E-Mail to us:
Subject: Doubt Announcement
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 14:11:28 GMT
From: "Susan MacDonald" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
I have worked for months on a doubt condition as regards the organization of the Church of Scientology. Attached is what I hope is an informative and also interesting look at major outpoints with explanations written in the form of a Doubt Announcement.
I noticed that Virginia's story is on your site now. Would the attached be of interest to visitors to the English side of the Zone?
Susan Q. MacDonald
To my friends and fellow game players in the game of achieving total spiritual freedom using Scientology technology:
This is an announcement of the result of my Doubt condition as regards the organization of the Church of Scientology as it exists and has existed since the early 1980s when RTC, headed by David Miscavige, took control.
First, let me say that I am not now, nor have I ever been, in doubt as regards the technology of Scientology as written by L. Ron Hubbard. I have found this tech to be extremely workable in achieving my goal of spiritual freedom. Where it has failed, I see evidence of tampering with it or misapplication of it. Where it has succeeded, it is due to the good intentions of those applying it and their ability and my ability to apply it to the result described by LRH.
The history of the take over of the Church by RTC and Miscavige is well documented by others. Of particular good use in gaining an education of how this all came about are the transcripts of the Jon Zegel tapes which can be found on the internet. I have listened to these tapes and read other accounts of peoples experiences during the late 70s and early 80s.
As I have been involved in Scientology since the late 1970s, I was present for the final changeover to RTC management. While I was not involved in the 60s and 70s, I have read a great deal of Hubbard's policy and tech from those decades and I have thoroughly interviewed numerous individuals who were involved in various capacities, from public to staff to Sea Org, and even part of the top-level management at that time called World Wide.
My own investigation to complete my personal doubt formula has been as thorough for me as was needed to prove beyond any doubt the intentions and actions on the part of the current management of the Church who have betrayed LRH and his stated mission on this planet.
When I joined up, I joined LRH and his game. I did not join the RTC game and for the first five years of my life as a Scientologist, I grant myself the beingness of having not known of the true nature of their intentions and purposes and thus forgive myself for having forwarded their goals and purposes. However, for the past 15-plus years I have seen multitudes of out points and while I have attempted to handle them in some ways, I am quite guilty of not speaking loudly enough and of not disconnecting from them when no handling was possible.
This is not written to assuage my guilt for having flowed power to those I now see have so misused it. I am handling my responsibility in this matter. I am applying the correct policies and Tech to this area to ensure I will not remain stuck at this point on the time track. To ignore this would ruin my future much more than theirs. This is written to share my own hard-won knowledge with anyone who wishes to look and decide for themselves.
I implore you, DO NOT BELIEVE THIS just because I have written it here. Do your own doubt condition (or whatever condition applies to you). Look for yourself and consult your own experiences. Consult the experiences of those around you. Decide for yourself whether the current organization of the Church of Scientology is worthy of your support or if, instead, you might wish to join the growing number on the outside who are applying the Tech standardly to themselves and others to forward the aims that LRH proposed personal spiritual freedom for each and every one of us.
Before beginning on your own quest for answers, I most highly recommend you study (or re-study as the case may be) the Data Series in full. Being able to spot out points and plus points is vital in doing a doubt condition.
Alright then, following are some of the major outpoints that I have observed with some examples and my conclusion as to what each means to me.
There are exceptions to every rule, and I do not mean for this to be a generality. So to avoid that I will speak of what I know and invite you to compare this information to your local situation. I have observed the course and growth (or lack thereof) of my own local organization for over 15 years. Despite the peaks and valleys of more staff at times and less staff at times, the overall result is that the org is not one bit larger, nor is it producing any more products than it was 15 years ago. At no point in its life through these years was it ever booming. I thought this might have been an isolated org, so I began questioning friends who live in other cities about their local orgs. The information is the same. Most of them have a staff of not over 20 and most of these are part-time staff members. Attending a Div 4 course reveals includes 3-10 people on any given evening or weekend. Asking any staff member where they are on the Bridge or what they are doing currently during their enhancement time almost always reveals very slow, if any, progress up their own personal Bridge, despite the policy that all staff are to have 2 1/2 hours a day of enhancement time. Take a look at the org nearest you. What is the true condition of the staff? Are they well paid? Are they moving up the Bridge? Are they happy, productive individuals across their dynamics? The dream of St. Hill sized orgs is a bust. In 15 years there have been so few St. Hill sized orgs, and yet even these are not promoted to the public. Try to name which orgs are St. Hill sized for yourself. Try to find a working list of them in the printed materials and promotional pieces. This is not easy data to find.
CONCLUSIONS: Lower orgs than the AOs and FLAG are being used like missions to an org they send their public to the higher orgs as rapidly as possible. Those public that remain on the local level are moving so slowly up the Bridge and are so few in number that the orgs are slowly dying from lack of support. The dream of enough St. Hill sized orgs to meet the goal to have OT IX and X is unreachable with the current policies and application by the Church.
I see that the amount of effort and energy it takes to get onto and through a course or a rundown of auditing at FLAG has been increased to the point of becoming a major slow or stop; i.e., using policy to stop. As an example, the new Pro TRs course took literally years for several of my friends to complete. Many other acquaintances spoke of the months they spent on the course. We have come so far from LRHs ability to get anyone through a hard TRs course in two weeks that the size of this outpoint is like not being able to see the forest for the trees. As another example, the route to get onto the lower OT levels has been extended to include a Sec Check of 150+ questions. An investigation into the policies that govern this area showed me that the policy entitled OT Courses is being made only the first part of ones trek through the morass of approvals needed to get behind the many levels of locked doors to your sessions. This smacks horribly of introducing a huge unusual solution into the equation, and as a result the OT course rooms (I-III) are quite empty at FLAG. If you are finally able to get onto them, you are almost always alone in the course room with the supervisor. This is great one-on-one attention, but I encourage you not to miss the outpoint of how few people are moving up to and onto the OT levels at all. Look back into recent history and note that during the mid-1980s, people would arrive at FLAG barely Clear and within 3 months be back home having completed OT III. Now it can take up to three months to complete the Solo I course. If the Golden Age of Tech is making the Bridge so much more rapid, why are so few people graduating from OT III?
CONCLUSION: Irrespective of the cost of doing services, moving up the Bridge at any sort of significant pace is impeded all along the way. Stats (products) do not happen by chance. They are made to happen. A stat is held down purposefully.
When I was on staff in the 80s, the amount of pressure brought to bear on us to create our statistics was overwhelming. One had to live with the constant chant of where are your products. While some good products were being created (preclears through their sessions, students through their courses) and this is what the purpose of an org is, the staff were not treated with kindness most of the time. Don't take my word on this one. If you were on staff, you already know exactly what I'm talking about. If you were not ever on staff, did you not observe the pressure the staff was under? If not, talk to people you know who were, or are now, on staff. If you can get them to really say what they felt or feel, the undercurrent will be similar in every case. While we all bought the justifications of why so much pressure was necessary, I don't know one person who enjoyed it or felt that it was conducive to increasing the products of the org. I also don't know of one person who hasn't compared that working environment to other companies or organizations they worked for and wondered why, if this was/is such a great management system, the orgs weren't booming like wog businesses. (Comparing Class IV or V orgs to Sea Org orgs, my personal observation is that being in the S.O. is even more pressure.) Have things changed since I was on staff? Yes, somewhat. I observe far less yelling and screaming of one staff member to another, but overall, the pressure to create stats at any cost to the individuals dynamics has not changed. Staff are still blackmailed into stat pushing in order to get their very precious lib time. Lib time is revocable at the whim of ones senior, even if that time is unscheduled org time (time when the org is supposedly closed). At the risk of rambling on and on in this area, I will cut it short and note that nowhere in LRHs policies (and I have read and studied all the staff basic policies which apply to a Class IV org) is this management style advised. I find many, many instances where basic policy is not being applied. Again, you must look for oneself. Take any policy in OEC Volume 0 or I and compare it to what is being done in the org. Do your own analysis of application of policy.
CONCLUSION: An organization is only as ethical or high-toned as the individuals at the top (my own observation). If the lower orgs treat their staff this way, it is because the higher orgs treat the lower org staff this way (personal experience proved this to be true). If the higher orgs are this way, then it is because Int Management manages this way. I wonder if the Int Management team is truly all the way up the Bridge or if they miss their enhancement/study time as well.
From my own experience, I tried on several large issues to get policy applied. In one instance, while on staff, I wrote reports to higher authorities regarding a gross stat push perpetrated by several other members of the executive staff at our org. Instead of the situation be righted, I was assigned a lower condition for not working with the other executive staff. No action was taken to correct the erring execs. In another instance, I reported numerous times on one of the execs and how he was abusing staff verbally, and even physically in one instance. I was told that his case was in the way and that this would be handled and to understand why he was under so much pressure. If this was true, then it was case on post, which is off policy. Upper management was justifying this execs behavior to the detriment of the entire staff who were being bullied by him. The situation was left to continue for months, despite numerous and continued reports. As another example, someone I knew wrote up an out-tech point which he proved completely with his research on the matter. After two years of writing to this Int Exec and then the other as instructed, he was finally told that it would not be changed and that he would not be shown a reference to dispute his findings. This person has not moved on the Bridge since (several years). As another prime example, one can review the evidence presented by Virginia as posted on the internet and readily available at her web site, http://www.reformedscientology.org. She discovered a majorly significant out-Tech point as regards the use of sec checks on OT VII. Today she is declared, out of the Church and very outspoken on the matter. Having personally reviewed this data, I can find no fault in her data. Nor have I seen the Church adequately explain their lack of correct application in this area, nor present any LRH policy or bulletin which refutes it.
CONCLUSION: Int Management wishes to apply the Policy and Tech as they see fit, not as LRH saw fit. If the ends justify the means, then the Policy or Tech point is altered to be used to meet their end.
Having studied and applied the PR tech quite effectively across my dynamics, I am want to explain how it is that the Church has so bumbled in this area that their enemies are larger in number and stronger in their assault. How was a Bob Minton allowed to be created to the degree that he has opened an office in Clearwater and is opening at least two more in other states? How is it that more and more of the type of Jesse Prince, Peter Alexander, Stacy Young, Vaughn Young, and others are rising up and speaking out about the conditions and treatment they received in the Church and how it needs to be reformed? A re-study of KSW #1 reminds us that we are only upbraided for our lack of results. Lisa McPherson certainly was not a good product. Neither were any of the above mentioned individuals. I am not a good product for that matter in their eyes if I am now dissenting and pouring forth the outpoints that I have observed in the misapplication of Policy and Tech by the Church management. What is the product that we are going for as Scientologists? Is it not to become completely self-determined individuals? (Review the Qs for the answer to this one.) If this is a good goal, then speaking out is an acceptable behavior. Yet, I know without a shadow of a doubt that if they discover my identity, I will be declared Suppressive and my friends and family who are members of the Church will be made to disconnect from me. For that matter, I am made to disconnect from those I know who have been declared whether I agree with the declare or not. What I see from this is that we are creating our own enemies and we are not handling them effectively. A review of the law suits world wide against the Church or any of its entities reveals that we have many enemies. And many of began their descent to the level of enemy by questioning the outpoints and being unable to cause a change to right them. As for those who dare to point out the out points, we are made to believe that our future spiritual freedom depends on getting along with the Church management. (See #7 below.) A review of the Policies and Tech regarding PTSness and Suppression will also reveal that the Church is lacking in its application. One either handles or disconnects. I do not see either of these occurring where their enemies are concerned. They have not handled them, and they certainly have not totally disconnected. They are involved with their enemies daily.
CONCLUSIONS: The Church is actively creating enemies by its continued misapplication of Policy and Tech. We ARE being upbraided for our lack of results. After 50 years, we are spending millions annually to defend our position, and hundreds of thousands of man hours as well. Despite this, there are more law suits than ever and yet fewer orgs and missions to disseminate the Tech. In addition, many Scientologists are afraid to look at the outpoints they perceive are there for fear of reprisal. Those that do are forced to not-is them or to quietly disconnect from the Church so as to maintain comm lines of friends and family.
Recently an acquaintance of mine told me that he had just finished his fifth 6 month check. He had used 2 1/2 intensives of auditing at the AO at FLAG over the six weeks he was there. The cost for this auditing is valued at approximately $18,000. He originated to me that he had to find a new job now (since he had not been working while doing the 6-month check) to make more money so he could do the next one. Oh, but this one really was the best one ever he originated that he was sure that his responsibility level was coming up since he was obviously confronting more and more to have to need more and more hours of auditing during each 6 month check. Well, if you cant see some of the outpoints in the above, please get onto OT VII yourself and experience this personally. Here is a very able person who is completely flat broke while being on the highest level of the Bridge offered currently by the Church. His daily existence is devoid of anything that isn't immediately contributing to remaining on this level. Where are his other dynamics? Very little mest to speak of. No career or real job to speak of. Very little time for friendships or family relations. An upheaval of his life every 6 months to be away at FLAG for weeks makes creating a stable environment virtually impossible. How can one create on the dynamics with this scenario? And, what happened to OT VII being a solo audited level? The Golden Age of Tech re-do of VII involves learning dozens of auditing procedures one might need so that the solo auditor can handle anything which might come up. Why then is so much auditing required at the 6 month check? Okay, enough of this. The point is that it is so costly to be on the Bridge, only the wealthy can afford to do so. Personally, I used every resource I had available to me to get through OT IV. When I was finally finished I was tens of thousands in debt and had nothing to fall back on. It took me years to dig out of the financial hole I had put upon myself. Was OT III worth it? Yes. Absolutely. Would I do it again? Yes. Is this what LRH intended? Not that I can find in his writings. How is it that we have created a situation where so few people can afford to go OT? This points back to us not following the Policy and Tech. For if we were, the roll books would be filled with public moving up the Bridge and as a result the cost would be less per individual. If we were not mocking up law suit after law suit, the resources of the organization would not be so drained, either. As another example, consider the Super Power building. LRH explicitly warns against the staff member who must have before he can do. Why must we have a special building for this rundown? Why must this building be the ornate shrine that is planned? What's wrong with temporary buildings if that is what will help us get this vital Tech into use? I have personally seen a policy that LRH wrote in 1978 which clearly shows that Super Power was to have been released that year; that the team of auditors had already been trained and were ready to go back to their orgs across the planet and deliver this Tech. Why was it pulled? Why can it not be delivered using existing resources? These are more outpoints to consider. Despite all of the sec check auditing, no one has finished OT VII. It has been revamped twice since the early 80s and while rumors fly about how some are close to finishing, the level takes years at the Church and costs minimally $20,000 and more realistically $40,000 a year to be on it in the form of sec check fees.
CONCLUSIONS: Int Management does not want a lot of people to get the upper OT Levels, nor Super Power. However, once you manage to get onto the highest OT level (VII), then they don't want you to finish it. The 6 month checks are designed to slow your progress while keeping you highly connected to FLAG and paying large sums of money in the form of sec check auditing on a bi-annual basis.
Years ago OT III was made public when several individuals removed the packs from the base and spread it planet wide. It occurred. Done. Over with. Some years back in a court case in Denmark the entirety of OT I through VII were entered into the court records. Today one can purchase a CD of all these levels as entered into the court records for under $100. A friend of mine (previous OT VII completion) who has reviewed this material has verified that it is accurate. The secret Tech is in the public domain. We do not have the only license to use this Tech any more (we being the Church organization). Yet we continue to fight and sue and create antagonism to such a degree that we assert our own monopoly over it all. Those who are in the Church are forbidden to go anywhere else but to the Church to receive services. If one wishes to go to a field auditor, that auditor must be licensed by the Church. If you want the Church's brand of Scientology, use only their licensed organizations or individuals. But in truth, per the Tech Dictionary, a Scientologist is one who uses the Tech to better conditions for himself and his environment. The Tech is for use. We CAN use the Tech. We can read it, drill it and do it , but if we want results, then it is our own responsibility to be standard. What I have observed as the outpoint is that the Church discourages use of the Tech on ones own. I have been made to feel that if I write up conditions, then I am using their Tech to do this. I cannot consult with a friend regarding his or her business and use the management Tech that I have learned without getting a license from WISE. I cannot audit my friends and have the blessing of the Church without being a member of I HELP and paying a portion of my earnings to them. I am made fully aware that the supposed only place to get Scientology is at the Church and that if I do not agree to their rules (whether written by LRH or by them SPDs in particular), then I will be banned from receiving the services forever or until I beg their forgiveness and play by their rules again. I know how I have felt all these years. I have felt that I could not say what I saw for fear of losing my eligibility of receiving the OT levels. I knew that if I uttered my disagreements too loudly, I would have spent most of my time in ethics trying to handle my disagreements instead of in session handling my case. My only other choice was to not participate. To not go up the Bridge. And for years, I chose the course of putting on the blinders to not see what was going on, to only say what I observed most tentatively so as not to cause waves, to justify to myself all the good reasons that things were as they were after all, if I was unwilling to give up my life and join the sea org to make things better, then I had no right to complain, right? Back to the Tech being in the public domain. There are many questions being raised as to the status of the copyrights of LRHs writings. A review of affidavits which are posted on the internet (of particular interest are the ones by Vaughn Young), in addition to the many law suits regarding copyright infringement, tell a story which leads one to question who really owns the rights to LRHs works. See #8 below for information on how the Tech is being rewritten.
CONCLUSIONS: The current Management creates the environment where we are afraid to apply the Tech outside the Church by misuse of the ethics Tech. They use the threat of taking away our route to spiritual freedom to keep us playing by their off-policy rules. In truth, the Tech is available to anyone who wishes to use it. Those who use it properly, per LRH, will attain high results. Those who do not, will not. In any event, it is plausible that RTC is trying to fool us into believing they have a monopoly on the Tech so that we will not discover that it is ours to use for attaining personal spiritual freedom. It is plausible that they are in fact rewriting the Tech so as to re-copyright it with changes in an attempt to maintain that monopoly.
Since LRH died in 1986, seemingly every book, every tape and every loose policy and bulletin have been reworked, reprinted and reissued with multitudes of changes. The PR line given by the Church for this is that LRH left notes and other instructions leading them to do this. Another explanation given by RTC is that when comparing the current to the original LRH writings, there were many errors. The changes are supposedly being made to handle these errors. Here is a huge outpoint to combat these lies: LRH was quite alive and very much involved in the Church at least through 1978. The original OEC and Tech Vols and all the books were being used pervasively throughout the organization during the 70s. Even the OT Levels (up through old OT VII and new OT III) were being used consistently to rave results. If these were so inadequate, why did LRH allow them to be used? Okay, there were typos and errors, and cancellations that were still in the books, etc. Ill buy that. But why would there have to be so much rewriting done to all these works? I invite you to compare the basic books of 25 years ago to the basic books of today. Where did RTC find all this other material to add to the books? Why were whole chapters deleted from the newer versions? Where are LRHs orders as regards these massive changes? Compare some of the policies in the old OEC vols to the new ones. Compare closely. Someone has rewritten them. Who has the arrogance to rewrite LRH? Who are the people doing the rewriting exactly? What are their names? What is their level in auditing and training? Are they all Class XIIs and OT VIII and above like LRH? (Of course not. No one is truly OT VIII according to the Church. No one has actually finished VII.) But we know that LRH was OT VIII or above as it was he who supposedly wrote them. I invite you to investigate for yourself. For starters, just look at the latest version of the Introduction to Scientology Ethics book. Or the two versions of the book before that, for that matter. There is so much added material to each subsequent version, but not one notation of reference as to where it came from. Those educated in Ethics Tech will see that many are from policies and bulletins which are also in the OEC vols or Tech vols. But why not note where they are from? A close inspection of some of this material will also show you that it has been paraphrased in parts from the original policy or bulletin. Who has the arrogance to presume they can write LRH better than the man himself? And what happened to the many policies and bulletins which gave credit to those who helped LRH along the way? How come on the newer versions they are cut from view as having contributed?
CONCLUSION: Those who want pure, unadulterated LRH, or the closest thing to it, will steer clear of the latest versions of his writings, or at the very least inspect closely before assuming it is what LRH intended for us to use as the Tech. Further, I must conclude that RTC is in favor of altering the Tech. Perhaps to try to maintain a monopoly by copyrighting the newest material with changes. Perhaps to actually ensure that no one goes free for real.
I have observed over the past ten years that the events have become PR-filled extravaganzas. I have observed that the statistics they give are generalities, couched with graphics that look great, but do not really show meaningful comparisons of statistics. I have seen with my own eyes doctored photos of an auditorium supposedly filled with event attendees, which upon close inspection reveal photo magic duplications of people across the rows and balconies. I have seen minor wins in the field blown completely out of proportion and made to seem universe changing. Having worked with OSA (and earlier the Guardians Office) on many different flaps over the years, I know first-hand how the Church avoids briefing the parishioners on the situations, while only relaying their version of events. While this may seem laudable on the surface, it completely sabotages ones ability to use the KRC triangle to create more control in the environment. A new morality is being enforced on Church members. One is questioned and rebuked for not attending Church events. At every event, a new version of an old book or course is released and one is pressured to buy it now! Tape sets costing hundreds of dollars are packaged and sold, while meter styles that were perfectly adequate to audit on the OT Levels are now relegated to the trash heap in favor of one that costs nearly twice as much as the earlier version. (I just cant understand why the Mark VI is unusable, at least at the lower levels, while the Mark V is still being promoted for use on the lower Grades. If it is just no good, why aren't all of us who used it to get up through OT III made to go back and re-audit that level on the Quantum?) The events have turned into Vegas-style shows, with a circus atmosphere surrounding them. At FLAG and in Los Angeles, thousands attend, but at the Class V orgs, audiences of 100 are considered very high indeed. In addition, and very important to me, each of the Tech Films has been refilmed and reedited after LRHs death. While they may look a little more modern, what else was changed in them from the originals? And, without LRH to supervise the complete 100% accuracy of them, once again we have someone presuming to know better than LRH. I've seen the new films. I've seen the old ones (or at least many of each). As a strict LRH supporter, I do not see where the new ones have handled some problem the old ones could have had.
CONCLUSIONS: Among the glitz and glitter are lost the steady-intentioned who just want to go up the Bridge. Pump up the masses, bring in the bucks and then rev them up at the next event again. Billy Graham perfected this method decades ago. It is being used on us again and again to give us false hope that spiritual freedom is attainable. Just keep on contributing your time and your money and eventually your good works will be rewarded. Further, with PR and glitz, we are being fed new versions of everything LRH wrote and produced. Someone has presumed to know more than LRH by doing this.
The Church has demanded that parishioners NOT research anti-Church information with the penalty of spending time in ethics handing why one would want to read anything anti-Church.. The Church has distributed a Net Nanny program which filters out any site with what they believe has anti-Church sentiment. I have personally been told that certain books are banned, in particular The Gods of Eden and certainly the books written by Paulette Cooper, L. Ron Hubbard, Jr., Bent Corydon, and others. I have been told by friends to be sure and not read certain articles in the newspaper as they might contain OT material, and I've been told that surely I don't wish to explore sites on the internet. Much of this is done with an air of fear as regards running into the confidential OT materials, however, no consideration is given to the ability of a person to read some things and avoid others as one sees fit for oneself, the Code of Honor notwithstanding (in particular to receive or give communication as one desires). While on services at the Church, I was in fear to even discuss anti-Church ideas believing with total certainty that I would end up spending hours in session handling these thoughts and discussions. In fact, I spent time in my eligibility auditing exploring if I had ever had a negative thought or said anything negative about Int Management, David Miscavige or RTC including questions regarding what others may have said to me. At that time, I had not had any negative thoughts, but time was spent on these questions anyway, and I assure you that since I have now explored all of this in depth, I know without a doubt that I would never be allowed to continue on the Bridge without heavy ethics handlings and many hours of further sec checking. As a sub-category of this section, my observation is that Church members are discouraged from participating in society at large other than in a manner which will benefit the Church in some way. Certainly having a well-paid job contributes in that one then has the resources to give to the Church. But past this, taking ones time to participate in clubs, associations, politics, etc. is viewed as dilettantism and if not outright a waste of time, at least time taken away from being on course or in the chair auditing. Yet, the policy Special Zone Plan specifically notes the importance of Scientologists participating in all facets of society. The Way To Happiness also speaks of supporting beneficial groups and activities.
CONCLUSIONS: It is to the Church's advantage for us all to spend every waking moment thinking about how we can further the aims of the Church. The activity has become focused around what is good for the Church's dynamics, not the individuals dynamics. In addition, by group moral code, spending ones resources on activities outside the Church has become selfish and an overt in itself. What have you done for me lately is the watchword of eligibility checks. What good things one did in the past is quickly forgotten for the most part.
I see that no one is finishing OT VII and has not for years and years and years. All those who supposedly were finished are now not finished and back on it or supposed to be back on it. This is a total flub of the level as far as I can see and based on the policies that I know exist, the Church is truly mishandling this level and possibly causing harm to people. I see people having to be on a 6-month check for weeks and weeks in some cases and this is very odd, not to mention costly and disruptive to their lives. More than one person has told me how it must be that their responsibility level has somehow come up while on the level since they are now handling so many more overts on the sec checking. This is pretty strange indeed since what I have also seen is many of these people having to go into serious debt in order to remain on the level, or having to live a quasi pauper lifestyle in order to afford it. More than one person has told me outright that they would never begin this level until they see that people are finishing it in a reasonable amount of time.
CONCLUSIONS: I observe that we are becoming more and more slaves to money and mest in order to be on the Bridge. We are spending more and more of our time at the beck and call of the Church, doing what is good for their dynamics, and doing less and less what is self-determined for us. In the Qs, LRH says: The common denominator of all life impulses is self-determinism. And Self-determinism, applied, will create, conserve, alter and possibly destroy universes. So where is all the self-determinism that is promised from the Bridge that RTC is delivering? I see that people are become more and more other determined the other being the Church itself, or those that the Church has put in charge of this group or that group. I see that I have been incredibly PTS to this in that I felt certain I would never go free if I didn't do what the Church wanted me to do. What kind of freedom is this?
Any activity can be plotted against an Admin Scale. (If you are not familiar with this piece of the administrative policy, I highly recommend it. I have found it to be most useful across my dynamics. For a quick explanation of it, look it up in the Admin dictionary. The reference for the total explanation is the Policy Letter Third Dynamic De-Aberration.) The Church and RTC have their stated Admin Scales, the goal being to Clear the planet or for the Sea Org to bring ethics to this sector of the universe and so forth. The goal of an Org is to train and audit people. These stated goals fit on their admin scale. But what if the valuable final product that they propose aligns with their goal is consistently lacking? This got me to thinking. I began taking all of the data above and plotting it into an Admin Scale. Kind of working the Admin Scale backwards to eventually come to the goal. When I take all my experiences and do this with them, I conclude that the goal that is stated by RTC and the Church is a false goal. I conclude that the true goal of RTC is to keep people from going free spiritually. The goal appears to be entrapment. Regardless of what one says, ones products tell the story. LRH once said, Loudly doth speak the overt in accusation. Me thinks the Church protests too much.
LRH wrote that the price of freedom is constant alertness, constant willingness to fight back. There is no other price. This is certainly true for me. What is also true is that I am responsible to ensure that I achieve whatever level of spiritual freedom I want for myself. I can play this game to the degree that I am willing to play it. Fortunately, there are a growing number of people out here (outside the Church boundaries) who are willing, able and actually are applying the Tech to ourselves and to others. This is not an organized group, rather small pockets of individuals who sometimes work together and sometimes communicate about our progress. The good news is that it exists. The Tech exists in its entirety for any who are willing to seek it out and use it. Yes, even the upper levels exist.
Certainly there are some squirrelly people out there doing squirrelly things. But there are a few who remain loyal to LRHs version of his Tech who don't shove upper level material into peoples faces (thereby degrading the Tech and causing others to shun it) until they are ready and willing to do the levels below it and achieve the grade honestly.
Since seeking out such individuals, I have filled in the missing parts of the Bridge that RTC has removed or altered on the Bridge. I have moved on up above the level of OT IV which I achieved in the Church a few years ago. I am currently doing my Ls and look forward to solo auditing on OT VII on up to OT 16. I can see that there is a tunnel and that I am in it and that just around another bend or two, there will be the light at the end of this tunnel called my case. I have proof that others have gone before me and they are here to help lead me out of this trap. It was hard to have this at first. But as I applied the conditions and really looked for myself, it slowly came to view. I am now allowing myself to have this precious Tech and am finally in a position to help encourage others to seek it out, too.
If you want to play this game, you can do it. But it takes integrity and a willingness to look and then take action to call a spade a spade. As a wise man once said: If it looks like a duck, feels like a duck and quacks like a duck, its a duck. The same holds true for the Church and the Tech. If it looks like they are altering the Tech, feels like they are altering the Tech (as in no results or poor results), and it results in no one going free then their version isn't the Tech you've been lead to believe it is.
Apply the real Tech - LRHs Tech. Don't settle for a poor substitute which will entrap you more instead of free you.
As for my public announcement of completing my condition of Doubt as regards the organization of the Church of Scientology (not the Tech): I hereby announce that I am no longer a part of that group which is run by RTC and is altering and squirreling LRHs Technology of spiritual freedom. I have joined the group of Scientologists who KNOW the Tech of Scientology as researched, compiled and written by L. Ron Hubbard; who APPLY the Tech standardly with good intentions to attain the highest possible level of spiritual freedom for all; and who renounce all who would sabotage it or use it to harm or impede others from going free.
Submitted with the knowledge that as a result certain friends and family members may be coerced to sever their ties with me. May the day come when all may speak freely and associate freely without the influence of RTC and the fear of losing ones comm lines through intimidation.