Scientology's Interrogation Tech

A place to post and debate the Church of Scientology.
User avatar
caroline
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Scientology's Interrogation Tech

Post by caroline » Tue Oct 26, 2010 12:43 am

I'll post some more Scientology indoctrination material on individuation. The following comes from Hubbard's main procedural bulletin on sec checking.
L. Ron Hubbard wrote:“Sec Checking,” “Integrity Processing” and “Confessionals” are all the exact same procedure and any materials on these subjects are interchangeable under these titles. (HCOB 24 Jan. 77, TECH CORRECTION ROUNDUP)

Withholds don’t just add up to withholds. They add up to overts; they add up to secrecies; they add up to individuations; they add up to games conditions; they add up to a lot more things than O/W.

You are straightening out somebody on a moral code, the “Now I’m supposed to’s.” They’ve transgressed on a series of “Now I’m supposed to’s.” Having so transgressed, they are now individuated. If their individuation is too obsessive, they snap in and become the terminal. All of these cycles exist around the idea of the transgression against the “Now I’m supposed to’s.” That is what a Confessional clears up and that is all it clears up. It’s a great deal more than a withhold. (HCOB 1 Mar. 77 III, FORMULATING CONFESSIONAL QUESTIONS)

Hubbard, L. R. (1978, 30 November). Confessional Procedure. Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology (1991 ed., Vol. XI. pp. 361-370). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.
INTELLIGENCE SPECIALIST TRAINING ROUTINE – TR L
Purpose: To train the student to give a false statement with good TR-1. To train the student to outflow false data effectively.
Commands: Part l “Tell me a lie”.

User avatar
caroline
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Scientology's Interrogation Tech

Post by caroline » Tue Oct 26, 2010 1:12 am

This 1961 HCOB shows Hubbard's early focus on the "confusion of identities." Note that on the advanced levels, Scientologists handle their confusion of identities by blowing off their body thetans. They are not, however, permitted to blow themselves.
L. Ron Hubbard wrote:Failures to help on the various dynamics can bring about confusion of identities.

This is normally resolved by a thetan by obsessive efforts to individuate (blow phenomena or merely insistences upon individuation).

The end product of failures to help is aberrated self-determinism.

At an overt-withhold level, the thetan is trying to individuate and is therefore proceeding to individuate after failing to help. Thus a thetan is at obsessive cause while trying to do overts or get motivators.

As I have stated before it makes little theoretical difference whether help is run two-way or on an O/W basis.

I also promised to inform you when more data was to be had on this.

Apparently there may be some virtue (in terms of case gain and saved time) in running help on a pan-determined basis.

The theoretical look at this (see recent table in HCO Bulletin of January 5th, 1961, “O-W A Limited Theory”) is that overts are below help and that when one enters upon an improvement in help, obsessive individuated cause falls out and pan-determinism moves in.

Hubbard, L. R. (1961, 12 January). New Help Data. Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology (1991 ed., Vol. VI. p. 5). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.
INTELLIGENCE SPECIALIST TRAINING ROUTINE – TR L
Purpose: To train the student to give a false statement with good TR-1. To train the student to outflow false data effectively.
Commands: Part l “Tell me a lie”.

User avatar
caroline
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Scientology's Interrogation Tech

Post by caroline » Tue Oct 26, 2010 1:28 am

Here's an "advanced" definition of individuation from the NOTs materials.
L. Ron Hubbard wrote:By Collective Identity is meant an identity as a plural or generality; e.g. "I'm the army" or "I'm us". There is no personal identity.

Christian Science asserts that "All is mind, infinite mind" - that's a collective identity and will make a BT or cluster being a Christian Scientist very hard to blow.

This is the reason a cluster doesn't blow, a cluster has the wrong item "us", without personal identity. So the technique of "What are you?","Who are you?" runs into trouble when you get a totally general zealot identity of "I'm the army", or "I'm Christian Scientist", "I'm us", and you don't get a blow. If you keep asking "Who?" you just get a repeat answer "us", and these collective identities won't give a blow.

There's an implant on the track on the subject of "We are all one", "All is one". Someone stuck in this actually goes from the generality of "All is one" and then individuates from that! That's actually the basic definition of individuation (as different from individuality).

Hubbard, L. R. (1978, 27 October). Collective Identities New Era Dianetics for OTs Series 37.
See also: Striking Parallels between CoS and Christian Science
INTELLIGENCE SPECIALIST TRAINING ROUTINE – TR L
Purpose: To train the student to give a false statement with good TR-1. To train the student to outflow false data effectively.
Commands: Part l “Tell me a lie”.

User avatar
caroline
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Scientology's Interrogation Tech

Post by caroline » Tue Oct 26, 2010 1:48 am

This 1959 HCOB shows some of Hubbard's early black PR on individuation.
L. Ron Hubbard wrote:Universe O/W is based upon the observable fact that a thetan is trapped in a thetan, a mind, a body and the physical universe. If he weren’t, he or she wouldn’t be sitting in a chair. Thus we process the extremely obvious, scouting out with an E-Meter only what obviousness is more troublesome to the pc than the other obviousnesses. Of course it seems strange that a thetan could think of himself being trapped in another thetan but you see this all the time in valences. Ghosts become ghosts by being overwhelmed by thetans they think are ghosts and so on. That a thetan is trapped in a mind and that it is not his own mind that he is trapped in is also obvious. If it were his own mind he would soon as-is it and you see what a hard time he has trying to erase it: that hard time comes about because he is misowning the mind in which he is trapped. And this is true of all traps. A thetan is usually quite sure that there is something wrong with the ownership of his own body and sure enough there is. And of course he’s in the universe without much understanding of it.

[...]

You are probably wondering how we can get away with running “conceive a static”, forbidden in the book The Creation of Human Ability. We can just barely get away with it because of the nature and power of the Comm Process. By damping out excessive individuation the Comm Process increases havingness. A total individual can’t have much of anything—you can’t even have a car really unless you can be, besides self, a “car driver” or a “car passenger”. A totally individuated person cannot be anybody but himself, cares for nobody but himself and can share in no activity of any other person. Hence as we flatten out this obsessive individuation we gain in the pc usually enough havingness to run a massless identity such as a thetan.

Hubbard, L. R. (1959, 5 October). Universe Processes. Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology (1991 ed., Vol. V. pp. 223-225). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.
INTELLIGENCE SPECIALIST TRAINING ROUTINE – TR L
Purpose: To train the student to give a false statement with good TR-1. To train the student to outflow false data effectively.
Commands: Part l “Tell me a lie”.

User avatar
caroline
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Scientology's Interrogation Tech

Post by caroline » Tue Oct 26, 2010 2:10 am

From Hubbard's use of the term individuation in Advanced Procedures and Axioms, first published in 1951, it looks like he was familiar with the standard usage of the term in child or developmental psychology.
L. Ron Hubbard wrote:Computations

Every Homo sapiens is running on aberrated computations.

The computation technically is that aberrated evaluation and postulate that one must be consistently in a certain state in order to succeed. The computation thus may mean that one must entertain in order to be alive or that one must be dignified in order to succeed or that one must own much in order to live.

A computation is simply stated. It is always aberrated. It is commonly in conflict with basic goal.

Basic goal is that goal native to the personality for a lifetime. It is second only in importance to survival itself. It is incident to the individuation of the person. A child of two knows its basic goal. It is compounded from genetic generations of experience. It can be found and reduced in some long past heavy effort facsimile such as death. It is neither advisable nor inadvisable to tamper with it. Much experience aligns on it. De-sensitized, it would be supplanted by another basic goal.

Hubbard, L. R. (1951). Advanced Procedures and Axioms (1989 ed.). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.
INTELLIGENCE SPECIALIST TRAINING ROUTINE – TR L
Purpose: To train the student to give a false statement with good TR-1. To train the student to outflow false data effectively.
Commands: Part l “Tell me a lie”.

User avatar
caroline
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Scientology's Interrogation Tech

Post by caroline » Tue Oct 26, 2010 4:11 pm

Here's some classic Hubbard black PR on people who make no progress in Scientology, because they're "guilty of too many overt acts."
L. Ron Hubbard wrote:Now of course, this machine [E-meter] here - you young sprouts that are in the audience will probably live in a civilization where to get a job you'll have to be checked out on an electrometer, and where they won't have unreasonable and destructive revolutions for the excellent reason that most of the criminals are missing out of the society.

Now look, there are a lot of people in the society (quote) "doing good" or "trying to change the society" because they themselves owe a debt to society which they are trying to pay in an oblique way. I'll tell you something very funny: that is simply a compulsion that never gets anyplace. All of us owe a debt to society as far as that goes. We owe our services on all dynamics. But when we have to give them under compulsion, they don't work very well. So this idea of "the fellow is trying to do good because he has been so bad" generally winds up with us all in the soup. The funny part of it is, he'll do ten times as much good, a thousand times as much good, if he himself doesn't have to do any good at all. Quite remarkable.

So there's no reason for this mechanism beyond the fact that certain individuals individuate and fall away in the society, fall away from the dynamics to such a degree that they become something else than human, become something else that isn't alive, that's sort of a synthetic something that crawls through life and tries to get along. When you try to audit a person who is guilty of too many overt acts, he makes no progress. When you audit a person who has a few he had better not say, he makes slow progress and is once in a while a little blowy, once in a while tries to leave, once in a while tries to get out of school or get out of a session. And we've long since known that when we got somebody with hardly any, up the line he'd tell us those.

Hubbard, L. R. (1960, 1 January). Responsibility. State of Man Congress, (6001C01). Lecture conducted from Washington, DC.
INTELLIGENCE SPECIALIST TRAINING ROUTINE – TR L
Purpose: To train the student to give a false statement with good TR-1. To train the student to outflow false data effectively.
Commands: Part l “Tell me a lie”.

User avatar
caroline
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Scientology's Interrogation Tech

Post by caroline » Wed Oct 27, 2010 5:43 am

Scientology and Scientologists often compare their interrogation scripture and practice to Catholic confession. Obviously there are significant procedural differences, but what interested me in this essay from Freud and Psychoanalysis was an insightful discussion about some benefits and dangers involved in Catholic confession and about the transference phenomenon.

Some time ago, I wrote about Scientology's abuse of the transference, but I didn't relate it specifically to sec checking, which Jung does to confession. The "guiding" of the patient or penitent in life that Jung mentions, is taken out of the auditors' hands in Scientology; Ethics personnel, or missionaires, or OSA perform that function. There is no effort on Scientology's part to minimize the transference, and every effort to maximize it to the benefit of the organization, and to prevent the Scientologists from becoming the modern mentally developed persons that Jung mentions here, which would be individuation.
Carl G. Jung wrote:CONFESSION AND PSYCHOANALYSIS

431 Before I discuss in detail this especially important part of the analysis, I should like to draw attention to a parallel between the first stage of psychoanalysis and a certain cultural institution. By this I mean the religious institution of confession.

432 Nothing makes people more lonely, and more cut off from the fellowship of others, than the possession of an anxiously hidden and jealously guarded personal secret. Very often it is "sinful" thoughts and deeds that keep them apart and estrange them from one another. Here confession sometimes has a truly redeeming effect. The tremendous feeling of relief which usually follows a confession can be ascribed to the readmission of the lost sheep into the human community. His moral isolation and seclusion, which were so difficult to bear, cease. Herein lies the chief psychological value of confession.

433 Besides that, however, it has other consequences: through the transference of his secret and all the unconscious fantasies underlying it, a moral bond is formed between the patient and his father confessor. We call this a "transference relationship." Anyone with psychoanalytic experience knows how much the personal significance of the analyst is enhanced when the patient is able to confess his secrets to him. The change this induces in the patient's behaviour is often amazing. This, too, is an effect probably intended by the Church. The fact that by far the greater part of humanity not only needs guidance, but wishes for nothing better than to be guided and held in tutelage, justifies, in a sense, the moral value which the Church sets on confession. The priest, equipped with all the insignia of paternal authority, becomes the responsible leader and shepherd of his flock. He is the father confessor and the members of his parish are his penitent children.

434 Thus priest and Church replace the parents, and to that extent they free the individual from the bonds of the family. In so far as the priest is a morally elevated personality with a natural nobility of soul and a mental culture to match, the institution of confession may be commended as a brilliant method of social guidance and education, which did in fact perform a tremendous educative task for more than fifteen hundred years. So long as the medieval Church knew how to be the guardian of art and science—a role in which her success was due, in part, to her wide tolerance of worldly interests—confession was an admirable instrument of education. But it lost its educative value, at least for more highly developed people, as soon as the Church proved incapable of maintaining her leadership in the intellectual sphere—the inevitable consequence of spiritual rigidity. The more highly developed men of our time do not want to be guided by a creed or a dogma; they want to understand. So it is not surprising if they throw aside everything they do not understand; and religious symbols, being the least intelligible of all, are generally the first to go overboard. The sacrifice of the intellect demanded by a positive belief is a violation against which the conscience of the more highly developed individual rebels.

435 So far as analysis is concerned, in perhaps the majority of cases the transference to and dependence on the analyst could be regarded as a sufficient end with a definite therapeutic effect, provided that the analyst was a commanding personality and in every way capable of guiding his patients responsibly and being a "father to his people." But a modern, mentally developed person strives, consciously or unconsciously, to govern himself and stand morally on his own feet. He wants to take the helm in his own hands; the steering has too long been done by others. He wants to understand; in other words, he wants to be an adult. It is much easier to be guided, but this no longer suits intelligent people today, for they feel that the spirit of the age requires them to exercise moral autonomy. Psychoanalysis has to reckon with this requirement, and has therefore to reject the demand of the patient for constant guidance and instruction. The analyst knows his own shortcomings too well to believe that he could play the role of father and guide. His highest ambition must consist only in educating his patients to become independent personalities, and in freeing them from their unconscious bondage to infantile limitations. He must therefore analyse the transference, a task left untouched by the priest. Through the analysis the unconscious—and sometimes conscious—tie to the analyst is cut, and the patient is set upon his own feet. That, at least, is the aim of the treatment.[2]

[2] [Cf. the "Psychology of the Transference" for a more detailed study.]

Jung, C. G. (1961). Freud and psychoanalysis (First Princeton/Bollingen Paperback printing, 1985 ed., pp. 192-193). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
--
Edit: added a link
INTELLIGENCE SPECIALIST TRAINING ROUTINE – TR L
Purpose: To train the student to give a false statement with good TR-1. To train the student to outflow false data effectively.
Commands: Part l “Tell me a lie”.

User avatar
caroline
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Scientology's Interrogation Tech

Post by caroline » Sat Jun 25, 2011 4:27 am

The Suppressive Person Defense League has assembled the following materials concerning Scientology's interrogation technology:

Hubbard Senior Security Checker (HSSC) Course Pack
HSSC Lectures (mp3 and transcripts)


Orientation: Responsibility

Main technical issue: Confessional Procedure.

Sample sec check questions: Joburg
Hubbard gave instructions for determining E-Meter "lie reactions" on the Joburg form, the "roughest Confessional list in Scientology."
L. Ron Hubbard wrote:The preclear's auditing on Expanded Grade II must include Confessional processing, including a Joburg, done at an appropriate point during the Grade.

Hubbard, L. (1987, 14 November). Expanded Grade II Process Checklist. Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology. (1991 ed., Subject Volume 4, pp. 101-33.)
Hubbard False Purpose Rundown Auditor (HFPRDA) Course Pack
HFPRDA Lectures (mp3 and transcripts)


Orientation: False Purpose Rundown

Main technical issue: Auditing the False Purpose Rundown

Sample FPRD questions: Basic form
INTELLIGENCE SPECIALIST TRAINING ROUTINE – TR L
Purpose: To train the student to give a false statement with good TR-1. To train the student to outflow false data effectively.
Commands: Part l “Tell me a lie”.

User avatar
caroline
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Scientology's Interrogation Tech

Post by caroline » Sat Jun 25, 2011 8:09 pm

O/W write-ups are do-it-yourself, but ordered and examined, interrogations used frequently in Scientology. The theory and procedure is published in the Basic Staff Volume of the Organization Executive Course, pp. 535-9. Note: "When a person has completed his O/W write-up he must receive an end ruds check."

Download Vol 0: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=Y6Y8T3ZY. OEC Vols linked from WWP
Posted also at SPDL: HCOPL O/W Write-ups

Lisa McPherson wrote several O/W write-ups in the weeks and months before her death in 1995. The last one she wrote was 43 pages long.
In her O/W write-up dated 31 October 1995, Lisa McPherson wrote:1. I dramatized my case to keep from confronting my condition.

2. In February 95, on Tuesday afternoon at 2:10 in my office at AMC. The pack manager had come in and was asking me what condition I was applying. My w/hold got missed and I became enraged. I noted it was a non-optimum reaction and was way over what was probably called for. I looked at it as a "sign" and began chewing on my case. I looked at the blackness that had come over me and started listing on what it was. I kept listing for the rest of the day, giving myself item after item, "maybe it was that I was really in power and there was so much power connected to my condition that it caused this super restimulated power surge..." and "well, I'm on Power processes and my condition on post is power and it seemed like a lot of power coming from the blackness so maybe it is the fact that I am really in power..." and "wow, what was that?" and I wonder what that REALLY was?" and "maybe it was some kind of valence" and "let me see if I can figure this out" and "maybe it was something I can't really confront and that is why it was black" and "it was so quick and yet so black and felt so overwhelming, maybe it was another being invading my space and I really couldn't do anything about it anyway" and "maybe it was a being from another planet trying to take over my body" and "maybe it was because I had decided I could conquer anything in the universe and this what I pulled in as a result of that postulate" and off I went into the out list of the out list phenomenon. I went psycho. I bled my case on every terminal around me. My FSM, my 2D, my friends at work. I probably stirred up some of their case by running mine on them. I granted my case the power and strength to overwhelm me and it did just that. I became less than it and a victim to it. I gave up complete control of my thoughts actions, postulates, power and turned it all over to my case and what my case dictated is all I went with. I spent my entire bridge that I had saved for handling this. I lost over 50K in income for the year that I could have earned had I stayed on post and not gone off into the tangent I did. I worried every single friend and fellow staff member to death thinking I might not make it because I was dramatizing death so hard. My friends were left helpless to me. Int management had to get involved to sort me out which took time away from their expansion or helping someone who wasn't as able as I was. Every comm line I was on was adversely affected in some way due to my position as a stable terminal it destabalized anyone who was connected to me. My group was severely damaged both spiritually and financially due to my actions. We almost went down.

Retrieved on 25 June 2011 from http://www.lisafiles.com/scn/ethics/ow/6027.html
These are the "O/W's" of an already tortured soul. Note especially the heartbreaking description of her mental state during Power processing in February 1995.

Lisa's group was AMC Publishing. Her boss, Bennetta Slaughter went on to become the President of Applied Scholastics International. [See: Wikipedia: Applied Scholastics International.]

Lisa's O/W write-ups are included in the Clearwater Police criminal investigation documents. http://www.lisafiles.com/scn/ethics/ow/index.html
INTELLIGENCE SPECIALIST TRAINING ROUTINE – TR L
Purpose: To train the student to give a false statement with good TR-1. To train the student to outflow false data effectively.
Commands: Part l “Tell me a lie”.

User avatar
caroline
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Scientology's Interrogation Tech

Post by caroline » Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:55 am

Nancy Many wrote about her experience with Scientology interrogation in My Billion Year Contract.
Nancy Many wrote:The next day, I was escorted into the auditing room by Donna and Kirsten. The auditor was already set up behind a small desk, and they both followed me into the tiny counseling room. As I looked at these three women and their blank faces, I wondered if this was about to be one of those Gang Sec Checks that I had heard about years ago. It was not. After a stern warning that this was my golden opportunity, Kirsten and Donna left me alone with my auditor, Joan.

The room was cramped with just enough room for a small desk and two chairs. I noticed a security camera in the upper left corner of the room. I had no way of knowing if it was on or off or if they would begin recording us when she started the session. Joan sat in the chair by the door, and I knew from past courses and experience that she had been trained to stop any unauthorized attempts by myself to leave the room. My chair was right up against the single window that overlooked a parking lot many stories below.

What transpired over the next several days was like no auditing I had ever experienced. Grueling is a word that seems to fit. Mental torture is more accurate. The sessions were seven or eight hours long with very few breaks and went on for days. After our initial introduction, the auditor had me read different writings by L. Ron Hubbard to show me that this truly was for my benefit and that these sessions were not
meant to be an inquisition or an attack against me. Joan said that she really cared about me and that was why I was being given this help. However, within an hour, she was yelling at me, angry over something I’d said that she disagreed with.

I remember confessing to her something that I had done to a suppressive person that I considered to be an overt, “a Scientology term that describes a bad action or inaction that is committed against another person or group.” I was astonished when Joan screamed at me that what I had done couldn’t possibly be an overt.

I told her I felt my actions were not good. Joan shouted, “you cannot commit overts on suppressive people!”

We had several disagreements about the definition o f an overt. I said that I did not agree with the concept of an overt being an act that does the most harm to the greatest number of dynamics. Hubbard says that a right action is right to the degree it benefits the greatest number o f dynamics: the “greatest good for the greatest number” theory. I felt that this concept had been consciously used to justify many wrong actions that had been done, not to mention my former colleagues and friends within OSA and the Sea Org. If the “greatest good for the greatest number” was Scientology’s prime goal with the result being a cleared planet, then almost anything could be justified that forwarded that agenda, even the cruelest of actions. I personally felt that “do unto others” had a much greater validity for me, and I used that as my definition o f an overt act to decide if I transgressed or not. Joan vehemently disagreed with my point of view. I did not comply with Hubbard and Scientology’s beliefs; this led to several more of the yelling episodes right in the small auditing room.

Another topic we delved into was my feelings about God and his place in Scientology. I told Joan that I had gone to the Catholic church down the street from my house and lit a candle before coming for the first session. Joan seemed surprised and wanted to know more.

I told her of my confusions with Scientology and God over these last few years and how I knew many Scientologists that were atheists. I wanted to know if that was their personal opinion or if that was the systemic view of Scientology. I had found several writings by Hubbard that had been rewritten by others who deleted references to God in his writing after his death.

Joan really became upset when I told her that I knew that Hubbard’s children had gone to parochial schools in England and that supported my feeling that Hubbard himself did not have all atheistic views. She was very angry that I said that and angrily argued that Hubbard had only done that because we had no Scientology schools back then. I pointed out that Hubbard could have sent his children to nonparochial schools.

Joan moved on to other questions: Whom had I spoken these doubting thoughts of Scientology to? What had they said in response?

These sessions lasted almost two weeks. When I wasn’t in session, I talked very little. I felt numb all the time. Although I tried, I slept fitfully at best. I had to force myself to eat as I was not hungry at all.

At night, I would feel these sessions repeating over and over, a constant drone in the background. It was like the session never really ended. I had brought the auditor home with me. She was in my mind, disagreeing with me, screaming at me, digging into my head.

February 9 or 10, 1996, was the longest session I’d had, lasting about six hours. I remember desperately wanting to leave; however, I was on one of the upper floors o f OSA. When I pictured the difficulties o f getting past my auditor as well as the myriad hallways and stairs that had cameras everywhere and were always full of staff and security guards trained to prevent someone leaving such
a session, I just gave up. I spent most of those six hours sitting in the stifling auditing room, sobbing and doubled over a trashcan with dry heaves.

I was holding the auditing cans in my hands and was across the desk from Joan, but when she handed me the trashcan, I turned my body sideways. I could see my car parked in the lot below. I would look from the car in the lot to the camera up in the corner above Joan and just know it was hopeless. A new wave of nausea would roll through my body again.

“I’m not going to make it,” I cried. “I know I’m just not going to make it.”

“Enough of that,” Joan snapped. “Let’s get back to the question.”

Somehow, we got to an answer that Joan was happy enough; with that, we could end for the day. I was able to leave the building and get into the safety of my car. I cried the entire drive home.

That Sunday night, February 11, 1996, I finally got to sleep. It was 2:00 am that I was violently awakened with an audible cracking of my mind, my soul, my self. I don’t know how else to describe it. My mind physically broke, and there was an actual horrible audible sound to me that accompanied it. I was driven to do something I did not know what.

As I leapt out of bed, I heard a voice shout at my husband. “you better get up or you’re going to lose your wife!” I knew the words had come out of my mouth, but it did not feel as if I was yelling the words. It felt as if someone else was in my body, attempting to communicate with Chris.

I burst out of our front door, running as fast as I could. My husband ran after me and caught me before I left the driveway. I paced around the car and tried to touch one of the trees in front of our house. I felt I needed to do three things: touch the ash tree in front of our home, find my Helen O’Brien book Dianetics in Limbo, and a third thing, which to this day eludes my memory.

Many, N. (2009). My Billion Year Contract. Los Angeles: CNM Publishing.
INTELLIGENCE SPECIALIST TRAINING ROUTINE – TR L
Purpose: To train the student to give a false statement with good TR-1. To train the student to outflow false data effectively.
Commands: Part l “Tell me a lie”.

User avatar
caroline
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Scientology's Interrogation Tech

Post by caroline » Sun Jun 26, 2011 2:58 am

Laura Ann DeCrescenzo alleged she was subjected to a coercive "exit interview" in her case against CSI.
Plaintiff further alleged that (1) Scientology severely restricted her personal freedom and applied repressive measures to enforce her loyalty to the organization; (2) she was allowed to leave her employment in 2004, at the age of 25, only after she had attempted suicide; (3) she had little formal education at that time, was unsophisticated, and had been isolated from mainstream society and culture; (4) she was subjected to a coercive exit interview and required to sign documents purportedly exculpating Scientology, and that the documents were illegal and unenforceable; (5) she was not given a copy of the documents that she signed and (6) Scientology falsely represented to her in the exit interview that she had no claims and no recourse against Scientology and others and that she owed Scientology approximately $120,000 for her job training.

Source: https://www.dropbox.com/s/dzmdvguzck4dt ... -v-CSI.pdf
Hubbard provided the technical basis for such an "exit interview" or interrogation:
L. Ron Hubbard wrote:Show me a staff member who is blowing the organization and I will show you a staff member who is guilty of undeclared overts against the organization.

Hubbard, L. R., (1959, 23 December). Responsibility. Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology. (1991 ed., Vol V, pp. 258-9.) Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.
The above bulletin is studied on the How to Confront and Shatter Suppression PTS/SP Course and the Hubbard Senior Security Checker Course.
L. Ron Hubbard wrote:People leave because of their own overts and withholds. That is the factual fact and the hardbound rule. A man with a clean heart can’t be hurt. The man or woman who must must must become a victim and depart is departing because of his or her own overts and withholds. It doesn’t matter whether the person is departing from a town or a job or a session. The cause is the same.

[...]

A recent Secretarial Executive Director to all Central Organizations states that before a person may draw his last paycheck from an organization he is leaving of his own volition he must write down all his overts and withholds against the Organization and its related personnel and have these checked out by the HCO Secretary on an E-Meter.

To do less than this is cruelty itself. The person is blowing himself off with his own overts and withholds. If these are not removed then anything the organization or its people does to him goes in like a javelin and leaves him with a dark area in his life and a rotten taste in his mouth. Further he goes around spouting lies about the organization and its related personnel and every lie he utters makes him just that much
sicker. By permitting a blow-off without clearing it we are degrading people, for I assure you, and with some sorrow, people have not often recovered from overts against Scientology, its organizations and related persons. They don’t recover because they know in their hearts even while they lie that they are wronging people who have done and are doing enormous amounts of good in the world and who definitely do not deserve libel and slander. Literally, it kills them and if you don’t believe it I can show you the long death list.

Hubbard, L. R., (1959, 31 December). Blow-Offs. Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology. (1991 ed., Vol V, pp. 260-2.) Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.
Emphasis added.
INTELLIGENCE SPECIALIST TRAINING ROUTINE – TR L
Purpose: To train the student to give a false statement with good TR-1. To train the student to outflow false data effectively.
Commands: Part l “Tell me a lie”.

User avatar
Wieber
Posts: 10365
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm

Re: Scientology's Interrogation Tech

Post by Wieber » Sun Jun 26, 2011 3:36 am

"Factual fact"? funny I didn't catch that before. What a great term for parody purposes!
L. Ron Hubbard wrote:People leave because of their own overts and withholds. That is the factual fact and the hardbound rule. A man with a clean heart can’t be hurt. The man or woman who must must must become a victim and depart is departing because of his or her own overts and withholds. It doesn’t matter whether the person is departing from a town or a job or a session. The cause is the same.

[...]

A recent Secretarial Executive Director to all Central Organizations states that before a person may draw his last paycheck from an organization he is leaving of his own volition he must write down all his overts and withholds against the Organization and its related personnel and have these checked out by the HCO Secretary on an E-Meter.

To do less than this is cruelty itself. The person is blowing himself off with his own overts and withholds. If these are not removed then anything the organization or its people does to him goes in like a javelin and leaves him with a dark area in his life and a rotten taste in his mouth. Further he goes around spouting lies about the organization and its related personnel and every lie he utters makes him just that much
sicker. By permitting a blow-off without clearing it we are degrading people, for I assure you, and with some sorrow, people have not often recovered from overts against Scientology, its organizations and related persons. They don’t recover because they know in their hearts even while they lie that they are wronging people who have done and are doing enormous amounts of good in the world and who definitely do not deserve libel and slander. Literally, it kills them and if you don’t believe it I can show you the long death list.

Hubbard, L. R., (1959, 31 December). Blow-Offs. Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology. (1991 ed., Vol V, pp. 260-2.) Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.
What a hunk a burnin burnin lies! And that's a factual fact!
“Think wrongly if you please, but in all cases think for yourself.”
Doris Lessing

Image

User avatar
Wieber
Posts: 10365
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm

Re: Scientology's Interrogation Tech

Post by Wieber » Sun Jun 26, 2011 3:46 am

By the way, and I hope this isn't too distracting to this thread, I just used some stuff I learned from reading The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell and from reading Comedy Writing Secrets by Mel Hilitzer. Since there's nothing particularly nasty, that I know of, about scientology in either of those books, it would behoove the lurking "scientologist" to read them. Mind you such a person would not be able to actually use what they read there but it would help them to recognize the techniques when they are applied. :lol:

Don't reply to this post. :x No! :evil:

Carry on with the thread's topic.
“Think wrongly if you please, but in all cases think for yourself.”
Doris Lessing

Image

User avatar
caroline
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Scientology's Interrogation Tech

Post by caroline » Sun Jun 26, 2011 4:25 am

HCOB Blow-Offs is also issued as a policy letter, published in HCO Vol 1 OEC, (1991 ed., pp. 724-6.) D/L: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=5XWORJUQ.

Nancy Many's mention of "Gang Sec Check" in her book reminded me of Homer Schomer's testimony about his "gang bang sec check" at Author Services International. See Excerpt of Proceedings: Testimony of Homer Schomer in Armstrong 1.

Prof. Stephen A. Kent wrote about gang bang sec checks in Scientology -- Is This a Religion?

Xenu-directory has an excellent collection of material on Security Checks here: http://www.xenu-directory.net/practices/seccheck1.html.
INTELLIGENCE SPECIALIST TRAINING ROUTINE – TR L
Purpose: To train the student to give a false statement with good TR-1. To train the student to outflow false data effectively.
Commands: Part l “Tell me a lie”.

User avatar
caroline
Posts: 2315
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Scientology's Interrogation Tech

Post by caroline » Sun Jun 26, 2011 11:03 pm

Laura's complaint in DeCrescenzo v. CSI recites common and expected results of Scientology's scripturally-ordered human suppression. (Ref. [url=ttp://www.suppressiveperson.org/sp/archives/2263]HCOB Blow-Offs[/url].) It is very good news that Scientology was precluded from asserting a statute of limitations defense because of its own actions, and her complaint is live again. That is actually the condition with every Scientology victim. Scientology, Scientologists and their agents have a slew of tech and ops to prevent their victims from making their legal claims until it's too late. Because of the cult's intentions and actions, it might never be too late. :D
Complaint in Laura Ann DeCrescenzo v. Church of Scientology International wrote:29) Once in, it was all work and little else. Plaintiff discovered she had almost no personal freedom. Planned visits to family were restricted, delayed and cut short. She was 12 — 13 years old and not allowed unrestricted access to her parents. She could not visit her parents without special permission and being “sec checked”. She would be “sec checked” again upon her return. Sec-checking was mandatory and is described in some detail in the cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress.

30) while employed by CSI, Plaintiff was on occasion assigned to work in the Rehabilitation Project Force (“RPF”). Work on the RPF is designed to control, coerce, punish, inflict emotional distress and break the will of the victim. The working conditions are severely harsh. Personal liberty is non-existent. Plaintiff worked on the RPF for over two years, which caused her significant emotional distress.

31) Plaintiff eventually decided to leave but needed an escape plan. The Scientology enterprise, including Defendant CSI, uses various techniques to keep workers on the job and providing cheap labor. Plaintiff knew of various enforcement procedures and knew she had to find a creative way out. Plaintiff also knew that the Scientology enterprise, including Defendant CSI, was somewhat paranoid about workers dying or committing suicide at one of Scientology’s main bases. (A death may cause an inconvenient investigation.) Therefore, to escape, Plaintiff swallowed bleach while being sure this was witnessed. Plaintiff was distraught and desperate to get out. She exhibited suicidal tendencies and was dubbed a security risk. Plaintiff had found a way out; however, she was still forced to leave on the employer's terms.

32) After being deemed a suicide risk for swallowing bleach, Plaintiff was brought into a room to sign her “exit” papers. Plaintiff was under extreme duress and just wanted to get out without having to undergo hours or days of emotional abuse. There was no negotiation over her escape papers. She was required to sign various papers before being allowed to leave the room. Plaintiff signed the papers to get out and was not given copies. Plaintiff did not fully understand the papers, or the process, except that it had to be endured if she wanted out. Plaintiff had to sign the papers to leave the room and get out. Plaintiff partially recalls some of the content. The papers contained a list of her “crimes” and confidential matters revealed in the “sec checking” procedure described above. There were recitations about how great Scientology was and how bad she was, and various terms about not disclosing the working conditions at CSI and not suing Scientology for its wrongs. Plaintiff did not freely consent to the unconscionable and unlawful terms of her termination papers. These documents were signed by Plaintiff under duress, mistake of fact and law, and under improper conditions and coercion.

33) Plaintiff submits that this exit process is in itself illegal and improper. It is a coerced procedure and involves elements of fraud, deceit and undue influence. The resulting papers cannot exculpate Scientology form violations of the labor laws. (Authorities cited elsewhere.) The papers purport to waive rights that cannot be so waived, and are believed to include liquidated penalty provisions that are void as against public policy. This heavy-handed and deceitful “exit” procedure serves to extend the stature of limitations for actions that do not accrue until discovery of the action, such as this case, and constitutes fraudulent concealment of rights sufficient to equitably toll applicable statutes of limitations.

34) During her “exit interview” process, it was falsely misrepresented to Plaintiff that she had no claims or rights, had no recourse against CSI and others, and that she owed CSI approximately $120,000 for her on—the—job training since age twelve. Plaintiff had been taking orders from Defendant since age twelve and was under the undue influence of Defendant CSI and its agents. Plaintiff had little formal education or sophistication as she had been effectively isolated from mainstream society and culture. Initially, Plaintiff attempted to pay off the alleged “debt” to an employer who had underpaid her for years. Plaintiff paid approximately $10,000 on an unenforceable “Debt” for training and courses that was required by her then employer, Defendant CSI, and was related to her job performance. Plaintiff seeks restitution of payments made on this illegal and improper claim.

35) Plaintiff was not given copies of the papers she was pressured to sign at the beginning, during and end of her employment with CSI. Plaintiff is informed and believes that the papers she was required to sign, and in particular the exit documents, are part of a standard operating procedure used by CSI and the Scientology enterprise as an ongoing fraud as against its former victims including Plaintiff herein. Much effort is made to convince the departing employee that the waivers, releases, confidentiality agreements and penalty clauses are legal. Examples of termination papers are posted on the Internet. Presumably Plaintiff was pressured and coerced to sign similar papers to make her escape. Examples of Scientology termination papers on the net recite that former employees must not disclose the working conditions or pay within Scientology, which is a violation of the Labor Code, and that workers will pay “damages” of $20,000, $50,000 or more if they exercise their rights of free speech and rights under the Labor Code. These illegal and unenforceable papers intimidate many ex-Scientology employees into silence. Ex-Scientologists know of Hubbard’s dictum that the purpose of a lawsuit is to harass and destroy, not to win on the merits. Former staff members and others fear being sued into financial ruin by Scientology. The church has a reputation to live up to. See, e.g. Church of Scientology of Calif. v. Wollersheim (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 628 (Scientology has sued lawyers, witnesses, judges and the entire Los Angeles Superior Court with respect to a case of emotional distress. See also the underlying case at Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology (1989) 212 Cal.App.3d 872)

[...]

77) Defendant CSI, as part of the Scientology enterprise, uses infliction of emotional distress as a tool to subjugate its workers such as Plaintiff. Defendant CSI intentionally inflicted emotional distress on Plaintiff to control, coerce, manipulate, punish and deceive her. In particular, Defendant’s use of the RPF and “sec checking” procedures on a primitive lie detector were calculated to inflict substantial emotional distress upon Plaintiff.

78) Security checking is a process whereby an employee, such as Plaintiff, is interrogated on a primitive lie detector known as an e-meter. This process is designed and employed to make sure that the worker has no thoughts of trying to escape or becoming a Scientology risk. Employees such as Plaintiff are told, and come to believe, that they can have no secrets from management. Any such secrets or bad thoughts will be exposed in “sec checks” on the e—meter. This process started for Plaintiff on or before her first planned visit with her parents and continued for her fifteen years of working for Defendant CSI. The sec checking procedure constitutes a gross invasion of privacy and is used to gather embarrassing data on employees. The threat of using confidential and embarrassing information collected and recorded in the “sec check” process is used to control employees such as Plaintiff. This practice borders on blackmail and violates both State and Federal law.

Source: http://www.scribd.com/full/13912796?acc ... cbbx9pkg8h
INTELLIGENCE SPECIALIST TRAINING ROUTINE – TR L
Purpose: To train the student to give a false statement with good TR-1. To train the student to outflow false data effectively.
Commands: Part l “Tell me a lie”.

Post Reply

Return to “Opinions & Debate”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests