).

> SO, just between you, me, and the gatepost, being an OT8, do you
> really buy that Xemu stuff or are you focusing on the reactive mind
> aspect of the, damn I have a hard time saying this, theory? (I would
> have found it easier to say Space Opera.)

Actually I have not done the new OT8, only OT7 (both old and new).
But if the rumors are correct, I've done the process (mapping
out ones recent lifetimes) and how to do it is in the new Self
Clearing book.

As far as Xemu goes, I did find such an incident for myself
personally and it ran from the Pilot's perspective (the OT3
Pilot, that is) with considerable charge coming off.  It was
a bit different than Hubbard's perspective.  That is
described in detail in chapter 6 of the Super Scio book.

So I think that the incident is real.  But I also don't think
that it is very important.  Just one incident after all out of
potentially billions.  That is also discussed in chapter 6.
There is a little bit about it in the new self clearing
book too, but its hardly more than a footnote.  That is
how important I think it is.

I would say that I focus more on the Scientology axioms and
Theta-Mest theory and so forth.

Both case handling and OT drills, pretty much in alternation
(don't wait to go clear to do OT drills, just do them).

I would say yes on "reactive mind" if you mean a loose
definition meaning mental charge.  But if you are using
the very limited Dianetics definition, it is inadequate.
Scientology grades theory doesn't actually require the
presence of engrams.

> My only other question is, do you plan on charging for the reform or
> is there some kind of tithe arrangement you have in mind?  If you have
> a tithe arrangement in mind, please discribe it.

Who would I charge for this?  The org?  Fat chance of them paying
me.  I'd end up like Koos who sends them bills for his undesired
sec checking of the dead.

As for my materials, I have already made them available at no
charge on the internet.  People may do with them as they see
fit.

I do think that it would be fair to recieve normal author's
royalties on my writing.  I'm sure that the self clearing
book would do well in the bookstores even if people could
pick up free copies on the net.  But the org would sue my
ass off if I did it now, so that has to wait until the war
is over.

> Please do not take this post as antagonistic.  As I said, I read some
> of your page (I will read the rest when I get a chance) and I got the
> feeling that you are true to your belief and feel that there is a lot
> wrong with the current organization you have to deal with.  Just so
> you know, I will repeat the URL for the lurkers and (like me) the
> jokers and degraders).
>
> http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/pilot.html#anti
>
> By the way,  I will always be a joker and degrader where the cult is
> concerned.  I would like to count you as a friend unless we come to a
> loggerhead and cannot agree to disagree.

Of course.

I quite enjoy joking and degrading and think that it a sign
of a healthy subject, just as seeing comics poking fun at
the government is a healthy sign for the country.

I put "super scio humor - " in the subject line of the jokes
so that people wouldn't accidentally take me seriously.
You'll find a number of them in the archives on the Pilot
Home Page.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

subj : Super Scio - Continuing Sea Org Under Pressure


CONTINUING SEA ORG UNDER PRESSURE

> On 4 Dec 97, [email protected] (Ralph Hilton) continued the
> discussion "Super Scio - More on Sea Org Under Pressure"
>
> On 4 Dec 1997  14:00:14, [email protected] (The Pilot) wrote:
>
> >
> > MORE ON SEA ORG UNDER PRESSURE
> >
> >
> > On 21 Nov, 97, [email protected] (GrahamEB) responded to
> > my post "Super Scio - SEA ORG UNDER PRESSURE" with the following -
> >
> >
> >> I believe, pilot, that you are right. My bet is that Starkey will make
> >> the move."I am relieving you of your command."  I do not think Marty,
> >> the two Mikes, Epstein, or Leserve have the balls or backbone to do
> >> it - but Norman Starkey is another matter.  The Trustee of the LRH
> >> Estate.  Of  course, MSH, now there is salvatation and a brand new
> >> beginning.  Or a real new beginning, Princess Suzzette or Princess
> >> Dianna, with Norman and the two Mikes as the powers  behind the
> >> thrones and with DM moved aside to a titular ceremonial but powerless
> >> post under total watch.
> >>
> >> Graham Berry
> >
> >Do you know anything about Norman Starkey?
> >
> >I don't, and it bothers me.
> >
> >I either know or know about or at least have little rumors and
> >stories concerning most of the big names.  He is the exception.
> >
> >Is he a good guy or potentially a worse tyrant than Miscaviage?
> >
>
> I would not bother about Starkey.
>
> He was Captain of the Apollo for quite a while. Basically he is a
> practical man. He was not the sort of person who read a lot. He had
> practical skills but wasn't very bright nor up to the political
> machinations of DM and co.
>
> As an example of his intellectual ability he gave a talk about a new
> type of radio antenna that LRH was researching saying that the 2 were
> made to be in high ARC with each other and how this would
> revolutionize science!
>
> I got the impression that Hubbard made do with him for want of someone
> better - one day he sent Jill Goodman, one of his messengers, up to
> the bridge. She yelled loudly something along the lines of:
>
> "Norman! The Commodore want to know why its ok that you fuck up all
> the time!"
>
> One doesn't do that to someone one respects.

Sounds like he was just a non-entity.  But technical dumbness doesn't
mean an inability to connive and manipulate, and I think that almost
every exec got asked that "fuck up" question at one time or another.
So I would say he's not likely but shouldn't be ignored completely
either.

> Dianna and Suzette are not leaders. Suzette was a pleasant open girl
> when I met her but not the strong leading type.

True.  Definitely not deeply involved.

> Dianna was far too cold and unsure of herself. I would say that she
> could only take a secondary role.

That might have improved as she got older.  But I don't see her
as a hidden manipulator.

> What I see is that there is a stronger terminal behind these guys. DM
> seems like he is incapable. There isn't an obvious Power Terminal
> there.
>
> I think that DM is just a figurehead as Heber so obviously is.
>
> There is an intelligent manipulator behind the scenes. When DM falls
> he will be replaced by another figurehead. Perhaps Starkey or Dianna.

Possible.

> Although the CofS looks dumb in many actions they couldn't have
> carried on without a Power Terminal.
>
> Someone with some intelligence is guiding the scene.

Possible.

> Let us look at some changes that occurred after Hubbard died:
>
> 1. The Mk 6 E-meter which was a piece of junk with germanium
> transistors was replaced by the professionally made Mk 7 with chips, a
> fairly decent taut band meter movement and some complex electronics.

Such an obvious technical action and done long after it should have
been done if they were up on things.

> 2. The tech was much more professionally presented with the new tech
> volumes and tapes.

Maybe due to John Mustard.  A real old time tech enthusiast.
More likely to be a reformer rather than a hidden manipulator.


> 3. The attacks on the Freezone dropped very considerably. Much fewer
> rants about squirrels. I haven't seen a thing of OSA in the last 10
> years despite fairly openly delivering the tech.

Maybe just non-confront and apathy.  They have failed so badly in
this area.

From reading the Clearwater picket accounts in ARS, it seems obvious
that the org was scared of Dennis Erlich, probably because he is
highly tech trained.  Since most at OSA have no tech training and
the new OT levels don't even include OT drills, they are probably
afraid of any trained freezoner.


> 4. OT8 was released which is a pile of Bullshit. It won't make OTs.

If rumors are correct, it is the original OT 1 which was replaced and
became the original OT 4 which again was replaced very quickly.  In
other words, the mapping of one's recent lifetimes.  So a level
wasn't developed, they just took one of the ones that had been
shelved because it was too difficult and repackaged it as OT 8.

Ron probably said, before he died, to reissue and renumber the
old stuff whenever they needed to put out a new level.  Mithoff or
whoever probably did the repackaging.  And even Miscaviage is
smart enough to scream at them to give him something new to
release.


> 5. The New Golden Age of Tech! bwahahaha! Designed for people who can
> barely read.

This is a major footbullet rather than a smart move.


> I'm still figuring. The outpoints are contradictory.

It seems like the manipulator is either not too bright or
is actually inimical to the subject.

> I think DM is on his last legs as a figurehead.
>
> My prophecy is that the man behind the scenes will retire him
> gracefully to a lower position and appoint another figurehead. He will
> then again use the same PR gimmick which has worked before with the
> membership and say "It has all changed and been reformed".
>
> Last time David Mayo was a scapegoat. Recently I talked to someone who
> was uncertain about this who just left the "Church".
> I gave him the new HRD bulletins and the originals that David wrote.
> He studied both for a few hours and then said that he saw no
> substantial differences. Yet David was made out as the "Who" of the
> tech failures.

True.

> Someone suggested Fred Hare - (ex Snow White in charge) as the man
> behind the scenes.

This might be a possibility.

The last story I heard of him was a bit after Snow White.  He had
gone into the sauna with a few of his chronies and a self important
public person had not wanted to move his seat when Fred ordered
him to get out of their way.  Then ensued a huge argument with
the public person yelling about not giving up a seat that he had
paid big bucks for and Fred yelling about having the guy declared.

The public guy held his ground and it ended with Fred and his
people walking off in a huff while yelling back about getting
ethics orders issued.  Of course nothing ever came of it.  The
other people in the sauna who witnessed this sat there with
straight faces and then burst into hysterical laughter after
Fred left.

Anybody know if Fred is still in the upper ranks?

> I haven't been able to get a better guess.
>
> I am pretty certain that DM is not the leader despite apparencies.
> Whoever is behind him is well hidden.
> --
>
> Ralph

You also correctly spotted that I put out an incorrect public PGP
key in "Super Scio - World Takeover (answering Anonymous)" posted
in early Dec and reprinted in Archive #16.

This was purely due to a mistake on my part.  I was rushing
through the posting process (to get back to the book) and
I accidentally picked up another public key that I had lying
around.  Note that the message itself was signed with the
correct key (I used my keyring for that).

All three websites that carry the Scientology Reformer's
Homepage have my correct public key at the end of the page
(I double checked) and it is the key that I have put into
my posts occasionally except for the above mistake.

But I have no idea what that second longer key that you
mentioned is.  Might you have picked up the wrong one
while posting your warning or could it be a key for one
of the webpage hosts?  I don't use keys of that length.

Note that I have PGP configured for short keys (the .ASC
version is 5 lines long) because the readme with the shareware
I use recommended it as being more broadly compatible.

Sorry about the confusion.


Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

subj : Super Scio - Answering the ClearL Survey


ANSWERING THE CLEARL SURVEY

On 8 Dec 97, "Homer W. Smith" <[email protected]> posted
the following which he recieved in private email from an
unknown poster on subject " Hello & some questions (fwd)"

> From private mail...
>
> It's me again.  Thanks for your care and comm.
>
> Now I would like you to answer me some other questions...  (If
> you have nothing against it)
>
> The purpose of them is to clarify for me the workability of tech
> and find out what is real & what is imagined.  I will not judge only
> by your answer, I hope about 5 persons will answer me also.  So, here
> we go:
>
> The Test Form for a being on a Bridge (no necessary standard)
>
> 0) What is your attitude towards different scientology orgs?

It varies considerably.  The same org may change significantly
simply on a minor change in the "water temprature" because of
the terrible emphasis on stats and the presence or absence of
crazy missionaires or orders with dire penalties.

In general I do not like registrars or salesmen or slimy
behavior, but I do like auditors and people who are enthusiastic
about the tech.  So there are people I will avoid and people that
I will enjoy talking to.

> 1) What is your level on the Bridge or what auditing have you
> received?

Both old and new OT7.  And many other things that may be of
more significance.

> 2) Was your ability to remember increased?

Certainly.

>  Was your thinking speed increased?

Yes.

>  Was your ability to make correct decisions from available data
>  increased?

Yes.  And my ability to correctly evaluate the orgs resulted in
my increasing disagreement with policy, so its not due to being
told things and swallowing them.

>               a) Wasn't changed
>               b) Some
>               c) Increased a lot
>               d) Absolute condition attained
>                  (can remember everything)
>                  (no thinking lag)
>                  (unmistakable thinking)

All of the above answers were about at the level of c) increased
a lot.

>   3) What is your usual emotional tone?

Varies considerably.

> 4) Was your perception changed and how?  (constant level) (I mean
> brightness, solidity, beautifullness)

More depth and color.  There was a radical change on grade 5
(power processing) which has remained stable.

>   5) Are there any incidents of the last month when your life
> seemed to you not pleasurable, boring or senseless?  What was the
> duration of them?  How many?

Sure.  Life is far from perfect.  There must have been at least
a dozen times at work when things were boring or senseless, sometimes
for hours.

>  6) Have you any illnesses (constant or not)

Occasionally.

I have had colds blow on processing and I have had colds that
wouldn't blow on processing.  We are fumbling around in the dark
and sometimes we handle something and sometimes we don't.

It is all very inconsistant which is one of the reasons that
I feel that we don't have all the answers and the research is
incomplete.

>  7) Do you think that your life is controlling you (start, change,
> stop) or you are controlling your life?

Usually but not always I feel that I am in control rather
than the reverse.

> 8) Can you create an object in your imagination and see it as
> clear as you can see with your eyes?

Not quite.  Often the visualization is a bit fuzzy and
less solid.  But the depth and color are good and I can usually
get sounds (complex music) with full clarity.

> 9) Can you be a sunset (or something else beautiful), perceiving
> it fully?

Nice auditing command (be a sunset rather than mocking one up).

I would say partially rather than fully.

>   10) Can see without your eyes?

Yes but not with accuracy.  Occasionally there is a flash of
what seems like true perception, and there is much "vague
impressions" which may be correct but are usually too poor to be
useful.  Of course I can fill in the blanks with visualization
and imagination, but that is mockup rather than perception.


>  11) Can you really have two or more viewpoints (points from which
> to see)

Easily.

>  12) Can you move physical objects with only your intension or by
> your beams?

It has happened on ultra rare occasions.  This is an area where
we really don't know what we are doing or else the results
would be more predictible.


> 13) Can you communicate telepathically?  (So, that the other
> would be aware of receiving your message).  Who with?  At what
> distance?

Sometimes.  Not usually with good certainty.  Generally only
with people that I feel really close to.  The distance doesn't
seem to matter in that case.  Often one gets the feeling that
the other person is trying to reach one without actually getting
the message in detail and gives them a phone call, or one is at
the store and gets a crazy urge to buy something because the
other person is trying to tell you to pick it up.  I have had
this happen freequently in both directions (to me and from me).

> 14) If your would be given a choice to become a real OT (able to
> be at will a cause over matter, energy, space, time, forms and life)
> for yourself and no one else could know that OR everyone would know
> that but you could not use these abilities, what would be your choice?

Neither answer is desirable.  It is not whether other people could
know that I was cause, it is whether other people could themselves
be taught to be cause that is important.

Both answers might be self defeating.

If one really had ability, one would postulate a better set
of choices.

> 15) If your would be given a chance to become very wise but no
> one would consider you wise OR everyone would consider you very wise,
> but, you yourself wouldn't be wise, what would be your choice?

This one is easy.  Obviously better to be truely wise.  Who cares
what others think.

>      Homer

I have had enough OT stuff happen to give me certainty that
one can operate without a body and to tell me that we are on
a really hot trail.

But it has been so rare that I know that we are far from
full understanding.

I would give others all the tools that I have so that they
might join in the exploration.  Hence the Self Clearing
book and all the other things I've been putting on the net.
I want others to go beyond where I am sitting now.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

subj : Super Scio - To Heidrun and Others About the Book


TO HEIDRUN AND OTHERS ABOUT THE BOOK

On 20 Dec 97, [email protected] (Heidrun Beer) posted on
subject "To Pilot; Re- Self-Clearing Book"

> Dear Pilot,
>
> I want to thank you for the book you have written. I think for
> all who have been on staff it is really impressing that beside
> the exhausting staff schedule you could manage the energy and
> concentration to write such a voluminous work.
>
> If you don't mind, I'll submit it to a literary web-site where
> a publisher might see it who wishes to issue it in print.
> I understand that you want the normal 10% author's honorary
> in this case. Please think of a way to manage such a money
> transfer.
>
> So far, I read only the summary - it's too early to comment
> on the text. I'll write a review in a few days.
>
> All the best to you, and happy holidays!
>
> Much love,
>
> Heidrun Beer
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>        "You shall know them by their fruits." (The Bible)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

I much appreciate all the encouragement that you and many others
have posted to the web in response to the Book.

As to publishing, you are correct but I do have the consideration
that there will be less trouble from OSA if the book has had
a bit of time to become an established fact on the net.  Once
they are used to it and know that pandora's box can't be closed
they will be more apathetic about attacking.

As I posted it, I had the feeling that the real reaction will
come in about 3 months (mid march).  Upon reflection, that seemed
like the amount of time necessary for many people to assimilate the
book.  It is hard to say what might occur, but that would be
the correct time for the next move.

As to your post asking for contradictions in Scn, feel free to
pick up things from the stuff I have posted.  There are quite a
few on the webpages.  Another one that occurs to me is that
after presenting infinity valued logic in DMSMH, Hubbard later
switches to "an infinity of wrongness and only one rightness"
in standard tech.  So the intelligent evaluations are limited
to the relative degree of badness and the rightness can't be
questioned or evaluated.


Happy Holidays,

The Pilot

==========================================

subj : Super Scio - Answering Pierre


ANSWERING PIERRE

On Dec 5, [email protected] (Pierre) wrote on subject
" Super Scio Tech - Answering Homer about Thought"

> Pilot wrote:
>
> +ANSWERING HOMER ABOUT THOUGHT
>
> +On 28 Nov 97, "Homer W. Smith" <[email protected]> responded
> +to my earlier post on " Super Scio Tech - CHAKRAS"
>
> +The double > > are his quotes of my earlier post.
>
> Ooops....
>
> +> > Eating and Sex have somehow a dichotomious nature. One is used to
> +> > intake the creations of (an)other(s), making the form from something
> +> > into nothing, the other is creating from nothing into something,
> +> > when scarcity occurs.
>
> Hi Pilot,
>
> I happen to have this quote in my e-mail out basket and it looks
> like I have written it.
>
> Not that I mind at all you quoting my post, but someone could think
> we're the same person, which you know we are not.
>
> Love to You, and thanks for the work done and that one to come.
>
> Pierre

Sorry about that.  I try to mark things clearly but sometimes
peoples names get lost in the clear-l discussions that get posted
to ACT.

Homer was mostly quoting my earlier post and I didn't pay careful
attention to sort things out.  Really just too busy trying to
get the book done (its finally finished and posted).


==========================================

subj : Super Scio - Answering Ralph About Orgs Etc.


ANSWERING RALPH ABOUT ORGS ETC.

On 4 Dec 97, [email protected] (Ralph Hilton) responded to my earlier
post on subject "Super Scio - Book Includes OT Drills (Answering Robert)


> On 4 Dec 1997  14:00:20, [email protected] (The Pilot) wrote:
>
> snipped a lot
> >
> > My big wonderment is how many people will have the
> > determination and perseverence to study and work on
> > their own.  There are books available on every subject
> > under the sun and yet few people will make the effort
> > to learn anything by themselves.
>
> The hardest task.
>
> > So I think that a lot of people will want somebody
> > to hold their hand, at least initially.
>
> Yes. And they need someone who is willing to later let go of it too.
> Few meet that criteria.
>
> > Also, the book does not cover how to process somebody
> > else.  That is best taught in an organization.  And
> > it would require explaining a lot more data.
>
> Auditing someone else is best taught by having the student sit in on a
> few sessions.

Good point.

> I learnt this principle from my aikido teacher. When he threw someone
> twice his size across the room I could not have learnt how to do it
> unless I had been there with him and FELT how he did it.
> He demonstrated to me something that I then started to use when
> showing people how to audit.
> Last week I demonstrated to a student how to audit while sitting in a
> restaurant. He told me that from being there while I assessed hat what
> happening with the PC he felt how I did it and gained the same ability
> far more rapidly than could ever be possible with study.
> The next day he ran a NOTs session off the meter with someone and blew
> their cold in 20 minutes. (Apologies to critics for the Big Win but
> these things do happen :-) )
>
> The old masters never tried to develop a tech that was broadly
> workable. They taught a few individually.

I agree in general.  But I'm curious which set of old masters
you are refering to.

> Hubbard tried to create something broader but lost too much. And he
> was so arrogant.

The modern approach is to have schools rather than apprenticeships.
He was simply in tune with the times.  But he failed to set up
a viable school system.

In other words, it is the right idea but the execution of it
was flawed.  He was too much at odds with the existing education
system.

> I want to teach people to become teachers. Life is too big for us too
> hold onto our prodigies.

Yes exactly.

> Hubbard was an abysmal failure at granting beingness. He was a
> patronizing bastard. A touch of humility would have worked wonders.

These things are not synonymous.

Somebody could be humble and still fail to grant beingness.

And somebody could grant beingness without having to be humble.

I don't really feel that he had to be humble, the real problem
is the granting of beingness.  He couldn't accept others on
an equal footing.

> If he had had the guts to do the RPF himself then Scientology could
> have become something very big and ethically strong.

No, it just would have collapsed.  The RPF ruins people, it doesn't
make them strong.  He would have faired no better than the other
victims and some earlier Miscaviage would have ended up at the helm.
And with a victimized and blubbering Ron on the premesis, the
SO wouldn't have lasted a month.

> >I'm pushing hard to get it out before Christmas or at least
> >before New Years.  I'm skipping answering a lot of
> >posts right now for that reason.
>
> A fair bit of my attention at the moment goes into how to build a
> viable org.
>
> I think that most will graduate to a point where they need to pay
> nothing for help. They will be able to study and apply data on how to
> progress so need little if no assistance.
>
> I would like to see them progress that way. And it doesn't pay the
> rent etc. for an org that needs to be there for those moving up the
> line.

If the tech is almost free and is easy to do and the people make
gains, then it becomes very easy to have a viable org.

Let's take the original Dianetic boom.  Let people co-audit at
home without supervision, just read the book and try it.  Suddenly
the org is flooded with business even thought the emphasis is
on do it yourself.

The Dianetic boom only collapsed because it was not a very
workable tech.  So people felt betrayed and abandoned it.

It wasn't that they did the book wrong.  It's that the book
actually was wrong in many important aspects (see the writeup
I put out a few months ago).  The tech just wasn't good
enough to deliver what was promised.

I'm trying this with the Self Clearing book.  If I did it
well it should support this kind of effort.  If not, then
I or somebody else will write another one, either self
clearing or co-audit at home, or possibly group processing
videos or TV shows.  Anything that allows for mass clearing
without doing every baby step by a professional.

If you had to pay for a top auto mechanic every time you
needed to put gas in the car (put it up on the lift, remove
the fuel tank and replace with a full one), there would be
few people who could afford to drive and they would bitch
at paying a thousand bucks every time they needed a tank
of gas.

But most go to a mechanic once or twice a year for major work
and spend a pretty penny there, and the mechanics barely
need to advertise, so the tech admin ratio is fantastic.

A small Scientology org might have a thousand public just
sitting around not doing anything but wishing, and planning to
someday come up with ten or twenty grand to get started
and make a few paltry gains amid hundreds of hours of
wordclearing and sec checks and other time wasting.

Of course the income is low.  Most give up before they
ever do anything significant.  And the ones that do
pay are not necessarily happy products because they
might only have managed a single grade of release for
their many thousands of dollars.  So there is not much
enthusiasm and the subject doesn't spread well and
so you waste a fortune on annoying PR to try and get
the stats up and it fails anyway.

Now let us say that those same thousand people were
self auditing or co-auditing at home (unsupervised,
at no charge) or watching group processing videos
and making gains at these things.

And so they are happy and enthusiastic and the subject
spreads and they also are willing to come in and
spend some bucks (a grand or two, not ten or twenty
grand) each year for some professional clean up.

And maybe they get ten or twenty major grade releases
or OT levels during that year, so it was well worth the
price and they continue on with great enthusiasm and
get their friends involved too, which causes an ever
increasing stat even though people eventually move
beyond the point of needing any handholding at all.

And quite a few would want to train as professionals,
and if you had a sane course room instead of a
concentration camp, you would have lots of business
there too.  And courses are much more viable than
selling individual sessions.


> There seems to be a gradient of responsibility:
>
> 1. Need to be helped.
> 2. Can help oneself.
> 3. Has handled self and wants to help others.

I still think that I need to be helped.  I'm simply bypassing.

Its an expanding sphere.

Needs help (and willing to accept it) AND can help oneself
too AND wants to help others.

As opposed to whinning about how one must be helped.


> It takes a lot of work to shift people up this scale.
>
> Comments???
>
> --
>
> Ralph


Merry Christmas,

The Pilot

==========================================

subj : Super Scio Tech - About Running Implants (to Robert)


ABOUT RUNNING IMPLANTS (TO ROBERT)


On 5 Dec, [email protected] (Robert Ducharme) wrote on
subject "implants as narratives"

> A narrative is a traumatic experience which is reviewed and desensitized
> in a session as a whole experience rather than with one particular
> feeling in mind, such as the feeling of guilt.  A narrative may contain
> many different unwanted feelings (somatics).
>
> It occured to me why running implants as GPMs is not such a good idea.
> I'm not sure how, but in Dianasis (is anyone doing that any more?) they
> reportedly take up and run implants and implant GPMs.  I assume they run
> whole implants as opposed to one somatic at a time.
>
> The problem with implants is that they can cover many days or months or more
> and many somatics.  To restimulate the whole implant to where all the
> somatics would be handled would be an overwhelming experience for the
> processee and would not get to the root cause anyways.  That's if he could
> even contact it with any degree of reality.
>
> I have one client who, every time he goes to a pre-physical universe
> incident, almost always runs implant incidents along the way.  They include
> implant  incidents  in the Pyranees, Atlantis, Venus, Mars, the OTIII
> incident, a circus implant, a space ship between Earth and Mars among them.
> These incidents are often revisited session after session with each somatic
> chain that is run. Each time they are run to a flat point so that charge is
> not left in restimulation.  God knows what would happen if we just
> arbitrarily tried to locate these incidents or the ones in "A History of
> Man" and tried to run them as narratives.  There would likely be a lot of
> unreality and possibly overwhelm and various somatics chains remaining in
> restimulation.
>
> I don't see how running things like the Helatrobus implants can be any
> better, since each somatic will have an earlier basic and there will be many
> different chains of them restimulated.
>
> Maybe that's why the '60's GPM tech failed so, even though it caused such
> startling changes.  It was a tech of too much too soon while at the same
> time being too little too late.  There was too much charge contacted for the
> pc to assimilate safely at his case level, but the incidents still didn't
> contain all the charge needed to be run because they were not basic enough
> on the chain.
>
> I can't say that it wasn't a valiant effort by the participants of the 60s
> GPM processing, but I'm glad I didn't take part in it and left the
> experimenting up to them.  Furthermore, it produced a lot of brilliant
> auditors and tech finders who were able to find better ways of approaching a
> subject that was theretofore virtually unapproachable in man's history.  I
> know all too well the number of times I thought to myself "I can see why
> people say 'the mind is nothing to fool with', it contains such
> overwhelmingly powerful and mysterious forces ".  Fortunately LRH left a
> legacy of tech that formed the foundation for bridges across that chasm of
> insanity and death so that even such devastating memories as those of mass
> implantings can now be safely discharged.  Running the bank out by somatic
> chains is a technique that LRH should have gotten a Nobel prize for.  It was
> brilliant in that it allows virtually any unwanted condition of the mind to
> be resolved.  It also resolves the formerly unsolved problem of overwhelming
> incidents such as mass implantings. At the risk of sounding Lionesque, I
> think it's a great era to be alive in.
>
> Robert

Implant GPMs were not supposed to be run either narrative or by somatic.

They were supposed to be run by platen, running out the implanted
items.

According the the 1963 tech, if you hit an implant while doing
R3R, you were supposed to establish if it was a known pattern of
items and either shift to R3N (if you had the platen) or to
R3M to list the items.

R3N was replaced by R6GPMI (GPMs by item) which became the solo
process used to flatten implant items that is used on CC and OT2.

The process does work and is easy to run on a known implant where
you already have the platen.

Note that they had terrible trouble having one person run this on
another (R3N) and the only safe way seems to be to have the person
flatten the platen on himself solo.

That can even be done without a meter as discussed in the
self clearing book.

Running somatic chains back through the implant and earlier
as you describe may be workable because you have his attention
focused on the somatic and you don't get into scanning over
the items.

Running the implant directly as a narrative is generally a
bad idea, it has generally given me trouble when I tried it
either as a dianetic PC or solo.  You miss too much of the
content unless you get the implanted items.

If you do manage to research an implant by items, there is
a point where your confront comes up on the items and all
the charge seems to blow.  Then you can spot the narrative
easily and the somatics in the incident don't seem to have
any force anymore.

But R3M is really poor for researching implanted items
because it assumes a particular goal oppose pattern which
is not necessarily the case.  The only workable way on
many of the implants is to have enough confront to get
a feel for how the items fit together and then design a
way to list for them.

In all cases, implant items will read well on the meter
(usually spectacularly well) if you get them right and
in the right sequence as you are researching them and
the meter will pack up if you guess wrong and go at the
pattern incorrectly, so you fool around until you can
get the meter reading well and see how it all fits together.

If you do get the items and pattern screwed up, you can
turn on somatics.  Sometimes you just have to ride it out
for a few days and then go back and look at it again when
you're feeling better.

I often had trouble getting the first part of an implant
and then it would get easy as the pattern became apparant.

Researching new implants is not for the fainthearted and
should never be done by an auditor on a PC because the
auditor's assumptions may stear the PC straight into the
wall and the PC doesn't know enough to second guess the
pattern.  It has to be done solo by somebody who really
knows the tech well.

I would suggest avoiding implants for which you don't
have the platens, or run somatics as you described, or
run the entry point into the implant (getting captured
or tricked or whatever before the actual implant items
are run in).

If you do have a correct platen it seems to undercut the
somatics and they don't give you any trouble.

Note that many implants don't use the double firing GPM
style patterns.  Often they follow declining scales
instead.

The real saving grace is that you can cool down the
implants considerably by having the PC spot and handle
his intentions to implant others.  It wasn't just those
evil psychs or the bad guys, it was popular on the early
track.  It was supposed to be the solution to criminality
and anti-social behavior.  Everybody wanted it done to
others at one time or another.

The only reason an implant ever worked on anybody (instead
of their shrugging the effects off in a few days) is
because they postulated so hard that implants should work
so that the bad guys would get implanted.

From what little I know of Dianasis, they were running implant
items rather than narrative scanning.  They claimed to
have mapped out the Between Lives Implant (they called it
the BLI).

If they got it right this stuff might be really valuable
to run.  Anybody have the platens?  Anybody know what
happened to them or if they are still active?  All I ever
saw was a few of their newsletters back in the 1980s.

The 1960s research suffered from having fixed ideas, trying
to have an auditor run this stuff on a PC, and using a
motivatorish approach that didn't confront the intentions
to implant others.

By the time they finally got something that ran consistantly
and had a solo tech that worked to flatten it, they had
paid such a price and were so charged up on the matter
that they went crazy on this confidentiality business.

All the cautions and worries only apply if you are trying
to research a new one.  The damn things are trivial once
you have the platen and all the fears and cautions become
a joke.

The implants only get one chapter out of 48 in the self
clearing book.  That is about the right proportion, maybe
two percent of the person's case.

---

In another post, you mentioned the following commands that
you have added to your procedure.

> "Observe that moment of shock from beginning to end from
> the viewpoint of aesthetics"
>
> and
>
> "Observe that moment of shock from beginning to end from
> the viewpoint of ethics"

This seemed extremely smart.  It may have further implications
and uses.

I put some things on the upper dynamics in some chapters near
the end of the self clearing book.  I've been working with
a set of eight which include these two and things such as
games.

As soon as I saw these two commands, I immediately thought
of the entire set of eight (observe the shock from the
viewpoint of games and so forth) and suddenly got the
sense of being a higher self above force but creating
"impacts" (shocks) in terms of ethics, asthetics, games,
and so on.

I then wondered if I could spot a purely ethical shock
in this lifetime (with no other impact or impingement)
and immediately recalled an incident at age 4 and some
heavy not-isness came off and I remembered an entire
month that I had known about in theory (because of
having been told about it when I was older) but had
never before had any concious recollection of.

I know that I am twisting this around a bit on you
since you are running incidents and just adding this
asthetics/ethics aspect.  But if the aspect is there
in a composite incident, it does imply that it might
also exist stand alone and these have the potential
of existing in time periods prior to the being's
being the effect of force and also in higher states
where the being is not subject to force.


Happy Holidays,

The Pilot

==========================================

subj : Super Scio  Tech - Answering Steve and Sarah


To Steve and Sarah

On 5 Dec 97, Good Churchie$ (Steve 'n Sarah)" <[email protected]>
posted on subject "Pilot-your attention please".

>After several problems with the mail software.Homer has provided the data needed to patch things together again.
>Many thanks to Homer.
> Here is the Pilot Apology (and about time too)
>
>----------
>
>
> ----------
> Greetings.
>
> Firstly,our apologies for the 'Pilot is in error/part 1'.A number of versions
> were prepared and this early one (written in a 'ranting Rondroid' phase was
> attatched in error.

Accepted.  And it was certainly better than ranting, the discussion
was worth having.

> We withdraw the post.
>
> As an example of how our views changed,here is a final note on homosexuality
> which you may find more agreeable than the "all gays are SP" rant.
>
> You wrote something along the lines of...
>   "A Thetan may decide that 'she' makes a good woman'"

Actually this was a quote from Ron.  Its on the reformers page
correctly identified as to which lecture it came from.

> It seems reasonable that 'she' would pick up female bodies time
> after time and gain a thoroughly female viewpoint.It also seems
> reasonable that mistakes will
> be made over the aeons and 'she' will aquire a male body but the female
> characteristics might be too strong to ignore.This might result in
> homosexuality.
> Regardless of whether this is true or not,we do not agree with Hubbard that
> the gay community is hell bent on covert destruction.

That is a late idea.  He had no problem with them in the 1950s.  I
like the earlier Hubbard much better.

> Unfortunatly,we cannot provide any background data on who we are at this
> time.We are in something of a peculiar situation which is stable for the
> moment and we would like to avoid OSA entanglement.

As I said, I do not want you to blow your cover.  Only say what you
can say safely.

> You are interested in our views on Chapter 4?.Would you prefer to have them
> added to our website or mailed onto the Clear-L list?.

Clear-L goes right into ACT which I keep an eye on.

> Finally,you may have assumed that we are 'Tech Loyalists'.This is mostly true
> but then again,if two terminals hold the same opinions then only one of them
> is doing the thinking.This alone is a good reason to start picking away at the
> Tech and anyway,if absolutes are unattainable,then LRH,as per his own
> axioms,cannot be absolutly correct.Although we are not absolutly
> certain...... :-)
> We are open to new idea's but OSA's warnings about the Freezone are not
> without foundation and there are some
> insane 'tech' idea's floating around on the .net.A 'Telepathic Auditor
> Training Course' for example.

That is Koos whom almost nobody takes seriously.  If you consider
Clear-l to be representative of the freezone, then the freezone
has already rejected him.  Ask Homer.

The occasional poor idea is generally weak and harmless rather than
dangerous to people.  It forces one to have a bit of judegement,
but that is desirable.

> Respectfully
>
>   Steve n' Sarah
>
>  We are all in the gutter....but some of us are looking up at the stars
>  (Oscar Wilde).
> >

I took a look at your website and it is very well done.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering CBW about the new book


ANSWERING CBW ABOUT THE NEW BOOK

On 19 Dec 97, "Homer W. Smith" <[email protected]>
answered an earlier post from [email protected] (C. B. Willis)
which questioned some things in the "Spiritual Orientation"
section of the Self Clearing book.

The subject line was "re - Super Scio <1 of 11> SELF CLEARING BOOK"

The double > > are Carol's and the > are Homer's reply.

> > Pilot writes:
> > : Before all creations, there can only be nothingness.
> >
> > This is a logical consideration only.  And a very popular one.
> > But not necessarily true.
> >
> > If you mean by nothingness, no material thing, then ok, but I find that
> > use of term 'nothingness' to be unworkable, as it makes material things
> > the primary orientation and defines the spiritual in terms of them,
> > albeit in terms of the absence of material things or "MEST".  Perhaps
> > this is not what you mean by 'nothingness'.
>
>      This is correct.   He means unmanifest.  He uses nothingness loosely
> the way Enid does and for which I gave her such hell.

Yes.  Perhaps unmanifest is better.  Or we could get Hubbardian and
say "The Life Static".

We could get complex and say "there is this factor X and its
characteristics include nothingness, unmanifest, static, senior
to time and space and so on".

I used a simple word and of course it is inadequate.

There is a longer discussion at the begining of chapter 2 of
the Super Scio book.

This section of the introduction was not meant to be a major
theological thesis but simply a statement of the spiritual
orientation that I was using and where I thought we were going.

I do believe that we all end up as creators exchanging our
creations in infinite variety.

My policy of "no bait and switch" requires that I mention these
things up front.  But I should have emphasized that you don't
have to believe or agree to work through the book.


> > : Therefore,
> > : God must be a nothingness with the power to conceive and create.
> >
> > This is one of the strangest statements I've ever heard!
> >
> > Why is not God and eternal spirit seen as positive consciousness,
> > in the affirmative, primary, with all else defined in terms of them?
>
>     All consciousness is a pock mark on the face of God.
>
>     You conceive God to be a conscious unit.  A Big Daddy.
>
>     Someone you can relate to as in another being.
>
>     God is the GROUND of consciousness, God is not conscious.
>
>     There may be a being who is the author of this universe, but
> at best you hired him to 'cast you into existence'.
>
> > This makes no sense to me at all.  Ex nihilo is a myth and an appearance,
> > as God created from His own consciousness and substance, and so do we.
>
>      Garbage.  You are lost Carol.  Totally lost.
>
>      That which creates consciousness can not itself be conscious.
>
>      Consciousness can not come from consciousness.
>
>      Homer

Homer has the right idea (although I would not have put it as bluntly).

A positive concious God implies a negative concious devil and
a good/evil dichotomy and all sorts of mess that would require
looking earlier for prior cause.

When I am talking about somethingness striving to balance the
nothingness I am not talking about a dichotomy.

Perhaps it would be better to say the manifest which is always
striving to catch up with the unmanifest but never actually
does catch up because the unmanifest is a higher order of
infinity (there is always more unmanifest implied by each
manifestation that comes into existance and so it never catches
up).

It is like the carrot hanging in front of the donkey.  No matter
how far he goes, the carrot is always ahead.

Not balance but a self perpetuating progression.  And a desirable
one except for the fact that we have lost awareness.  Like
surfing an infinite wave, but if you fall and get dragged
under you have to struggle to get back up on top of it.

Or we could talk about a not-static which is striving to catch
up with or balance a static that is always greater by definition.

But the real point is simply that I think we work towards
more creation rather than less and that we accept an underlying
commonality of spirit rather than finding the bad guys and
getting rid of them.

Its better to work through the book rather than getting lost
in theological debates.

Which brings us around to Carol's other post.

On 19 Dec 97, [email protected] (C. B. Willis) wrote
on subject "Re Super Scio <2 of 11> SELF CLEARING BOOK"

> The Pilot ([email protected]) wrote:
> : 6.1 Simple Recall - affinity
>
> : Do the following 3 commands alternately until you feel good.
> : Spot specific times and peoples.
>
> : 6.1a) Remember a time when somebody liked you
> : 6.1b) Remember a time when you liked somebody
> : 6.1c) Remember a time when two people liked each other
>
> Is there a reason for not running this on 4 flows, to include "Flow 0"?
> Flow 0 is often the punchline in the 4 flows set, what drives the process
> home, and the bottom line release in some other clearing.  Why not give a
> lot of practice and facility in Flow 0, so it becomes habit to consider how
> one life-processes himself.  The 4 flows are beautifully balance, why
> depart from that.  Sometimes the Flow 0 doesn't make sense, but not
> necessarily a problem, it might make some sort of case sense to the
> person, and he's always free to say he has no answer or the question
> doesn't make sense in this instance.

I omitted it because this is one of the first subjective processes
in the book and I wanted the commands to be easy and self evident for
the sake of new people.

Although "a time when you liked yourself" would have been workable,
this is part of a set (ARCU) and "a time when you enjoyed talking
to yourself" seemed like asking for trouble.

Of course an advanced person could run this on 4 flows and you
should do so yourself any time that it seems appropriate.  I should
have said that in appendix A.


> Also, while _Korzybski_ founded the subject of general semantics, his
> landmark work was SCIENCE AND SANITY (in case students want to pursue the
> subject), and to my knowledge he did not write a work called _General
> Semantics_.  (Allen, correct me if I'm wrong here.)

I was referring to the subject rather than a specific book.

Unfortunately I did spell his name wrong.  I depend on spell checkers
to fix my sloppy spelling and they are useless for names.

> - CBW
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> | [email protected]            | "Values are the infrastructure   |
> |                                |  upon which civilization         |
> |                                |  will be reinvented."  - CBW     |
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you, this has been helpful.

The most important practical point is that I should have said
more in the appendix for professionals.

The early part of the book does have kid gloves on.  The new
people do need a gradient and a chance to work up to things
and I had to assume that they would be alone without a helping
hand even though this might not always be the case.

Advanced students and professionals should feel free to beef
things up (like Carol's wanting to add a flow zero to the
above process) when it seems appropriate to them.

I am nowhere near as pedantic as Hubbard as far as not wanting
anybody to even breath in the presence of the sacred process
commands.

And he wasn't that pedantic in the 1950s either.  Listen to
any of the 1950s auditing demos.  In the later days he was
simply allowing for auditing done by idiots.


Happy Holidays,

The Pilot

==========================================

subj : Super Scio Tech - About Feedback (To Nogoot)


ABOUT FEEDBACK (TO NOGOOT)

On 6 Dec 97, [email protected] (NoGoot) responded to an earlier
post of mine on subject "Re: Super Scio Tech - More on AMs"

> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (The
> Pilot) writes:
>
> > That is a nice new definition of clear.  Being exterior to
> > the bank.  It means that you can think instead of reacting.
> >
> > This did happen for me when I went clear.  Since then I
> > always have a moment of free choice and decision
> > before I react or dramatize something or have an ARCX or whatever.
> > Often I will go ahead and ARCX (for example) anyway, because
> > this doesn't handle the reason I'm ARCXing, but I always
> > have the chance to look first instead of simply reacting.
> >
> > I think that most clears have this, but I don't actually
> > know for sure.  I'd be interested in hearing other's ideas
> > on this.
>
> Dear Pilot,
>
> I don't know if you're interested in the feedback of a
> non-researcher, but my cognition on clear is as you
> describe yours above -- which sounds similar to what
> Hubbard described as a key-out -- there's something
> still there, but I decide whether or not to react to/with
> the emotion presented by the automaticity.
>
> Your writing is very interesting.  I look forward to the
> completion of your book.
>
> NoGoot

Actual feedback and observations like this from non-researchers
are quite valuable.  The researchers often get prejudiced and
see or mockup what they expect to see.

A key-out would imply that something is temporarily gone which
can come back.

Here we are talking about a (hopefully) stable gain, but the
gain is not true errasure but simply an ability to be
separate from and choose before reacting.

A good definition of clear might have saved the org from
much misery and dramatization and blaming the wrong targets.
I suppose that we could say that the entire organization
had a misunderstood word.

The book is done, as I'm sure you are aware, and I thank
you for intelligently handling the few criticisms that
appeared on ARS.

Happy Holidays,

The Pilot

==========================================

subj : Super Scio Tech - About the Fountainhead


ABOUT THE FOUNTAINHEAD

On 9 Dec 97, [email protected] posted on
subject "Fountain Head"

>    There was a movie made in the early fiftys starring
> Gary Cooper who played a brilliant Architect and was
> based on the real life story of this fellow whose name
> I can't think of, but it was a sort of landmark film in
> that it dealt with the idea of Collectivism vs Individualism.
>   It spawned the anti hero type which began to fill the screen
> after that.
>  Does anyone know the Architects name or if this movie was
> based and Autobiography that is still in print ?
>
> The movie name was Fountain Head it was out of character for
> Gary Cooper and I think it was pretty much a flop for him
> but I'd love to read the book it was based on if there is one.
>
> Lightnin

After numerous responses indicating that it was Ann Rand's
"The Fountainhead", he posted the following -

>    Well I guess I'm the only guy on the planet has'nt
> read or does'nt know about this book  LOL ....Laugh out Loud Sarah
>    Actually the work I've been doing on the Root Chakra area
> has opened up several movies and books I would,nt have
> given a second look in the past, again thanks for all the replys.
>
>
> Lightnin George
> The Chili Dharma of Chili Dogma
>
> The sixth and most important sense
> is a Sense of Humor

I'm not bringing this up again to make Lightnin blush (my appologies,
Lightnin).

There is something very very interesting here.

He was working on the Root Chakra.  This is the first chakra,
which I believe to represent the energies of the first dynamic.

And then this movie occurs to him.  A movie that he thought
was a flop.  He didn't have all the PR or significance on it
that most people would have, so he had no reason to bring it
up except that it was a correct item.

And I would say that The Fountainhead is the ultimate first
dynamic book.  To me it matches the wavelengths of that
first chakra perfectly.

I would place Atlas Shrugged (which is the greater work) as
being as much 3rd and 4th as 1st dynamic.

But Fountainhead is pure 1st.

Some people don't like it because of that, it ignores much
else, but it is a sort of ultimate within its own sphere of
action.

The two books are among the great novels of this century.

There is also a hint of GPMishness in Fountainhead in that
the creator blows up his own creation.  Similarly in
Atlas, the society distroys itself.

Much food for thought here.

Best,

The Pilot


==========================================

The following trailer was used on these posts

------------------

See the "SCIENTOLOGY REFORMER'S HOME PAGE" by the Pilot
at http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/pilot.html
or http://www.igs.net/~michaelv/scnreform.htm or
via http://www.proweb.co.uk/~tech/good.htm or
The Pilots Home Page at http://fza.org/pilot/index.htm

Get the original Pilot materials (the 32 part SUPER SCIO book) at:
ftp://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/pub/ss/index.html
or from the Pilots Home Page or pick up the ss## files
from Homer's archive at lightlink.com.

Get the new Self Clearing Book from the Pilots Home Page (above) or in
gzip format from ftp://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/pub/ss/selfclear.gz

All of this week's posts will be collected in Super Scio Archive #17
and posted to ACT.  The posting archives are also available
on The Pilots Home Page.

------------------

You are viewing proxied material from sdf.org. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.