Starkey and a Hemet resident on Scn school controversy

17 views
Skip to first unread message

Deana M. Holmes (NED for OTs Series)

unread,
Jul 30, 1997, 3:00:00 AM7/30/97
to

This comes from the LA Times.

Wednesday, July 30, 1997
School Use of Hubbard Texts

Robert A. Jones' column, "Saved by a Rumor" (July 27) was filled with
generalities, slurs (including one that equates the religion of
Scientology with colonics) and inferences that the Church of
Scientology somehow attempted to sneakily get some "gambit" past the
Board of Education in an attempt to "catechize its students." It was also
inaccurate in the extreme.

    The fact of the matter is that L. Ron Hubbard wrote prodigiously in
numerous fields. His books on the subject of study are not a part of the
religion of Scientology any more than his prolific output of fiction
would be
considered part of the church's doctrine. Hubbard's study methods are
used
today in many countries by farsighted educators. Working on the front
lines,
they know that the train wreck has already happened in education and that
this is a tool of immense value that will help turn the tide. They care,
you see,
and what is important is that these methods work, not who developed them.

  
    Which is, of course, the only valid point. Not to Jones, though.
Because
it comes from Hubbard, it is, "not OK, of course." Really? Perhaps if
Jones'
sole intention was to create controversy then, of course, he would make
this
kind of assertion, hoping his readers were not intelligent enough to call
him on it. Because the teacher who seeks to open Northwest Charter School
is a Scientologist, Jones says the school "may never open its doors," and
rejoices, adding, "We were saved . . ."
    
  To once again use his own words, the "truly, horribly embarrassing"
thing about his column is that he ignored the facts and instead engaged
on a mission to malign well-meaning individuals who, no matter what their
religious beliefs, do care about our society.
     
NORMAN STARKEY, Trustee
     Estate of L. Ron Hubbard
     Hollywood

  * Re "Hubbard Teachings in Public Classrooms," July 27:
     I'll give Hubbard credit for one thing; he was the master of jargon.
Whenit comes to masking basic teaching techniques with complicated
language, he outdid even the state Department of Education. As for his
"empowering technology," perhaps I and all my fellow teachers have been
unknowingly trained by Scientologists. We routinely help students relate
classroom ideas to real life while presenting the material incrementally;
vocabulary study is basic to most lessons. If I had thought to use terms
like "lack of mass," "skipped gradient" and "word clearing," perhaps I
could have had my name on the cover of a textbook, hopefully in giant
letters like Hubbard's.

     Scientologists fought long and hard to be recognized as a religion.
Now it's time for them to sit back and count the money that their
tax-exempt status earns them, and to keep their hands off of our public
schools. They can't have it both ways.

     SUZANNE MASTROIANNI
     Hemet

<end>
Deana M. Holmes
alt.religion.scientology archivist since February 1995
NEW! 4/97 *and* 4/96 Poster Child for Clueless $cientology Litigiousness
mir...@xmission.com

Joe Harrington

unread,
Jul 30, 1997, 3:00:00 AM7/30/97
to

Norm Starkey, writing to the LA Times said,

> The fact of the matter is that L. Ron Hubbard wrote prodigiously in
> numerous fields. His books on the subject of study are not a part of the
> religion of Scientology any more than his prolific output of fiction
> would be
> considered part of the church's doctrine.

Hubbard's non-fiction materials, including his sci-fi, are at the core
of his "Sacred Scriptures". His study "tech" is a fundamental religious
tool for his "Church", and the method for implanting the orthodoxy into
the minds of his flock. His study tech tech would be ideal for the
creation of submissive, robotic, compliant, and quiet students.

Joe

Joe Harrington

unread,
Jul 30, 1997, 3:00:00 AM7/30/97
to C. B. Willis

C. B. Willis wrote:
>
> Joe Harrington (joe...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
> : His study tech tech would be ideal for the

> : creation of submissive, robotic, compliant, and quiet students.
>
> Joe, would you explain more how you see that happening? I tend to think of
> LRH study tech as mostly dictionary study (I could be wrong), but there's
> nothing unique about that in education. btw, does the study tech use an
> emeter?
>
> - CBW

Hubbard's "Study tech" is considered part of the "Sacred Scriptures" of
the Church of Scientology. His study tech consists of many written
bulletins, policy letters, and taped lecture. The study tech is at the
root of all of the courses that deal with Hubbardian doctrines and
dogmas. What the CofS is trying to slip into the LA school district is
just a very small part of the whole, for starters.

Hubbard created the notion of "study tech" in the mid 60's in order to
instill orthodoxy (right thinking) in all members and assure uniformity.
The application of study tech is the way in which he believed "Standard
Tech" and fundamentalism would be permanently engrained in his
organization, and eventually the entire society.

The stated objective of Hubbard and his organization was/is bringing
about global salvation for Mankind through the Scientologization of all
aspects of society. How this would occur was/is covered in many of his
policy letters and his directives to the Guardian Office. The
introduction of Study tech into the public sector was/is a part of that
plan.

The fundamental tenet of Hubbard's "study tech" is that ANY disagreement
with the subject matter being studied, ANY inability to apply the
materials, and any non-comprhension of the materials stems ONLY from
"misunderstood words" in the "Source" materials. With this mechanism,
Hubbard made his "source" materials infalliable. In the Scientology
"study tech" mindset, there can be NO dissent with Hubbard's utterances
and ANY difficulty the student is having with the subject or the
organization stems ONLY from misunderstood words he went past.

Using Hubbard's notion of the "misunderstood word", one could introduce
a "Source" textbook on geology, written by the President of the Flat
Earth Society and have every student who disagreed with the materials
look up all the "misunderstood words" they went past, until harmony with
the Source material was in place.

Indoctrination is a methodology of instruction intended to bring about
an acceptance of a system of thought or body of doctrine, uncritically.
Children are especially vulnerable to this method.

"Study tech" has NOTHING to do with traditional education. It is a
subliminal method of Scientology indoctrination and prostelyzing, and
part of Hubbard's grandiose plan to salvage the world from the ravages
brought about by the Xenu holocaust/implant that occured 76 million
years ago. The fanatics that form the core of Scientology's leadership
share in Hubbard's fantasy and cosmology and consider Scientology
mankind's ONLY hope for the future.

The e-meter is extensively used in the "study tech" setting. Students
are periodically subjected to questioning on the meter to ascertain if
they have any disagreements or misunderstood words they have not looked
up. Students who refuse to submit to meter checking are routed to
ethics, or required to write confessions of all their transgressions
while they were being a student.

E-meters (also called confessional aids), to my knowledge, are not
presently being used in Applied Scholastics oriented public school
classrooms. My understanding is that the CofS has developed an e-meter
for use in the public classrooms, to be introduced after more of the
study tech wins acceptance in the public schools.

Joe

(p/m)

Prignillius

unread,
Jul 31, 1997, 3:00:00 AM7/31/97
to

In article <33e047aa...@news.xmission.com>,

mir...@remove.to.mail.xmission.com (Deana M. Holmes (NED for OTs Series)) wrote:
>
>This comes from the LA Times.

[snip]

>
>****The fact of the matter is that L. Ron Hubbard wrote prodigiously in


>numerous fields. His books on the subject of study are not a part of the
>religion of Scientology any more than his prolific output of fiction
>would be
>considered part of the church's doctrine.

This is a lie (which I guess isn't too surprising, considering it
was written by Norman Starkey, one of the morally repugnant Church
of Scientology's most accomplished public liars). After some
pressing, I got Andrew Milne, Official Spokesthetan of the Co$,
who was unwise enough to post regularly here for a while, to tell me
that Church materials, specifically such as the Purification Rundown
and the L. Ron Hubbard Study Tech, when administered in a non-Church
setting (e.g. a prison) were "secular," but the *exact same materials*
when administered inside the Church of Scientology were "religious."

[remainder snipped]

>
>Deana M. Holmes

Prignillius

+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +
| Prignillius prign...@nym.alias.net |
| |
| I am afraid their [Scientology's] claim of teaching 1.5 million |
| children in South Africa to read is just another fabrication. |
| - Johan Klopper, Second Secretary, South African Embassy. |
+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +


Tom Klemesrud

unread,
Jul 31, 1997, 3:00:00 AM7/31/97
to

Deana M. Holmes (NED for OTs Series) (mir...@remove.to.mail.xmission.com) wrote:
: This comes from the LA Times.

: Wednesday, July 30, 1997

: School Use of Hubbard Texts

: Robert A. Jones' column, "Saved by a Rumor" (July 27) was filled with
: generalities, slurs (including one that equates the religion of
: Scientology with colonics) and inferences that the Church of
: Scientology somehow attempted to sneakily get some "gambit" past the
: Board of Education in an attempt to "catechize its students." It was also
: inaccurate in the extreme.

[...]
: NORMAN STARKEY, Trustee

: Estate of L. Ron Hubbard
: Hollywood

Hubbard died in 1986, and 11 years later, the estate is still open.
Thanks for publishing this Mr. Starkey.

Tom Klemesrud SP6
KoX

Alec

unread,
Aug 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM8/1/97
to


C. B. Willis wrote in article ...

>
>Joe Harrington (joe...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
>: His study tech tech would be ideal for the
>: creation of submissive, robotic, compliant, and quiet students.
>
>Joe, would you explain more how you see that happening? I tend to think
of
>LRH study tech as mostly dictionary study (I could be wrong), but there's
>nothing unique about that in education. btw, does the study tech use an
>emeter?
>
>- CBW

The E-meter is used in Method One Word-Clearing and in all the
Even-numbered Methods (2, 4, 6, 8.). Also Academy supervision routinely
includes putting students on the E-meter to ask, "Have you gone passed a
misunderstood word?" I believe this follows a supervisor's observations
that a student has exhibited "First Phenomenon" (reduced consciousness,
e.g. yawning, snoozing), or "Second Phenomenon" (hostile feelings
generally, or against the author, or the organization hosting the author's
works, namely COS).

There is some reason to believe that these periodic "meter-checks" are
witch-hunts for the purpose of zooming-in on supposed enemies--as the
church is always preoccupied with the ideas that enemies abound and that
there may be more enemies than there are members.

Alec


Alec

unread,
Aug 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM8/1/97
to


Joe Harrington wrote in article <33DF4...@worldnet.att.net>...

>Norm Starkey, writing to the LA Times said,
>

>> The fact of the matter is that L. Ron Hubbard wrote prodigiously in
>> numerous fields. His books on the subject of study are not a part of
the
>> religion of Scientology any more than his prolific output of fiction
>> would be considered part of the church's doctrine.

Contradicting Starkey's predictable defensive stand is a recent,
posthumous, Hubbard Policy (circa 1989), elevating ALL Hubbard Policy to
the rank of scripture. It is enforced by COS, and compliance is
mandatory.

>Hubbard's non-fiction materials, including his sci-fi, are at the core
>of his "Sacred Scriptures". His study "tech" is a fundamental religious
>tool for his "Church", and the method for implanting the orthodoxy into

>the minds of his flock. His study tech tech would be ideal for the


>creation of submissive, robotic, compliant, and quiet students.

Any use of Hubbard's jargon, (or Scieno-babble), is a prelude to
hob-nobbing with other Scientologists in a jargon which leads to
comraderie. This leads to further baiting, tricking, and clinching one
into buying into the Hubbard "charisma".

Scientology Salesmen are trained in a course, titled, "Hard Sell", that
"The only wrong one can commit is to fail to convert the person in front
of him." Scientology "Fair Game Policy" further encourages
Scientologists to commit many kinds of wrongs including "ruining
[non-Scientologists] utterly".

So Scientology "Study Tech" is a foot in the door toward applying their
abuse and coercion.

Scientology's "Study Tech" introduced in Public Schools by a Scientologist
who is compelled to comply with church directives to convert "the person
in front of you" works like a DNA protogen for the purpose of spreading
Scientology over the planet, as a combined political and religious
movement with the stated intent to take over the planet. L. Ron Hubbard
unabashedly advised Scientologists and public alike on his aims toward
world dominion profusely throughout his life.

Public School use of Scientology "Study Tech" is a violation of
"Separation of Church and State", as Scientology promotes Church Control
of the State.

David Alexander


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages