"Keeping Scientology Working," Hubbard policy letter 7 February 1965
Gerry Armstrong
http://carolineletkeman.org/sp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1466&Itemid=240
[Site section] Socio-Political Subversion
HCOPL: Keeping Scientology Working
For some years we have had a few excerpts from Hubbard's 1965 policy
letter "Keeping Scientology Working" on our sites. These excerpts are
some of our most visited pages.
http://carolineletkeman.org/sp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=187&Itemid=240
Because of Tom Cruise's recent reference to the policy letter, which
he calls, as all indoctrinated Scientologists do, by its acronym,
"KSW,"because of his fanatical reverence for the policy, Because of
his clear malevolence toward the "Suppressive Person" class, which he
and his cult create in order to have enemies to Fair Game, and because
of his threat to "put in ethics" on people around the world, we have
decided to web the entirety of the document as Scientology publishes
it in its books.
This version of KSW has been excerpted from the Organization Executive
Course Volume 1 ©1991 L. Ron Hubbard Library.
We believe that every wog in the world should know the totalitarian
nature of Scientology that makes a person like Cruise such a fanatic
and such a danger to decent, reasoning people that this cult
victimizes. And we believe that this totalitarian nature and the
"philosophy" or mentality that generates it cannot be understood
without understanding KSW in its entirety.
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 FEBRUARY 1965
Remimeo
Sthil Students
Assn/Org Sec
Hat
HCO Sec Hat
Case Sup Hat
Ds of P Hat
Ds of T Hat
Staff Member
Hat
Missions
Keeping Scientology Working Series 1
Note: Neglect of this Pol Ltr has caused great hardship on staffs, has
cost countless millions and made it necessary in 1970 to engage in an
all-out International effort to restore basic Scientology over the
world. Within 5 years after the issue of this PL with me off the
lines, violation had almost destroyed orgs. "Quickie grades" entered
in and denied gain to tens of thousands of cases. Therefore actions
which neglect or violate this Policy Letter are HIGH CRIMES resulting
in Comm Evs on ADMINISTRATORS and EXECUTIVES. It is not "entirely a
tech matter" as its neglect destroys orgs and caused a 2-year slump.
IT IS THE BUSINESS OF EVERY STAFF MEMBER to enforce it.
SPECIAL MESSAGE
THE FOLLOWING POLICY MEANS WHAT IT SAYS.
IT WAS TRUE IN 1965 WHEN I WROTE IT. IT WAS TRUE IN 1970 WHEN I HAD IT
REISSUED. I AM REISSUING IT NOW, IN 1980, TO AVOID AGAIN SLIPPING BACK
INTO A PERIOD OF OMITTED AND QUICKIED FUNDAMENTAL GRADE CHART ACTIONS
ON CASES, THEREBY DENYING GAINS AND THREATENING THE VIABILITY OF
SCIENTOLOGY AND OF ORGS. SCIENTOLOGY WILL KEEP WORKING ONLY AS LONG AS
YOU DO YOUR PART TO KEEP IT WORKING BY APPLYING THIS POLICY LETTER.
WHAT I SAY IN THESE PAGES HAS ALWAYS BEEN TRUE, IT HOLDS TRUE TODAY,
IT WILL STILL HOLD TRUE IN THE YEAR 2000 AND IT WILL CONTINUE TO HOLD
TRUE FROM THERE ON OUT.
NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE IN SCIENTOLOGY, ON STAFF OR NOT, THIS POLICY
LETTER HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH YOU.
ALL LEVELS
K E E P I N G S C I E N T O L O G Y W O R K I N G
HCO Sec or Communicator hat check
on all personnel and new personnel
as taken on.
We have some time since passed the point of achieving uniformly
workable technology.
The only thing now is getting the technology applied.
If you can't get the technology applied then you can't deliver what's
promised. It's as simple as that. If you can get the technology
applied, you can deliver what's promised.
The only thing you can be upbraided for by students or pcs is "no
results". Trouble spots occur only where there are "no results".
Attacks from governments or monopolies occur only where there are "no
results" or "bad results".
Therefore the road before Scientology is clear and its ultimate
success
is assured if the technology is applied.
So it is the task of the Assoc or Org Sec, the HCO Sec, the Case
Supervisor, the D of P, the D of T and all staff members to get the
correct technology applied.
Getting the correct technology applied consists of:
One: Having the correct technology.
Two: Knowing the technology.
Three: Knowing it is correct.
Four: Teaching correctly the correct technology.
Five: Applying the technology.
Six: Seeing that the technology is correctly applied.
Seven: Hammering out of existence incorrect technology.
Eight: Knocking out incorrect applications.
Nine: Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology.
Ten: Closing the door on incorrect application.
One above has been done.
Two has been achieved by many.
Three is achieved by the individual applying the correct technology in
a proper manner and observing that it works that way.
Four is being done daily successfully in most parts of the world.
Five is consistently accomplished daily.
Six is achieved by instructors and supervisors consistently.
Seven is done by a few but is a weak point.
Eight is not worked on hard enough.
Nine is impeded by the "reasonable" attitude of the not-quite-bright.
Ten is seldom done with enough ferocity.
Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten are the only places Scientology can bog
down in any area.
The reasons for this are not hard to find. (a) A weak certainty that
it works in Three above can lead to weakness in Seven, Eight, Nine and
Ten. (b) Further, the not-too-bright have a bad point on the button
Self-Importance. (c) The lower the IQ, the more the individual is shut
off from the fruits of observation. (d) The service facs of people
make them defend themselves against anything they confront, good or
bad, and seek to make it wrong. (e) The bank seeks to knock out the
good and perpetuate the bad.
Thus, we as Scientologists and as an organization must be very alert
to Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten.
In all the years I have been engaged in research I have kept my comm
lines wide open for research data. I once had the idea that a group
could evolve truth. A third of a century has thoroughly disabused me
of that idea. Willing as I was to accept suggestions and data, only a
handful of suggestions (less than twenty) had long-run value and none
were major or basic; and when I did accept major or basic suggestions
and used them, we went astray and I repented and eventually had to
"eat crow".
On the other hand there have been thousands and thousands of
suggestions and writings which, if accepted and acted upon, would have
resulted in the complete destruction of all our work as well as the
sanity of pcs. So I know what a group of people will do and how insane
they will go in accepting unworkable "technology". By actual record
the percentages are about twenty to 100,000 that a group of human
beings will dream up bad technology to destroy good technology. As we
could have gotten along without suggestions, then, we had better steel
ourselves to continue to do so now that we have made it. This point
will, of course, be attacked as "unpopular", "egotistical" and
"undemocratic." It very well may be. But it is also a survival point.
And I don't see that popular measures, self-abnegation and democracy
have done anything for Man but push him further into the mud.
Currently, popularity endorses degraded novels, self-abnegation has
filled the South East Asian jungles with stone idols and corpses, and
democracy has given us inflation and income tax.
Our technology has not been discovered by a group. True, if the group
had not supported me in many ways I could not have discovered it
either. But it remains that if in its formative stages it was not
discovered by a group, then group efforts, one can safely assume, will
not add to it or successfully alter it in the future. I can only say
this now that it is done. There remains, of course, group tabulation
or co-ordination of what has been done, which will be valuable—only so
long as it does not seek to alter basic principles and successful
applications.
The contributions that were worthwhile in this period of forming the
technology were help in the form of friendship, of defense, of
organization, of dissemination, of application, of advices on results
and of finance. These were great contributions and were, and are,
appreciated. Many thousands contributed in this way and made us what
we are. Discovery contribution was not however part of the broad
picture.
We will not speculate here on why this was so or how I came to rise
above the bank. We are dealing only in facts and the above is a fact—
the group left to its own devices would not have evolved Scientology
but with wild dramatization of the bank called "new ideas" would have
wiped it out. Supporting this is the fact that man has never before
evolved workable mental technology and emphasizing it is the vicious
technology he did evolve—psychiatry, psychology, surgery, shock
treatment, whips, duress, punishment, etc, ad infinitum.
So realize that we have climbed out of the mud by whatever good luck
and good sense, and refuse to sink back into it again. See that Seven,
Eight, Nine and Ten above are ruthlessly followed and we will never be
stopped. Relax them, get reasonable about it and we will perish.
So far, while keeping myself in complete communication with all
suggestions, I have not failed on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten in areas
I could supervise closely. But it's not good enough for just myself
and a few others to work at this.
Whenever this control as per Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten has been
relaxed the whole organizational area has failed. Witness Elizabeth,
N.J., Wichita, the early organizations and groups. They crashed only
because I no longer did Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. Then, when they
were all messed up, you saw the obvious "reasons" for failure. But
ahead of that they ceased to deliver and that involved them in other
reasons.
The common denominator of a group is the reactive bank. Thetans
without banks have different responses. They only have their banks in
common. They agree then only on bank principles. Person to person the
bank is identical. So constructive ideas are individual and seldom get
broad agreement in a human group. An individual must rise above an
avid craving for agreement from a humanoid group to get anything
decent done. The bank-agreement has been what has made Earth a
hell—and if you were looking for hell and found Earth, it would
certainly serve. War, famine, agony and disease has been the lot of
man. Right now the great governments of Earth have developed the means
of frying every man, woman and child on the planet. That is Bank. That
is the result of Collective-Thought Agreement. The decent, pleasant
things on this planet come from individual actions and ideas that have
somehow gotten by the Group Idea. For that matter, look how we
ourselves are attacked by "public opinion" media. Yet there is no more
ethical group on this planet than ourselves.
Thus each one of us can rise above the domination of the bank and
then, as a group of freed beings, achieve freedom and reason. It is
only the aberrated group, the mob, that is destructive.
When you don't do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten actively, you are working
for the Bank dominated mob. For it will surely, surely (a) introduce
incorrect technology and swear by it, (b) apply technology as
incorrectly as possible, (c) open the door to any destructive idea,
and (d) encourage incorrect application.
It's the bank that says the group is all and the individual nothing.
It's the bank that says we must fail.
So just don't play that game. Do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten and you
will knock out of your road all the future thorns.
Here's an actual example in which a senior executive had to interfere
because of a pc spin: A Case Supervisor told Instructor A to have
Auditor B run Process X on Preclear C. Auditor B afterwards told
Instructor A that "It didn't work." Instructor A was weak on Three
above and didn't really believe in Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. So
Instructor A told the Case Supervisor "Process X didn't work on
Preclear C." Now this strikes directly at each of One to Six above in
Preclear C, Auditor B, Instructor A and the Case Supervisor. It opens
the door to the introduction of "new technology" and to failure.
What happened here? Instructor A didn't jump down Auditor B's throat,
that's all that happened. This is what he should have done: grabbed
the auditor's report and looked it over. When a higher executive on
this case did so she found what the Case Supervisor and the rest
missed: that Process X increased Preclear C's TA to 25 TA divisions
for the session but that near session end Auditor B Qed and Aed with a
cognition and abandoned Process X while it still gave high TA and went
off running one of Auditor B's own manufacture, which nearly spun
Preclear C. Auditor B's IQ on examination turned out to be about 75.
Instructor A was found to have huge ideas of how you must never
invalidate anyone, even a lunatic. The Case Supervisor was found to be
"too busy with admin to have any time for actual cases".
All right, there's an all too typical example. The Instructor should
have done Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. This would have begun this way.
Auditor B: "That Process X didn't work." Instructor A: "What exactly
did you do wrong?" Instant attack. "Where's your auditor's report for
the session? Good. Look here, you were getting a lot of TA when you
stopped Process X. What did you do?" Then the Pc wouldn't have come
close to a spin and all four of these would have retained certainty.
In a year, I had four instances in one small group where the correct
process recommended was reported not to have worked. But on review
found that each one (a) had increased the TA, (b) had been abandoned,
and (c) had been falsely reported as unworkable. Also, despite this
abuse, in each of these four cases the recommended, correct process
cracked the case. Yet they were reported as not having worked!
Similar examples exist in instruction and these are all the more
deadly as every time instruction in correct technology is flubbed,
then the resulting error, uncorrected in the auditor, is perpetuated
on every pc that auditor audits thereafter. So Seven, Eight, Nine and
Ten are even more important in a course than in supervision of cases.
Here's an example: A rave recommendation is given a graduating student
"because he gets more TA on pcs than any other student on the course!"
Figures of 435 TA divisions a session are reported. "Of course his
model session is poor but it's just a knack he has" is also included
in the recommendation. A careful review is undertaken because nobody
at Levels 0 to IV is going to get that much TA on pcs. It is found
that this student was never taught to read an E-Meter TA dial! And no
instructor observed his handling of a meter and it was not discovered
that he "overcompensated" nervously, swinging the TA 2 or 3 divisions
beyond where it needed to go to place the needle at "set". So everyone
was about to throw away standard processes and model session because
this one student "got such remarkable TA". They only read the reports
and listened to the brags and never looked at this student. The pcs in
actual fact were making slightly less than average gain, impeded by a
rough model session and misworded processes. Thus, what was making the
pcs win (actual Scientology) was hidden under a lot of departures and
errors.
I recall one student who was squirreling on an Academy course and
running a lot of off-beat whole track on other students after course
hours. The Academy students were in a state of electrification on all
these new experiences and weren't quickly brought under control and
the student himself never was given the works on Seven, Eight, Nine
and Ten so they stuck. Subsequently, this student prevented another
squirrel from being straightened out and his wife died of cancer
resulting from physical abuse. A hard, tough Instructor at that moment
could have salvaged two squirrels and saved the life of a girl. But
no, students had a right to do whatever they pleased.
Squirreling (going off into weird practices or altering Scientology)
only comes about from non-comprehension. Usually the non-comprehension
is not of Scientology but some earlier contact with an off-beat
humanoid practice which in its turn was not understood.
When people can't get results from what they think is standard
practice, they can be counted upon to squirrel to some degree. The
most trouble in the past two years came from orgs where an executive
in each could not assimilate straight Scientology. Under Instruction
in Scientology they were unable to define terms or demonstrate
examples of principles. And the orgs where they were got into plenty
of trouble. And worse, it could not be straightened out easily because
neither one of these people could or would duplicate instructions.
Hence, a debacle resulted in two places, directly traced to failures
of instruction earlier. So proper instruction is vital. The D of T and
his Instructors and all Scientology Instructors must be merciless in
getting Four, Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten into effective action. That
one student, dumb and impossible though he may seem and of no use to
anyone, may yet some day be the cause of untold upset because nobody
was interested enough to make sure Scientology got home to him.
With what we know now, there is no student we enroll who cannot be
properly trained. As an Instructor, one should be very alert to slow
progress and should turn the sluggards inside out personally. No
system will do it, only you or me with our sleeves rolled up can crack
the back of bad studenting and we can only do it on an individual
student, never on a whole class only. He's slow = something is awful
wrong. Take fast action to correct it. Don't wait until next week. By
then he's got other messes stuck to him. If you can't graduate them
with their good sense appealed to and wisdom shining, graduate them in
such a state of shock they'll have nightmares if they contemplate
squirreling. Then experience will gradually bring about Three in them
and they'll know better than to chase butterflies when they should be
auditing.
When somebody enrolls, consider he or she has joined up for the
duration of the universe—never permit an "open-minded" approach. If
they're going to quit let them quit fast. If they enrolled, they're
aboard, and if they're aboard, they're here on the same terms as the
rest of us—win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-minded
about being Scientologists. The finest organizations in history have
been tough, dedicated organizations. Not one namby-pamby bunch of
panty-waist dilettantes have ever made anything. It's a tough
universe. The social veneer makes it seem mild. But only the tigers
survive—and even they have a hard time. We'll survive because we are
tough and are dedicated. When we do instruct somebody properly he
becomes more and more tiger. When we instruct half-mindedly and are
afraid to offend, scared to enforce, we don't make students into good
Scientologists and that lets everybody down. When Mrs. Pattycake comes
to us to be taught, turn that wandering doubt in her eye into a fixed,
dedicated glare and she'll win and we'll all win. Humor her and we all
die a little. The proper instruction attitude is, "You're here so
you're a Scientologist. Now we're going to make you into an expert
auditor no matter what happens. We'd rather have you dead than
incapable."
Fit that into the economics of the situation and lack of adequate time
and you see the cross we have to bear.
But we won't have to bear it forever. The bigger we get the more
economics and time we will have to do our job. And the only things
which can prevent us from getting that big fast are areas in from One
to Ten, Keep those in mind and we'll be able to grow. Fast. And as we
grow our shackles will be less and less. Failing to keep One to Ten,
will make us grow less.
So the ogre which might eat us up is not the government or the High
Priests. It's our possible failure to retain and practice our
technology.
An Instructor or Supervisor or Executive must challenge with ferocity
instances of "unworkability". They must uncover what did happen, what
was run and what was done or not done.
If you have One and Two, you can only acquire Three for all by making
sure of all the rest.
We're not playing some minor game in Scientology. It isn't cute or
something to do for lack of something better.
The whole agonized future of this planet, every man, woman and child
on it, and your own destiny for the next endless trillions of years
depend on what you do here and now with and in Scientology.
This is a deadly serious activity. And if we miss getting out of the
trap now, we may never again have another chance.
Remember, this is our first chance to do so in all the endless
trillions of years of the past. Don't muff it now because it seems
unpleasant or unsocial to do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten.
Do them and we'll win.
— L. Ron Hubbard
HCOPL 7 February 1965 Keeping Scientology Working
pdf:
http://www.carolineletkeman.org/sp/images/stories/hcopl/hcopl-ksw1.pdf
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org
Out_Of_The_Dark
> Webbed at:http://carolineletkeman.org/sp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view...
>
> [Site section] Socio-Political Subversion
>
> HCOPL: Keeping Scientology Working
>
> For some years we have had a few excerpts from Hubbard's 1965 policy
> letter "Keeping Scientology Working" on our sites. These excerpts are
>
> Because of Tom Cruise's recent reference to the policy letter, which
> he calls, as all indoctrinated Scientologists do, by its acronym,
> "KSW,"because of his fanatical reverence for the policy, Because of
> his clear malevolence toward the "Suppressive Person" class, which he
> and his cult create in order to have enemies to Fair Game, and because
> of his threat to "put in ethics" on people around the world, we have
> decided to web the entirety of the document as Scientology publishes
> it in its books.
>
> This version of KSW has been excerpted from the Organization Executive
> long as it does not seek to alter basic principles and successful
> applications.
>
> The contributions that were worthwhile in this period of forming the
> technology were help in the form of friendship, of defense, of
> organization, of dissemination, of application, of advices on results
> and of finance. These were great contributions and were, and are,
> appreciated. Many thousands contributed in this way and made us what
> we are. Discovery contribution was not however part of the broad
> picture.
>
> We will not speculate here on why this was so or how I came to rise
> the group left to its own devices would not have evolved Scientology
> but with wild dramatization of the bank called "new ideas" would have
> wiped it out. Supporting this is the fact that man has never before
> evolved workable mental technology and emphasizing it is the vicious
> treatment, whips, duress, punishment, etc, ad infinitum.
>
> So realize that we have climbed out of the mud by whatever good luck
> and good sense, and refuse to sink back into it again. See that Seven,
> Eight, Nine and Ten above are ruthlessly followed and we will never be
> stopped. Relax them, get reasonable about it and we will perish.
>
> So far, while keeping myself in complete communication with all
> suggestions, I have not failed on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten in areas
> I could supervise closely. But it's not good enough for just myself
> and a few others to work at this.
>
> Whenever this control as per Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten has been
> relaxed the whole organizational area has failed. Witness Elizabeth,
> N.J., Wichita, the early organizations and groups. They crashed only
> because I no longer did Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. Then, when they
> were all messed up, you saw the obvious "reasons" for failure. But
> ahead of that they ceased to deliver and that involved them in other
> reasons.
>
> The common denominator of a group is the reactive bank. Thetans
> without banks have different responses. They only have their banks in
> common. They agree then only on bank principles. Person to person the
> bank is identical. So constructive ideas are individual and seldom get
> broad agreement in a human group. An individual must rise above an
> avid craving for agreement from a humanoid group to get anything
> decent done. The bank-agreement has been what has made Earth a
> they're going to quit let them quit fast. If they enrolled, they're
> aboard, and if they're aboard, they're here on the same terms as the
> about being Scientologists. The finest organizations in history have
> been tough, dedicated organizations. Not one namby-pamby bunch of
> panty-waist dilettantes have ever made anything. It's a tough
> universe. The social veneer makes it seem mild. But only the tigers
> HCOPL 7 February 1965 Keeping Scientology Working
>
> pdf:http://www.carolineletkeman.org/sp/images/stories/hcopl/hcopl-ksw1.pdf
>
Good idea putting this up, Gerry. Maybe the title here should start
out with the abbreviation of KSW since that is what Cruise says in the
film.
Defamer Exclusive:
The Tom Cruise Indoctrination Video Scientologists Don't Want You To
See
"Didn't get a chance to watch the terrifyingly creepy Tom Cruise video
yesterday before Scientologists pulled it off YouTube? Well, we've
managed to get our hands on a copy and now we'd like to invite you to
watch in all its technicolor glory. Nevermind the orgs, nevermind the
SPs and nevermind David Miscaviage, Defamer won't hesitate to put our
ethics on ANYONE! Don't miss out, over one billion earth humans have
been served. KSW and KFC forever (or something). This is must-see. Do
not pass go without watching this video.
7:37 AM ON TUE JAN 15 2008
BY MARK GRAHAM
25,422 views
http://tinyurl.com/2wqkjw
http://defamer.com/344987/the-tom-cruise-indoctrination-video-scientologists-dont-want-you-to-see
Mary
Magoo
"Gerry Armstrong" <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote in message
news:6k4qo39p5lsnm49o5...@4ax.com...
> Webbed at:
> http://carolineletkeman.org/sp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1466&Itemid=240
Thanks very much, Gerry! It's great to have it all.
Also, if people would like to hear how this is incorporated into
Scientology, live, you can watch "Tory Talks to CFI" at
www.xenutv.com
4 critics went to watch that, and each one told me my talk helped
them finally understand how KSW effects people.
Thanks, again--
Tory/Magoo~~~
> or co-ordination of what has been done, which will be valuable-only so
> long as it does not seek to alter basic principles and successful
> applications.
>
> The contributions that were worthwhile in this period of forming the
> technology were help in the form of friendship, of defense, of
> organization, of dissemination, of application, of advices on results
> and of finance. These were great contributions and were, and are,
> appreciated. Many thousands contributed in this way and made us what
> we are. Discovery contribution was not however part of the broad
> picture.
>
> We will not speculate here on why this was so or how I came to rise
> above the bank. We are dealing only in facts and the above is a fact-
> the group left to its own devices would not have evolved Scientology
> but with wild dramatization of the bank called "new ideas" would have
> wiped it out. Supporting this is the fact that man has never before
> evolved workable mental technology and emphasizing it is the vicious
> technology he did evolve-psychiatry, psychology, surgery, shock
> treatment, whips, duress, punishment, etc, ad infinitum.
>
> So realize that we have climbed out of the mud by whatever good luck
> and good sense, and refuse to sink back into it again. See that Seven,
> Eight, Nine and Ten above are ruthlessly followed and we will never be
> stopped. Relax them, get reasonable about it and we will perish.
>
> So far, while keeping myself in complete communication with all
> suggestions, I have not failed on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten in areas
> I could supervise closely. But it's not good enough for just myself
> and a few others to work at this.
>
> Whenever this control as per Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten has been
> relaxed the whole organizational area has failed. Witness Elizabeth,
> N.J., Wichita, the early organizations and groups. They crashed only
> because I no longer did Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. Then, when they
> were all messed up, you saw the obvious "reasons" for failure. But
> ahead of that they ceased to deliver and that involved them in other
> reasons.
>
> The common denominator of a group is the reactive bank. Thetans
> without banks have different responses. They only have their banks in
> common. They agree then only on bank principles. Person to person the
> bank is identical. So constructive ideas are individual and seldom get
> broad agreement in a human group. An individual must rise above an
> avid craving for agreement from a humanoid group to get anything
> decent done. The bank-agreement has been what has made Earth a
> hell-and if you were looking for hell and found Earth, it would
> duration of the universe-never permit an "open-minded" approach. If
> they're going to quit let them quit fast. If they enrolled, they're
> aboard, and if they're aboard, they're here on the same terms as the
> rest of us-win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-minded
> about being Scientologists. The finest organizations in history have
> been tough, dedicated organizations. Not one namby-pamby bunch of
> panty-waist dilettantes have ever made anything. It's a tough
> universe. The social veneer makes it seem mild. But only the tigers
> survive-and even they have a hard time. We'll survive because we are
> - L. Ron Hubbard
Out_Of_The_Dark
> "Gerry Armstrong" <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote in message
>
> news:6k4qo39p5lsnm49o5...@4ax.com...
>
> > Webbed at:
>
> Thanks very much, Gerry! It's great to have it all.
>
> Also, if people would like to hear how this is incorporated into
> Scientology, live, you can watch "Tory Talks to CFI" atwww.xenutv.com
> 4 critics went to watch that, and each one told me my talk helped
> them finally understand how KSW effects people.
>
> Thanks, again--
>
> Tory/Magoo~~~ < <
Tory Christman Speaks at the CFI West - March 7, 2005
Tory gives an insider's look at Scientology ... She talks about her
history with the group as well as detailing ...
www.xenutv.com/panels/tory-cfi.htm
R. Hill
> Webbed at:http://carolineletkeman.org/sp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view...
>
>
> HCOPL: Keeping Scientology Working
>
> For some years we have had a few excerpts from Hubbard's 1965 policy
> letter "Keeping Scientology Working" on our sites. These excerpts are
>
> Because of Tom Cruise's recent reference to the policy letter, which
> he calls, as all indoctrinated Scientologists do, by its acronym,
> "KSW,"because of his fanatical reverence for the policy, Because of
> his clear malevolence toward the "Suppressive Person" class, which he
> and his cult create in order to have enemies to Fair Game, and because
> of his threat to "put in ethics" on people around the world, we have
> decided to web the entirety of the document as Scientology publishes
> it in its books.
>
> This version of KSW has been excerpted from the Organization Executive
> Course Volume 1 ©1991 L. Ron Hubbard Library.
<snip>
This is great Gerry and Caroline, because I can tell, the "KSW" thing
is what people have been looking a lot, and I mean a lot. The current
traffic I have seen today is ***way beyond*** what I have witnessed
during the BBC Panorama peak. People want to know.
Ray.
Magoo
"R. Hill" <rh...@xenu-directory.net> wrote in message
news:5734144b-da65-4c9f...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
<snip>
Ray.
Exactly---and now they can read it from "Source" and SEE
exactly what ol Tommy Boy is referring to.
Good job, G&C
Tory/Magoo~~
chuckbeatty77 @aol.com
> Webbed at:http://carolineletkeman.org/sp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view...
>
>
> HCOPL: Keeping Scientology Working
>
> For some years we have had a few excerpts from Hubbard's 1965 policy
> letter "Keeping Scientology Working" on our sites. These excerpts are
>
> Because of Tom Cruise's recent reference to the policy letter, which
> he calls, as all indoctrinated Scientologists do, by its acronym,
> "KSW,"because of his fanatical reverence for the policy, Because of
> his clear malevolence toward the "Suppressive Person" class, which he
> and his cult create in order to have enemies to Fair Game, and because
> of his threat to "put in ethics" on people around the world, we have
> decided to web the entirety of the document as Scientology publishes
> it in its books.
>
> This version of KSW has been excerpted from the Organization Executive
> long as it does not seek to alter basic principles and successful
> applications.
>
> The contributions that were worthwhile in this period of forming the
> technology were help in the form of friendship, of defense, of
> organization, of dissemination, of application, of advices on results
> and of finance. These were great contributions and were, and are,
> appreciated. Many thousands contributed in this way and made us what
> we are. Discovery contribution was not however part of the broad
> picture.
>
> We will not speculate here on why this was so or how I came to rise
> the group left to its own devices would not have evolved Scientology
> but with wild dramatization of the bank called "new ideas" would have
> wiped it out. Supporting this is the fact that man has never before
> evolved workable mental technology and emphasizing it is the vicious
> treatment, whips, duress, punishment, etc, ad infinitum.
>
> So realize that we have climbed out of the mud by whatever good luck
> and good sense, and refuse to sink back into it again. See that Seven,
> Eight, Nine and Ten above are ruthlessly followed and we will never be
> stopped. Relax them, get reasonable about it and we will perish.
>
> So far, while keeping myself in complete communication with all
> suggestions, I have not failed on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten in areas
> I could supervise closely. But it's not good enough for just myself
> and a few others to work at this.
>
> Whenever this control as per Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten has been
> relaxed the whole organizational area has failed. Witness Elizabeth,
> N.J., Wichita, the early organizations and groups. They crashed only
> because I no longer did Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. Then, when they
> were all messed up, you saw the obvious "reasons" for failure. But
> ahead of that they ceased to deliver and that involved them in other
> reasons.
>
> The common denominator of a group is the reactive bank. Thetans
>
> read more >>
Thankyou Gerry and Caroline!
This is so important, and I refer brand new Scientologists and family
who come to me, to view this policy letter.
This Hubbard policy says it all. It has the glowing space opera
futuristic mindset of Scientology, and the draconian undemocratic tone
of L. Ron Hubbard.
This is why Scientology's DNA is irreligious and will NEVER gain
religious stature.
It is NOT in Scienotlogy's DNA to be religious like traditional
religions.
This policy letter MORE THAN ANY OTHER, is the problem why Scientology
will find it almost impossible to reform itself.
I've concluded that this policy letter is the one most in the way of
gaining religious status for Scientology.
All Scientologists learn over time that this one policy is the KEY
policy about Scientology.
BUT NOWHERE IN THIS POLICY DOES LRH REFER TO SCIENTOLOGY IN
TRADITIONAL RELIGIOUS TERMS.
LRH does not even mention religion in this policy.
This policy shows how L. Ron Hubbard thought of Scientology, and L.
Ron Hubbard didn't refer to Scientology at any time in this policy
letter as a religion!
The importance of this one policy's effect on Scientology movement
followers cannot be overstated.
It IS the all time most important writing, bar none, for Scientology.
I would absolutey think it a huge public service to get this policy
widely shared with anyone wishing to inform themselve of how Hubbard
thought of his Scientology's importance to all people on earth and the
whole universe.
The galactic long term future is NO JOKE to Scientologists!
Chuck Beatty
Jens Tingleff
Hash: SHA1
chuckbeatty77 @aol.com wrote:
> On Jan 15, 3:09 pm, Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
>> Webbed
>>
at:http://carolineletkeman.org/sp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view...
>>
>> [Site section] Socio-Political Subversion
>>
>> HCOPL: Keeping Scientology Working
>>
[.....]
>>
>> WHAT I SAY IN THESE PAGES HAS ALWAYS BEEN TRUE, IT HOLDS TRUE TODAY,
>> IT WILL STILL HOLD TRUE IN THE YEAR 2000 AND IT WILL CONTINUE TO HOLD
>> TRUE FROM THERE ON OUT.
>>
>> NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE IN SCIENTOLOGY, ON STAFF OR NOT, THIS POLICY
>> LETTER HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH YOU.
>>
>> ALL LEVELS
>>
>> K E E P I N G S C I E N T O L O G Y W O R K I N G
[........]
>> Seven: Hammering out of existence incorrect technology.
>>
>> Eight: Knocking out incorrect applications.
>>
>> Nine: Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology.
>>
>> Ten: Closing the door on incorrect application.
>>
[.....]
>>
>> Eight is not worked on hard enough.
>>
>> Nine is impeded by the "reasonable" attitude of the not-quite-bright.
>>
>> Ten is seldom done with enough ferocity.
>>
[..........]
>> By actual record
>> the percentages are about twenty to 100,000 that a group of human
>> beings will dream up bad technology to destroy good technology. As we
>> could have gotten along without suggestions, then, we had better steel
>> ourselves to continue to do so now that we have made it. This point
>> will, of course, be attacked as "unpopular", "egotistical" and
>> "undemocratic." It very well may be. But it is also a survival point.
>> And I don't see that popular measures, self-abnegation and democracy
>> have done anything for Man but push him further into the mud.
>> Currently, popularity endorses degraded novels, self-abnegation has
>> filled the South East Asian jungles with stone idols and corpses, and
>> democracy has given us inflation and income tax.
>>
[....]
>> So realize that we have climbed out of the mud by whatever good luck
>> and good sense, and refuse to sink back into it again. See that Seven,
>> Eight, Nine and Ten above are ruthlessly followed and we will never be
>> stopped. Relax them, get reasonable about it and we will perish.
>>
[.......]
>
> Thankyou Gerry and Caroline!
>
> This is so important, and I refer brand new Scientologists and family
> who come to me, to view this policy letter.
>
[...]
> All Scientologists learn over time that this one policy is the KEY
> policy about Scientology.
Isn't it also cited in many/all SP declares? I mean, doesn't that make it
the most important document about how to behave to remain a member in good
standig of the criminal organisation known as the "church" <spit> of
$cientology?
If so, then - perhaps more than the Xenu story - this should be shouted from
the rooftops when the likes of TC try to convince everyone that $cientology
is just a regular religion, this is not the cult we're looking for....
[....]
Beest Regards
Jens
- --
Key ID 0x09723C12, jens...@tingleff.org
Analogue filtering / 5GHz RLAN / Mandriva Linux / odds and ends
http://www.tingleff.org/jensting/ +44 1223 829 985
"Dear hood... What brings you to this neck of the woods?" 'The Soft Wolf'
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFHjbBwimJs3AlyPBIRApkkAKCLWYEegLgV2WVjunYETiy+moE0KACg6TAz
awMBgxVIuqiKjIsNFuTyW7g=
=uWoq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Gerry Armstrong
It is extremely important, and contains an essential ingredient of the
cult's "Suppressive Person" doctrine.
Another essential ingredient, how to treat or handle SPs, is provided
in policy letters such as "Battle Tactics." The full text follows.
>
>If so, then - perhaps more than the Xenu story - this should be shouted from
>the rooftops when the likes of TC try to convince everyone that $cientology
>is just a regular religion, this is not the cult we're looking for....
Yes, the SP doctrine is key to understanding Scientology and
Scientologists (see, e.g., Tom) and key to real criticism and
opposition to the cult.
>
>[....]
>
>Beest Regards
>
> Jens
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 16 FEBRUARY 1969
ISSUE II
REISSUED 24 SEPTEMBER 1987
(Reissued with updated distribution.)
Limited
Distribution:
IMEC
OSA NW
LRH PRs
Confidential
BATTLE TACTICS
(This is a defense paper on material developed after 18
years of ceaseless attack by a foreign enemy. Nothing in
this paper advocates physical violence or invites the physical
destruction of persons.)
In these days of "cold war" when actual warfare is
impossible due to atomic weapons, the warfare is waged in the
press and public in the form of ideas.
If you uniformly apply the tactics and strategy of battle
to the rows we get into, press or legal or public confrontation,
you will win.
The enemy uses " groups" and meetings of groups like one
would use squads.
If we and they are considered as two hostile and opposing
nations at war, then a huge array of tactics and strategy
become visible.
One parallels in the field of thought what is used and
done in the field of battle in other ages.
You don't have to know too much about the tactics and
strategy of warfare to apply this but it helps.
The end product of war, according to Clausewitz, the
authority on it, is (condensed) "to bring about a more amenable
frame of mind on the part of the enemy."
But there are also wars of attrition. We are engaged
in one where total destruction of us has been the enemy's aim
for, at this writing, 19 years. This is barbarian warfare,
thus the enemy must have had very positive fears and terrors
about us. Since he fought for total attrition. In this case
it is not safe to hope for any half-way win. We must ourselves
fight on the basis of total attrition of the enemy. So
never get reasonable about him. Just go all the way in and
obliterate him.
It is bad warfare to fight battles on your own terrain,
in your own subject area. It is not good to fight in the
territory of allies. Fight battles wherever possible only on
enemy terrain, in and about his subject and his people, not
ours. You can gauge your relative success by this. When
all your battles are fought on his terrain, you are winning.
A good general expends the maximum of enemy troops and
the minimum of his own. He makes the war costly to the
enemy, not to himself.
One cuts off enemy communications, funds, connections.
He deprives the enemy of political advantages, connections
and power. He takes over enemy territory. He raids and
harasses. All on a thought plane - press, public opinion,
governments, etc.
Seeing it as a battle, one can apply battle tactics to
thought actions.
Intelligence identifies targets and finds out enemy
plans and purposes, enemy connections, dispositions, etc.
It is fatal to attack a wrong enemy. But it is good tactics
to make the enemy attack wrong targets or persons himself.
Good intelligence pinpoints who when where what.
Good PRO plans an action and operations fights the battle.
Legal is a slow if often final battle arena. It eventually
comes down to legal in the end. If intelligence and PRO have
done well, then legal gets an easy win.
You can win a battle even without legal and by PRO alone.
You intend to win it without legal wherever possible.
The prize is "public opinion" where press is concerned.
The only safe public opinion to head for is they love us and
are in a frenzy of hate against the enemy. This means standard
wartime propaganda is what one is doing, complete with atrocity,
war crimes trials, the lot. Know the mores of your public
opinion, what they hate. That's the enemy. What they love.
That's you.
You preserve the image or increase it of your own troops
and degrade the image of the enemy to beast level.
Always be ready to parley but watch for tricks. Don't
give the enemy breathing space.
Capture and use his comm lines. A press magnate on your
side is a big win.
You have in one of these publicity wars all the factors
of modern wars complete with artillery, cavalry, infantry.
For example at this writing, all fighting has been on our
terrain; they knew our generals we didn't know theirs; they
had all the press, funds, government control. We are reversing
this. We are fighting now on their ground. But we have a
long way to go.
We will make it all the way providing we look on this in
terms of active battle and not as a "if we are saintly good we
will win." The people who win wars have a saintly image but
they win the war by clever and forceful use of the rules of
tactics, strategy and battle.
Wars are composed of many battles.
Never treat a war like a skirmish. Treat all skirmishes
like wars.
The cold war is a war. The West is losing it because it
is fighting by other rules than the rules of war. We mustn't
lose it.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Adopted as official
Church policy by
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY
INTERNATIONAL
LRH:CSI:jk.ja
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/sp/pl-1969-02-16-battle-tactics-reiss-87.html
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org
marika
>
> It is extremely important, and contains an essential ingredient of the
> cult's "Suppressive Person" doctrine.
>
Is it pepper spray?
mk5000
"Cause I'm coming home again
Comin home again.
I met this girl when I was three years old
And what I loved most she had so much soul"-Kanye West