SP DECLARES ~~ more about

caroline · **Posted:** Thu Apr 14, 2011 1:35 am

Dorothy wrote:

It's true, at first encounter, for some folks who have had a hard time in relationships with others, they will read PTS/SP tech and go "wow", this answers quite a bit, this solves a problem for me. They don't realize they could have read an even better version of this "tech" in a psychology manual. Then they get their SP tech applied to them by a "religion" and it becomes ritualistic. It loses any academic value it might have had.

People at first encounter should not be having those kinds of "wow"s, and should not be thinking that this "answers quite a bit." That's fraud, and quackery. The SP doctrine is not a "worse version" of "this 'tech' in a psychology manual."

I challenge you to find any psych manual that teaches that people who tell the truth about Scientology are sociopaths, or bad, or wrong, or should be attacked and pursued. There is no similar "tech" in psychology or psychology manuals. To whitewash the indefensible and evil SP doctrine by saying it's a version of some "tech" in psychology manuals, when it clearly isn't, is really not okay, especially when the people you're saying it to are the SP doctrine's victims. So I must challenge you to produce such psychology manuals that contain a version of the SP doctrine.

Amy Scobee also wrongly associated Suppressive Persons to sociopaths in her Saint Pete Times Truth Rundown interview, and she hasn't corrected this serious mistake. I talked about this in Dear Loyalist Think Tankers.

L. Ron Hubbard lied about his background, credentials, academic standing, and the promises of his "science" or "technology." The evidence for of these lies should be sufficient for reasonable people in control of their faculties to immediately reject his toxic tech. Gerry Armstrong made many of the documents available that show Hubbard lied, which helps to explain why Scientologists universally hate him and act in conspiracy against him and against people who act in concert with him to tell the truth about Hubbard and Scientology. It's really quite frightful.

Wieber · **Joined:** Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm **Posts:** 8393

The information on sociopaths/psychopaths that has been developed from observation in psychology and psychiatry is completely different from anything Hubbard proffered anywhere in his writing and lectures. At the same time no one involved in scientology may avail themselves of that information per Keeping Scientology Working.

This leaves scientology and anyone involved with it fully vulnerable to the machinations of anyone who comes along who is a sociopath/psychopath. Nothing Hubbard has written or said would help anyone identify such an individual. Nothing Hubbard has written or said would arm anyone with any kind of defense against being victimized by one.

The only thing scientology has going for it with respect to sociopaths/psychopaths is that scientology has little or nothing that would interest such a person and unless they somehow are personally harmed by scientology they have no reason to attack it.

A sociopath/psychopath does not equal a suppressive person. There is no remote resemblance between the two.

J. Swift · **Posted:** Thu Apr 14, 2011 3:57 am

RealityWillTell wrote:

So should the Suppressive Person Defense League have to admit those who may only believe they were only wrongly labeled and that Hubbard's SP doctrine is still correct?

RWT, your question is absurd and here is why: If a Church of Scientology member who was declared believes they were "wrongly labeled (an SP) and that Hubbard's SP doctrine is still correct" then that person can still rejoin the Church of Scientology.

They have to do A-E and reapply for admission to the group.

I was speaking of Indies who publicly wear their declares with pride and have publicly denounced COB, COS, RTC, CSI, etc. but still embrace the Tech. Could they be SPDL members? That is up to the SPDL to decide. I would never join the SPDL and am certain they would never have me as a member.

Here is a more important question about SP's:

What of Declared SP'S who took Cult blood money in a legal settlement in return for remaining silent about Scientology forever?

Can a declared SP who took a fat legal settlement from the Scientology Cult and and agreed to shut up forever be allowed to join the SPDL?

Or is such a person who took money and signed a gag order a traitor to everything that the SPDL stands for?

/////

RealityWillTell · **Joined:** Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:05 pm **Posts:** 3097

J. Swift wrote:

RWT, your question is absurd and here is why: If a Church of Scientology member who was declared believes they were "wrongly labeled (an SP) and that Hubbard's SP doctrine is still correct" then that person can still rejoin the Church of Scientology.

They have to do A-E and reapply for admission to the group.

I was speaking of Indies who publicly wear their declares with pride and have publicly denounced COB, COS, RTC, CSI, etc. but still embrace the Tech. Could they be SPDL members? That is up to the SPDL to decide. I would never join the SPDL and am certain they would never have me as a member.

Actually what is absurd is that you'd give me an answer in reference to the "Church" when you know that I was refering to the indies and the SPDL. All you succeeded in doing was not answering by intentionally misinterpreting what I asked.

I know the indies wear their SP declares like a badge but are you saying they feel that their declares were deserved or do they feel that the doctrine was misapplied to them but do not want to go back into miscavige's "church"!

If it's the latter then why would the SPDL admit people who feel that hubbard's doctrine is not wrong?

Just because they were persecuted too but feel that type of persecution is right when correctly applied does not sound compatable with what the SPDL represents!

J. Swift wrote:

Here is a more important question about SP's:

What of Declared SP'S who took Cult blood money in a legal settlement in return for remaining silent about Scientology forever?

Can a declared SP who took a fat legal settlement from the Scientology Cult and and agreed to shut up forever be allowed to join the SPDL?

Or is such a person who took money and signed a gag order a traitor to everything that the SPDL stands for?

/////

As to whether they'd be considered traitors by the SPDL I can't answer.

But the question that should logically be asked of that type is why would they need the SPDL and what would the SPDL gain from admitting people who'd stay silent anyway.

caroline · **Posted:** Thu Apr 14, 2011 4:54 am

We had an earlier similar discussion about joining SPDL. I thought I made things pretty clear, but let me know.

operatingwog · **Joined:** Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:32 pm **Posts:** 500

(deleted)

Dorothy · **Posted:** Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:27 am

Caroline wrote:

Quote:

I challenge you to find any psych manual that teaches that people who tell the truth about Scientology are sociopaths, or bad, or wrong, or should be attacked and pursued. There is no similar "tech" in psychology or psychology manuals. To whitewash the indefensible and evil SP doctrine by saying it's a version of some "tech" in psychology manuals, when it clearly isn't, is really not okay, especially when the people you're saying it to are the SP doctrine's victims. So I must challenge you to produce such psychology manuals that contain a version of the SP doctrine.

I think you have missed just exactly what LRon did: how he tricked people into swallowing his control mechanism. There is no "white-washing" going on because what he did was not very "white". He took a well-known psychiatric label called the anti-social personality, something that many people have experience with (but never find out about because few people get psychiatric treatment) and he added his special ingredient. Proof here:
Personality Disorders: The Controllers, Abusers, Manipulators, and Users in Relationships
http://counsellingresource.com/distress ... index.html

Quote:

Chances are, you’re dealing with an individual with a personality disorder somewhere in your life — whether it’s your spouse, your parent, your co-worker...even your child. Dr Carver’s introduction to personality disorders in relationships puts the reality in plain English; more than just a list of diagnostic criteria, this explanation describes what it’s really like to be dealing with a personality disorder and offers tips for victims.

Quote:

As a family member, they maintain themselves as the center of attention and keep the family in an uproar, or they may be the 45 year old brother who has never worked and remains dependent on the family for his support. They may be the brother or sister who verbally bullies and intimidates others with their temper tantrums. As a coworker they are manipulative, unethical, dishonest, and willing to damage co-workers to achieve their employment goals. On the street they are the criminals, con artists, and people-users who purposefully damage others, then quickly move on to avoid detection.

Quote:

In over three decades of experience of dealing with victims, it’s clear that the majority of emotional victims I see in clinical practice are actually victims of an individual with a “Personality Disorder”. The “Personality Disorder” has been around for many years. For several centuries, professionals working with all types of people recognized that some individuals clearly thought and acted differently — without “normal” feelings, attitudes, behaviors, and interactions. In 1835, Dr. Pritchard suggested the term “moral insanity” to reflect the fact that these individuals were not insane by the standards of the day, yet had significant differences in their behavior, attitudes, ethics, morality, emotional expressions, and reactions to situations. Despite their significant differences when compared to others in their culture, the individuals exhibited little emotional or social distress.

Quote:

Antisocial Personality
A pervasive pattern of disregard for the rights of others and rules of society. The Antisocial Personality ranges from individuals who are chronically irresponsible, unsupportive, con artists to those who have total disregard for the rights of others and commit criminal acts with no remorse, including those involving the death of victims. In clinical practice, the Antisocial Personality has near-total selfishness and typically has a pattern of legal problems, lying and deception, physical assault and intimidation, no regard for the safety of others, unwillingness to meet normal standards for work/support/parenting, and no remorse.

see also "Psychology: 7th Edition Themes and Variations" by Wayne Weiten (pages 580, 581, 584)

As I was saying LRon took a well-known psychiatric label that many people have personal experience with, he practically copied it right out of the book with his "12 attributes" and he simply tacked "anti-scientologist" onto the title of the chapter. The chapter in the ethics book that covers this, makes no mention of the "anti-scientologist" or "anti-scientology", except in the title! Oh yeah, he added "is against betterment groups" as one of the attributes just to make it all congruent. Everything else in the chapter is the "personality description".

When people read this description in the "PTS C/S-1", what is it you think they identify with? How about real, actual anti-social personalities in their life, or persons resembling such? Yes, you will get some "wows" from that.

Essentially Lron adds to psychology's anti-social personality, "and they are against scientology". LOL! Talk about slight of hand!

And some actual anti-social personalities might actually be against scientology too! That makes it especially tricky.

This is the ethics book and red-on-white I am speaking of, Caroline. The travesties enacted upon you and Gerry were administrative, green-on-white activities: the SP declares you received, the fair gaming, the trashing of your life. None of that is related to the fact that LRon stole the "anti-personality" concept from psychology and made it a part of his "tech". I know to you it is all the same (SP doctrine) but to me it is not. Scientologists could do what the psychologists do and simply help people without "declaring" them, disconnecting them, and fair gaming them. I applied this anti-social personality stuff in my life and in others lives. I stood up to a few "anti-social personalities". But I never disconnected anyone and I never "declared" anyone a "Suppressive Person" either. So I too am your proof. And here's my picture

'Alert' · **Posted:** Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:41 am

RealityWillTell wrote:

J. Swift wrote:

RWT, your question is absurd and here is why: If a Church of Scientology member who was declared believes they were "wrongly labeled (an SP) and that Hubbard's SP doctrine is still correct" then that person can still rejoin the Church of Scientology.

They have to do A-E and reapply for admission to the group.

I was speaking of Indies who publicly wear their declares with pride and have publicly denounced COB, COS, RTC, CSI, etc. but still embrace the Tech. Could they be SPDL members? That is up to the SPDL to decide. I would never join the SPDL and am certain they would never have me as a member.

Actually what is absurd is that you'd give me an answer in reference to the "Church" when you know that I was refering to the indies and the SPDL. All you succeeded in doing was not answering by intentionally misinterpreting what I asked.

I know the indies wear their SP declares like a badge but are you saying they feel that their declares were deserved or do they feel that the doctrine was misapplied to them but do not want to go back into miscavige's "church"!

If it's the latter then why would the SPDL admit people who feel that hubbard's doctrine is not wrong?

Just because they were persecuted too but feel that type of persecution is right when correctly applied does not sound compatable with what the SPDL represents!

J. Swift wrote:

Here is a more important question about SP's:

What of Declared SP'S who took Cult blood money in a legal settlement in return for remaining silent about Scientology forever?

Can a declared SP who took a fat legal settlement from the Scientology Cult and and agreed to shut up forever be allowed to join the SPDL?

Or is such a person who took money and signed a gag order a traitor to everything that the SPDL stands for?

/////

As to whether they'd be considered traitors by the SPDL I can't answer.

But the question that should logically be asked of that type is why would they need the SPDL and what would the SPDL gain from admitting people who'd stay silent anyway.

Yah, that happens a lot these days

caroline · **Posted:** Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:32 am

Dorothy wrote:

As I was saying LRon took a well-known psychiatric label that many people have personal experience with, he practically copied it right out of the book with his "12 attributes" and he simply tacked "anti-scientologist" onto the title of the chapter. The chapter in the ethics book that covers this, makes no mention of the "anti-scientologist" or "anti-scientology", except in the title! Oh yeah, he added "is against betterment groups" as one of the attributes just to make it all congruent. Everything else in the chapter is the "personality description".

Could you please post that excerpt? That book is not available to me.

Wieber · **Joined:** Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm **Posts:** 8393

Actually, if organizational scientology ever does something to get a psychopath angry with scientology they will find it very difficult to deal with such a person. Think of a Charles Manson type with a grudge against the organization. Try crush redging a person like that into more debt than they can deal with. Lucky for scientology most people like that aren't interested in what scientology says that it offers.

Sponge · **Posted:** Thu Apr 14, 2011 1:07 pm

I'll just leave this Standard Tech here....

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=EOGTRVN2
[3.78Mb PDF file. Pictures of 1982 Mission Holders Conference in San Francisco, including Miscavige declaring someone]

Also ref: http://forums.whyweprotest.net/threads/ ... 1982.78672

Sponge · **Posted:** Thu Apr 14, 2011 1:16 pm

More "standard tech" being applied to a "wog" on the street

Sponge wrote:

It strikes me that the PTS/SP thing is the final boss. When all lesser methods of babbling foolery and persuasion have failed, you have in place a "shit or bust" policy. I think by "legitimizing" it into a shiny "course" cements it and makes the individuals think it's all just fine and dandy to do that crap (or even have it done to themselves willingly).

Here, in public, knowing she's being filmed for YouTube, the DSA of the Washington DC idle org, Sylvia Stannard, is quite serious and feels it is perfectly OK to stand there and endlessly repeat "you're a suppressive person" at protester Anonsparrow as if it actually means something to us "wogs". This is your brain, tripping on scientology extremism.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBV397LtEe0
(fast foward to: 4:37. This theme also continues in the rest of the 155.x series of his protest videos that day...and 156.x the next day).

Of course, when it crosses over from just words into deeds, then it does mean something to those "wogs" who have been disconnected from their PTS/SP-believing scientology family/friends still inside.

(that post quoted from another thread on the subject of "pts/sp": viewtopic.php?f=9&t=32576 )

caroline · **Posted:** Thu Apr 14, 2011 4:57 pm

Here's a 1968 SP declare signed by Hubbard.

L. Ron Hubbard wrote:

RACKET EXPOSED

James Pipe
Brenda Staires
Jean Woods
Tony White

are hereby declared Suppressive Persons for pretending to have and distribute forged and altered "Upper Level Materials" which were of a Research nature and not for distribution.

All Certificates and Awards are cancelled.

1. Having stolen or illegally procured these dangerous materials (at the instigation of a Psychiatrist) these persons did plot to misuse them to cause Insanity and Death.

2. False report for money that they would furnish the real materials.

3. They are declared Enemies of mankind, the planet and all life.

4. They are fair game.

5. No amnesty may ever cover them.

6. If they ever come to a Qual Division they are to be run on reverse process. [1]

7. Any Sea Org member contacting any of them is to use Auditing Process R2-45. [2]

8. The Criminals Prosecution Bureau is to find any and all crimes in their pasts and have them brought to court and prison.

The Public Distribution of False or Forbidden or Dangerous Data is a Suppressive Act and a High Crime.

[signed] L. Ron Hubbard Founder

Hubbard, L. (1968). Racket Exposed. Auditor 37.

[1] Reverse processes: psychological processes the auditor applies to cause harm to the recipient. See also: Lecture: About the Press' Tone Level: Psychometry

[2] R2-45: "An enormously effective process for exteriorization but its use is frowned upon by this society at this time." (Creation of Human Ability) Exteriorization is defined in Scientology as the act of moving out of the body. It is the dissociative condition sought after with Hubbard's processing. R2-45 is commonly understood in Scientology to be exteriorization by murder.

caroline · **Posted:** Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:58 pm

Here's a recent SP Declare put out by FSO (Flag Service Org), Scientology's "Mecca of Technical Perfection."

FSO Ethics Order 11801 wrote:

CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY

FLAG SERVICE ORGANIZATION

FSO ETHICS ORDER 11801

13 September 2008

ALL ORGS
ALL MISSIONS

SUPPRESSIVE PERSON DECLARE

RICHARD DINEEN

Richard Dineen of Los Angeles, California is hereby declared a Suppressive Person per HCO PL 7 March 1965RB I SUPPRESSIVE ACTS, SUPPRESSION OF SCIENTOLOGY AND SCIENTOLOGISTS.

In 2001, Richard was involved in spreading Black PR and malicious false data regarding the Church of Scientology to a Scientologist in good standing with the Church. In his statements he made attempts to deter this Scientologist from joining staff with the Church of Scientology.

LRH states in HCO PL 7 August 1965 I SUPPRESSIVE PERSONS, MAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF:

"Bad news, particularly if false, is the only comm line of the SP....

"ENTHETA IS THE SOLE STOCK IN TRADE OF THE SP."

In July 2003, Richard gave a Scientologist entheta and squirrel upper level data to read. This was done in such a manner so as to attempt to deter the Scientologist from standard Scientology technology and bar their progress up The Bridge. In August 2003, he publicly departed Scientology.

In October 2004, Richard admitted to having studied anti-Scientology material which was entheta and squirrel. He also stated that he was in agreement with Black PR and false data which he had read. At that point, he was offered ARC Break sessions but he refused.

He proceeded to spread more malicious false data in 2006 to a Scientologist who was attempting to help him. In this comm he invalidated the state of Clear and OT in attempts to disaffect the individual.

In February 2007, he again stated to a Scientologist that he was going to have no involvement with the Church of Scientology.

Richard has made no attempts to rectify his status with the Church and has failed to utilize Scientology technology to help sort out his situation.

In HCO PL 7 March 1965RB I, SUPPRESSIVE ACTS, SUPPRESSION OF SCIENTOLOGY AND SCIENTOLOGISTS, LRH states:

"Suppressive acts are defined as actions or omissions undertaken to knowingly suppress, reduce or impede Scientology or Scientologists." -LRH

Richard has committed the following suppressive acts:

1. PUBLIC STATEMENTS AGAINST SCIENTOLOGY OR SCIENTOLOGISTS BUT NOT TO COMMITTEES OF EVIDENCE DULY CONVENED.

2. PUBLIC DISAVOWAL OF SCIENTOLOGY OR SCIENTOLOGISTS IN GOOD STANDING WITH SCIENTOLOGY ORGANIZATIONS.

3. NEGLECT OR VIOLATION OF ANY OF THE TEN POINTS OF KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING.

Unpublished work: © 2008 CSFSO. All Rights Reserved.

Any certificates or awards Richard Dineen may have been awarded by any Church of Scientology are hereby cancelled. Any licenses or agreements that he may have acquired to use any of the trademarks or service marks of Dianetics or Scientology are likewise cancelled and any membership agreements that Richard may have signed with any Church of Scientology are also cancelled.

Should Richard come to his senses and decide to recant, he may apply the A-E steps as covered in HCO PL 7 March 1965RB I, SUPPRESSIVE ACTS, SUPPRESSION OF SCIENTOLOGY AND SCIENTOLOGISTS.

Richard's only Scientology terminal is the International Justice Chief via the Continental Justice Chief.

PUBLIC MAA FSO

Authorized by LRH COMM FSO
for

CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY
FLAG SERVICE ORGANIZATION

Approved by
D/INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE CHIEF
DIJC:CSFSO:HF:DD:dd

Grateful acknowledgement is made to L. Ron Hubbard library for permission to reproduce selections from the copyrighted works of L. Ron Hubbard. HCO, DIANETICS, SCIENTOLOGY, OT and THE BRIDGE are trademarks and service marks owned by Religious Technology Center and are used with its permission. SCIENTOLOGIST is a collective membership mark designating members of the affiliated churches and missions of Scientology.

sekh · **Posted:** Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:07 pm

I've posted that exact same 1968 SP-declaration once on ESMB as an example of elRon's stand on this point. The defense from some LRH-fans was that this is a publication from March '68, and He outlawed the "fair game policy" in August or September of the same year.

I.A.W., everything written before that date should be forgotten. It was mentioned that I was not really polite, using this "old" material to denounce good old Hubs.

I'm being impolite, while he ordered murder? WTF! :roll:

But I'm glad the mentioning of R2-45 is missing from modern SP-declarations. It's at least a step in the right direction.

SP DECLARES ~~ more about

Who is online