>> Do you want to help with preserving the original technology? << Consult my want list here!
Please note that words with an asterisk (*) are defined at the bottom of this page! Only first appearances are indicated.
“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 only 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 coordination of what has been done, which will be valuable—only so long as it does not seek to alter basic principles and successful applications.”
L. Ron Hubbard
(from HCO PL 7 Feb 65 “Keeping Scientology Working”)
“... In other words, even if you arrive at the technology, you still have the task of safeguarding the technology because, once more, it can easily turn and become a false technology.”
L. Ron Hubbard
(from Saint Hill Special Briefing Course lecture #308, renumbered 1991: #338 “Saint Hill Service Facsimile Handling”, given on 18 Sept 63)
- (1) Keeping Scientology Working - Today's significance
(Includes: a) Am I getting the results I am supposed to have?; b) Qual Libraries vs Missing information; c) A rundown of the understanding required today ...; d) “Having the correct technology” vs “Standing in the shadow”)
- (2) It doesn't look good for ‘David Mayo’, or does it?
(Includes: a) Who is David Mayo? and the ‘Church of Scientology’; b) The ‘Church of Scientology’/Scientology offshoots vs The ‘David Mayo Bridge’; c) Educating out the previous education vs Blind spots; d) The position of various Free Zone groups regarding which Bridge to use; e) It just doesn't look very good for David Mayo ...; f) Fact vs Myth? Whose Bridge are we traveling on?; g) Man vs Sheep)
This matter has become more and more important as the years passed by. These web pages have essentially been worked on for reason to establish if we were still having that original technology. It is not without good reason that we find warnings all over in the writings of Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard that a technology can get lost. See, man is very susceptible and can be sidetracked rather easily. There is no reason to assume he does not. It is just a matter of time that this happens. It did, and man didn't see it, or did not want to see it.
Hence we have these studies here. To try to tell what happened and how it happened. It also gives you to whole scenery that was created in where this was played out.
‘Keeping Scientology Working’, yesterday and today
A brief outline ...
“Within 5 years after the issue of this [HCO] PL, with me off the lines, violation had almost destroyed orgs.” LRH (from 15 Jun 70 reissue: HCO PL 7 Feb 65 “Keeping Scientology Working”)
The main reference that introduced this concept of ‘Keeping Scientology Working’ was reference HCO PL 7 Feb 65 “Keeping Scientology Working”, it was subsequently reissued on 15 Jun 70, again on 28 Jan 73 and a final time on 27 Aug 80. The reissues from 1970 and 1980 received an additional paragraph added at the top when it was found that violation had occurred. You can read more about that here (separate window).
Seven pages long it relates about incident what happened if the here under listed 10 pointes were not adhered to:
“Getting the correct technology 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.” LRH
It then reads: “Seven, Eight, Nine and Then are the only places Scientology can bog down in any area.”.
“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.”
The subject of Scientology vs Those involved with it
There could be said to exist 2 aspects that one should watch for. Which is the people that make use of it and that what it says in the original writings. It should be a simple reality that which is called for Scientology may not be Scientology, it could be an interpretation or it could even be an alteration. Its history has been stretching over a period of about 60 years now. In its history it did go through various phases. Changes that may have been introduced in certain time periods however may not always get accepted as correct technology by those that may practice Scientology outside the scope and control of the official Church of Scientology.
This almost has turned to a dilemma. In fact some battles of sorts have and still are being fought about this. It is not my aim to tell you which is which. However the pages on my website aim to look at various matters in rather great detail. You are simply to make up your own mind about them.
A chronological anthology of this can be consulted here below:
Another battle is being fought between Scientology (as an organization or as a subject) and that what can be addressed as the anti-Scientology movement. These battles characterize themselves with that the anti-Scientology movement(s) pretty much have condemned all of the subject of Scientology, its founder L. Ron Hubbard, and the organization. For them it is deemed one and the same. Thus we can determine that no distinction is made by them between The subject of Scientology and Those involved with it. I find however that it is rather important to do make such a distinction.
A study of those that oppose to Scientology all together can be consulted here below:
(from ‘L. Ron Hubbard: An Introduction to Scientology’ (1966))
“The reason Scientology's assumptions are—can be considered to be true is because they work, and Scientology is totally a workable science. It is only workable. We're not interested in ultimate or absolutes. We're interested in what produces results. And if you know certain things and you apply them and that then increases a man's IQ, increases his ability to handle the world around him, why, he naturally, then, is able to do better and to do more, to make more money, to be happier in his environment and so forth.” LRH
So how are we going to go about this? L. Ron Hubbard says specifically that Scientology is a workable technology, he does not say it's the only one or the best one, that it will solve all your problems or that it will take you to Walhalla, Nirvana or Heaven. It is simply something that is workable. It is said that it has been tested throughout, and if it was not delivering the desired result it was worked on till it gave the desired result. This and only this is what is meant with that this technology would be workable. Then having achieved this L. Ron Hubbard adds to it that it should not be made subject to any more changes. For the risk that if you do alter, it will no longer be workable and accordingly become useless or pretty much so. There are quite a few of such references wherein it is described in detail what one is allowed to do and what not to do with this technology. The main target has been and still is to keep it workable.
Attempt for infiltration
During the early ’60s L. Ron Hubbard informed us about this:
“As the organization rapidly expands, so will it be a growing temptation for antisurvival elements to gain entry and infiltrate, and attempts to plant will be made.
To foil these, all staff members must be alert to attempts of this nature and it is their duty to inform the Technical Director, or above, of any doubts they may have and to see that the necessary action is taken.” LRH (from HCO PL 30 Oct 62 I “Security Risks Infiltration”)
“... the United States government and the efforts of that government since 1955, stepped up since 1963, to seize Scientology rather than forbid or stop it ... .” LRH (from HCO PL 14 Jun 65 III “Politics, Freedom from”)
Please do mind and consider the consequences of this!
At that time we also had this Keeping Scientology Working policy letter being written up:
“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 only 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 coordination of what has been done, which will be valuable—only so long as it does not seek to alter basic principles and successful applications.” LRH (from HCO PL* 7 Feb 65 “Keeping Scientology Working”)
Of course there is a reason for this effort of mine to get this point across! Well, basically because a variety of the information supplied about Scientology on this website is dealing with alterations. The fact we have to face is that since the early ’80s that we have a different situation. It is reported that L. Ron Hubbard had stopped appearing in public since December 1972, and pretty much so went in complete seclusion since about October 1979, and that there may be indicators that he was not anymore in control of various things. Before you have your opinion ready about this, it may be advised to have a look at various of my findings that clearly seem to support this thesis. And I have been quite thorough about it! Any that which I say can be verified. Once upon a time it was deemed that we were “having the correct technology”.We may be face a different reality this day.
“The danger points of the past and of the future”
And it's really not so difficult to lose the right track out of sight:
“Now, the moment you have found the exact, precise mechanics which apply to all minds, you can then get a broad agreement on the situation because they override the minor data on which the people are fixated. In other words, they also would have this broader perimeter of data and they'd recognize the truth in the broader perimeter of data. But the moment that you move even a sixteenth of a millimeter sideways off of what is generally applicable to all minds, you are again into the particularities and opinions. So therefore, if you had a broad sphere of knowledge which was true, and these were all high generalities and everybody would agree with them, frankly it'd be very easy to bankrupt and upset that whole operation by taking it, and by false relay—you see, bad instruction and bad relay of the material and dropping out a datum here and a vital datum there and substituting something or other—you eventually could then again effect a sort of a slavery out of that information.
In other words, even if you arrive at the technology, you still have the task of safeguarding the technology because, once more, it can easily turn and become a false technology.” LRH (from Saint Hill Special Briefing Course lecture #308, renumbered 1991: #338 “Saint Hill Service Facsimile Handling”, given on 18 Sept 63)
Sound snippet
And a warning from 1968:
“The situation with regard to standard tech at this time is we have had a few mice. And I imagine down through the years there will be a few other mice. A bulletin gets altered, a tape gets pulled off the line, some vital action is shifted. Somebody comes tearing in with a brand new idea that seems to be absolutely vitally essential, and the first thing you know, why we have trouble of one kind or another. And tech fails. And it suddenly ceases to give the results which it should attain.
At that time morale goes down. ‘No, Scientology doesn't work.’ These are the danger points of the past and of the future.” LRH (from Class VIII lecture #5 “The Standard Green Form and Rudiments”, given on 28 Sept 68)
Sound snippet
Interestingly enough these are not in particular considered by the Church of Scientology representatives and/or spokesman. It is just always presented that we are “Having the correct technology.”. Indeed it does say in HCO PL 7 Feb 65 “Keeping Scientology Working” that “One above has been done.”, and the entire focus is on exactly that. I would perceive however that people in general do take things for granted. It is easier to let someone else take care of safeguarding and all that (this turning to authority worship), rather then maintaining your own alertness.
Rights and obligations ...
Either way there are some standard lines how to deal with this. And I have walked on these paths many times, but it appears to take time, lots of time to get adjustments implemented. In the interim I wish not to withheld any of this information from those who call themselves Scientologists and/or any other who would have an interest in this one way or the other.
“To work for freedom of speech in the world.
To actively decry the suppression of knowledge, wisdom, philosophy or data which would help mankind.” LRH (from HCO PL 5 Feb 69R (Revised 15 May 73) “Code of a Scientologist”)
“That all men have inalienable rights to conceive, choose, assist or support their own organizations, churches and governments.
That all men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to write freely their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others.” LRH (from ‘The Creed of the Church of Scientology’ (1954, 70))
And thus if anybody feels offended, or finds that I offend any person or management.
“Never fear to hurt another in a just cause.” LRH (from ‘PAB 40’, 26 Nov 54 “The Code of Honour”)
At times however I may be wrong about things, if that is the case then I urge you to forward your findings to me! And if their correctness can be properly substantiated and verified they will be implemented.
In regards to daring to question the present Scientology management there are some approaches to consider:
“‘7. ABILITY TO JUDGE. “Try to understand the facts of a situation before you judge. Evaluate things on an open-minded, unprejudiced basis and be willing to change your mind.” ...
‘21. CURIOSITY. “An inquisitive, curious mind will help you seek out new information. Don't be afraid to admit you don't know it all. Always ask questions about things you don't understand.”
‘22. INDIVIDUALISM. “Do things the way you think they should be done, without fearing somebody's disapproval.” ...
‘24. IMAGINATION. “Geniuses know how to think in new combinations, see things from a different perspective, than anyone else. Unclutter your mental environment to develop this type of imagination. Give yourself time each day to daydream, to fantasize, to drift into a dreamy inner life the way you did as a child.”’”
And to read all of these, please click here (pop-up window).
Keeping Scientology Working (2) - How to go about it?
“There is a maxim in PR or advertising that a MESSAGE MUST BE REPEATED OVER AND OVER TO IMPINGE ON A GIVEN PUBLIC.” LRH (from HCO PL 9 Jun 75 “Enemy Lines”)
This can also get very wrong as history has shown us. Please reflect on the following. It is reported that
Adolf Hitler has said: “If you tell a lie long enough and loud enough, and often enough, the people will believe it.”.
He also said, “People are more likely to believe a big lie than a small one. If you’re going to tell a lie, tell a big one. People will believe that.”
Some have expressed to me that Religious Technology Center is full bore on keeping the technology pure. This is being promoted in countless flyers, magazines, books and scheduled public meetings, over and over and over again. Mr. David Miscavige has said: “We give you pure and unaltered tech!” So why should we be bothered about it? Everything is taken care of is it not? This may not be as obvious as it may seem though. We can see this expressed in this paragraph added in the 15 June 1970 reissue of HCO PL 7 Feb 65 “Keeping Scientology Working”:
“Note: Neglect of this PL 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.” LRH
Per this one can not simply rely on that others will take care of that. Only because some people confide to us that some things are or have been done, this does not automatically mean that this has been carried out in reality. This is what Public Relation is all about. For many it is the easy way out to simply state: “See, all has been taken care of, I don't have to do anything anymore!” In reality it just has become a justifier for not doing anything. To say with Bob Dylan: “The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind.”. Even Religious Technology Center does acknowledge that “he (LRH) has stated, Keeping Scientology Working is a responsibility shared by all members of the Scientology religion”. Reality is though that criticism is often met with as if there is something wrong with you. You can't have it both ways! The data itself should be investigated if some peculiarity surfaces.
HCO PL 7 Feb 65 “Keeping Scientology Working” gives an listing of 10 steps of what is actually needed for “getting the correct technology applied”. The first step is “One: Having the correct technology.”. Then at the end of the list LRH says: “One above has been done.” One should think this over a little more. “Has been done.” What does that mean? It should mean that we in actual fact are “having the correct technology”. Now, why then is the current management making continuously changes, releasing new LRH issues, and is even introducing new procedures? This consideration all by itself simply is odd. These are some of the things I have been digging into.
There is this quotation:
“PRICE OF FREEDOM: Constant alertness, constant willingness to fight back. There is no other price.” LRH (source of quotation unknown, but it is frequently displayed in the periodical of the International Association of Scientologists)
And there is this:
“Hammering out of existence incorrect technology.
Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology.” LRH (from HCO PL 7 Feb 1965 “Keeping Scientology Working”)
This involves doingness. This is not just sitting around till someone acknowledges you for your findings. To do otherwise is not living up to the responsibility needed. And you also don't rely on someone else taking care of it for you, that is even if you may have reported it to some people. You have to do a follow-up, and if needed act again, and again, and again .... hammer, hammer, hammer out of existence ....... and closing, closing, closing the door .......
You should be safe with this:
“IF ONE KNOWS THE TECH OF HOW TO DO SOMETHING AND CAN DO IT, AND USES IT, HE CANNOT BE THE ADVERSE EFFECT OF IT.” LRH (from HCO PL 30 Jan 83 “Your Post and Life”)
When encountering any deviation from the technology you may also want to inform:
Religious Technology Center
1710 Ivar Avenue, Suite 1001
Los Angeles, California 90028
USA
Or it may just be for expressing your worries.
The present-day situation regarding the subject of Scientology and those that practice it
A preview of the information you will find researched on these pages ...
(Includes: a) Am I getting the results I am supposed to have?; b) Qual Libraries vs Missing information; c) A rundown of the understanding required today ...; d) “Having the correct technology” vs “Standing in the shadow”)
(Includes: a) Who is David Mayo? and the ‘Church of Scientology’; b) The ‘Church of Scientology’/Scientology offshoots vs The ‘David Mayo Bridge’; c) Educating out the previous education vs Blind spots; d) The position of various Free Zone groups regarding which Bridge to use; e) It just doesn't look very good for David Mayo ...; f) Fact vs Myth? Whose Bridge are we traveling on?; g) Man vs Sheep)
(1) Keeping Scientology Working - Today's significance
a) Am I getting the results I am supposed to have?
My studies performed at a later date, more particularly those published as “Analysis of HCOB 24 Jan 77 ‘Tech Correction Round-up’” & “Overview of Tech changes during 1978-82 versus A lost Bridge” (see main Scientology pages index at “6”), do point at a particular situation. It is here you do have to ask yourself some questions such as: “Am I getting the results I was supposed to get from auditing and training according to the original prognosis?”. For those persons that came into Scientology at a later date this would be a bit hard to determine. This is simply because they have no data to compare with! And they could not even know about that, as all the data is physically (as in printed materials) simply not in sight for them!
All that may be observed, i.e. if they observe more closely, is that there are some particular indications to be seen. Indications like why the Qual Libraries* are not set up as per the rather clear guidelines set by L. Ron Hubbard. As today we only find the newest of the newest materials presented in these places. Earlier versions of all sort of references have been gotten rid of. The same goes for earlier prints of the books. Then we have the matter of these old Scientology periodicals for example Ability, Certainty, The Auditor, and various other magazines that offer a treasure of information about how things used to be, and that even captured the wonderings and the thoughts of persons from these earlier days.
It has been said: “It's an org* library and you just get your hands on at least two of every pack on tech or policy or anything else that has ever been issued.” LRH (taken from lecture given 5 Sept 71 “A Talk on a Basic Qual”, also in HCO PL 3 Mar 82 “The Qual Library”). We thus face a situation here that we physically have been robbed from a source of information in where we otherwise would have had an opportunity to find out how things were in the earlier years of the Scientology community. If you have this sort of original materials, you have a means that you can use to determine if some information would have been filtered out. And it is a simple reality this day that the present Church of Scientology is deliberately filtering out information. On these pages here there is a tremendous amount of data that address many of such occurrences.
More about this can be found here: (separate window)
c) A rundown of the understanding required today ...
Today for a full understanding of these subjects of Dianetics and Scientology it appears to be required that we have:
(1)
a complete chronological rundown of the technical aspects of the technology itself;
(2)
a complete chronological rundown of how the organization and its administrative policies came about, its development, and its changes through time;
(3)
an actual comparison study of in particular technical changes through time, coupled with a thorough overview of the very organizational changes, and the comings and goings of the Scientology parishioners in general.
(1) used to be accounted for, but is being tampered with (in particular regarding the status quo of the technology up to 1977 compared to 1978 to present); (2) has been seriously interfered with; and (3) was omitted. We used to be without (3) simply because there was no need to have it, but these days this is more than just necessary as it will guide us while determining if we still really have the correct technology.
The present Scientologist in the final end will find out that he has to face 2 distinctive situations:
Firstly that the same route (Bridge) that is offered by the Church of Scientology is available in the various Free Zone groups (those that practice Scientology outside the scope and control of the official Church of Scientology). This would then be the so called ‘David Mayo Bridge’, as established during 1978-82 while David Mayo was posted as the Senior C/S International (top technical person after L. Ron Hubbard).
Secondly (which is much harder to uncover and finally admit to), that the original LRH Bridge and route is hardly available anywhere at all.
d) “Having the correct technology” vs “Standing in the shadow”
You see, just because we once were “Having the correct technology.”, does not mean that it will sustain into eternity. The policy letter written about this “Keeping Scientology Working” was written in 1965, this is quite a while ago now. Many things can happen. See the comments from L. Ron Hubbard about this in chapter: “Keeping Scientology Working (1) - A workable technology”, see earlier on this page.
Now, regarding all this one may want to keep in mind that any cure, process, or any such that is based on or taken from an accurately working procedure. Well, be confident here with that you may get various seemingly nice results, but ... it will not likely get you where you were meant to arrive at. But as always, it is up to you, and only you, in which swimming pool you wish to splatter. But if you follow blindly what others tell you to do, you certainly will pay the price of freedom, meaning you will never arrive at that. Well, if you are satisfied with standing in the shadow, but convince yourself that you are standing in the sun, and thus giving this choice of preference all of your sympathy and your adoration, alright then, but it will be your choice and your concern only ...
Sound snippet
(Extract from Rolling Stones song)
“Have you seen your mother, baby, standing in the shadow? Have you had another, baby, standing in the shadow? I'm glad I opened your eyes The have-nots would have tried to freeze you in ice
Have you seen your brother, baby, standing in the shadow? Have you had another, baby, standing in the shadow? I was just passing the time I'm all alone, won't you give all your sympathy to mine?
Tell me a story about how you adore me Live in the shadow, see through the shadow, Live through the shadow, tear at the shadow Hate in the shadow, and love in your shadowy life”
The purpose for all of my studies would be to provide for information that enables one to make a comparison. I relate on these pages about matters that most persons have not even considered, and how could they? If you lack the information. Ah well, here you have it! Now its up to you to do something with it, you could also simply ignore it, or just ridicule it, or even attack the person that is forwarding it. It ALL has been done already anyway ...
Further advised reading about this is found in the introduction of my page “Overview of Tech changes during 1978-82 or When the Route to Freedom was interfered with and turned upside down”. Consult in link here below:
a) Who is David Mayo? and the ‘Church of Scientology’
First of all, who the heck is David Mayo? To find out about that you have to travel back a little in time. Persons that came into the Church of Scientology at a more recent date will not hear anything about him at all. Nonetheless this person had been in Scientology since as early as 1962, became the Flag C/S in September 1973, and was posted as the Snr C/S Int* during 1978-82. These positions basically meant that he was the top technical person after L. Ron Hubbard during a period of a whole 10 years. All that was ongoing until late August 1982 at which time he was forcefully removed from this position. And by March 1983 he had been expelled from the Church of Scientology and was literally deemed to be the worst of all evils. And this is why you don't hear about him in the Church of Scientology.
b) The ‘Church of Scientology’/Scientology offshoots vs The ‘David Mayo Bridge’
You do however hear about him in the various offshoots of Scientology groups such as the Free Zone and Ron's Orgs, groups that practice Scientology outside of the control of the Church of Scientology. It does appear that in particular the Free Zone groups had embraced all of him. The Ron's Org on the other hand did their own continued research, which nonetheless at least in part is based on procedures that David Mayo had released. More importantly is that either of these groups have their focus on the 1978 and later version of the technology. They for example all deliver New Era Dianetics (released 1978) instead of Standard Dianetics (released 1969).
Anyhow it may have been figured that a person that was expelled and referred to as the worst of evils by the Church of Scientology must be something good to have. May be so ..., but the strangest of it all is that the version of the technology that David Mayo had left in the Church of Scientology is presently in full use in BOTH these opposing sides! During the time that David Mayo was posted as this Snr C/S Int we have actually seen a complete Grade Chart* (Bridge) turnaround occurring, which was, very strangely, not reversed after they had kicked him out. Of course they cancelled and rewrote a whole bunch of references that were witnessing the involvement of David Mayo, but the fact remains that the Bridge that he left was kept INTACT! These Free Zone groups out there on the other hand liked David Mayo, and so they have that same Bridge there as well. Indeed, a very, very strange state of affairs!
You see, if some worst of evils gets kicked, you follow his track and you restore to the former status quo. That this was not done makes the Church of Scientology representatives look very suspect indeed!
c) Educating out the previous education vs Blind spots
Even a child could figure out here that something is not quite right here! Nonetheless the Church of Scientology parishioners have gloriously missed this. The younger ones simply don't know because of no data, where the old-timer Scientologists within the Church of Scientology appear to have kept themselves blind. The question is if the situation would be any better for these Free Zoners, Ron's Orgers, and even these people calling themselves for Independent Scientologists (a misnomer actually, as a true Scientologist is already from the very beginning an independent!, nonetheless we see more and more of these Declarations of Independence out on the Internet, people that then had turned their back to the Church of Scientology). Anyhow this Free Zone and Ron's Orgs appear not to be really straightforwardly looking either. There is factual data around that a majority of them just don't want to look at and/or consider its actual significances! Facts however are a bit difficult to just ignore, and so we just turn our head and look at some other direction. This has thus far been my general experience with any such persons, with an occasional exception on that rule. The reason for this is that it appears very hard to leave behind or change in that which one has thought to be correct for such and such a long time. This is largely a matter of educating out the previous education, and is also of course an ego problem. The first step is the hardest which is making a realization about that there may be any truth contained in such possibilities as forwarded on this website, and then to be able to see the consequences of that. You see, that an old dog doesn't learn new tricks, offers more angles for interpretation than one may have thought once!
d) The position of various Free Zone groups regarding which Bridge to use
Special mention needs to be made for such groups that appear to actively blocking persons and denies membership to those that wish to focus on the 1972 status quo of the tech. Meaning Standard Dianetics and all that came with it.
There is a serious problem present here, because they would then have taken it upon themselves to decide which is the correct tech. Worse it gets if this is enforced upon one's members! And if you do not adapt to such a reality, then you are just not welcome, and out through the exit door you go!
Well, so much for the claims they display on some of these websites that I have seen. It may be found that it would be full with claims that they deliver unaltered pure tech and more such things. Take your pick: “Preserve the exact technology and original workable philosophy of Lafayette Ron Hubbard for all mankind so it is available for future use.”. But THEY would decide what tech that would be! And what do we find? It is usually that Bridge that had been established during 1978-82. Which, big surprise, is the same Bridge that is being offered by the Church of Scientology.
On such websites you also find claims about that a Scientologist would be a free person, yeah, but ONLY as free as the rulers of this group ALLOWS you to be! Haven't we seen all this before, hmmm? Wake up people! Decide for yourself! Don't let anyone limit you or decide for you what you can or can not do, or what you can practice or can not practice!
It seems to me that some people are overlooking some things here:
“So technical progress has been:
CLASS VIII - 1968.
COMPLETE DIANETICS - 1969.
COMPLETE SCIENTOLOGY - 1970.” LRH (from ‘LRH ED 117 Int’, 26 Aug 70 “Current Cases”)
Can it be said any more clear than this?
You see, with this demand that we find within this group they are factually banning Standard Dianetics. New Era Dianetics and Standard Dianetics just don't go so well together. Virtually always a choice is made by some auditor which he wants to deliver, excluding the other.
“Any process ever taught on the SHSBC or ever released in ANY book can be audited and be Standard Tech.” LRH (from HCOB 26 Feb 70 “Standard Tech and Invalidation”)
“Inevitably, when any new approach or process is released, some will instantly assume that all ‘older’ (actually more basic) data has been cancelled. There is no statement to that effect. ...
A subject can be reorganized and made more workable. That was done in 1969 for Dianetics. ...
This idea that the ‘old’ is always cancelled by anything ‘new’ has its root in the idea that a later order cancels earlier orders, which is true. But orders are one thing and Tech basics another.” LRH (from HCOB 30 Jun 70R (Revised 6 Mar 73) “VIII Actions”)
“Yeah”, you say, “but this or that group carry a whole bunch of really high classed auditors amongst their members. Wow! Must be alright then!”. Well, If you are into authority worship and not following your own understanding, that will be your choice. You want to go free, or you don't want to go free, that is pending the choice you will be making! All that I say is, “Don't let anyone fool ya!”. Individual members of such a group may also have a different opinion about this then the general line that is pushed by ruling and approving comittees. So be sure to check out any of these things by yourself. Don't let anyone tie your shoes for you!
e) It just doesn't look very good for David Mayo ...
Without a doubt this message will not be liked by various persons. This however can simply not be helped. Nor should one care about that. No person either is supposed to embrace the things that I relate, each person has the find out for him or herself. Just look and make it out for yourself. See, this is just not a matter of opinion. At least not anymore!
Recent studies expose that during March 1982 that the person David Mayo was heavily involved in an increasing implementation of the use of so-called Confessionals, that technically were in fact Security Checks. It goes even that far as effectively interfering with this that is known as the No-Interference Area. See HCOB 8 Mar 82 “Confessionals and the Non Interference Zone”. This is basically the area from Dianetic Clear to OT III, in which period you do not do other than just completing and being active on these levels. The same rule applies when you are on any of these later New OT levels, they are not to be interfered with while you are on them. March 1982 marks the time that it suddenly was ok that they were being interfered with. All this culminating amongst other into ‘6 month (security) checks’ for New OT VII that are lacking ANY and EVERY reference to approve of such an action. As a side note March 1982 also marks the exact time that the original OT Levels IV-VIII were dropped, replacing them with what you can call the NOTs (NED for OTs) Levels. A coincidence? Not very likely!
Even HCOB/PL 6 Mar 82 “Confessional Tech Policies” issued by David Mayo directs that “Anyone who refuses a Confessional or who refuses to answer a reading question should be turned over to the Ethics Officer” is not without significance.
These 6 references that were issued in the 6-10 March time span, and that all had their focus on Confessional/Security Checking procedures, they all carried the signature of David Mayo. A signature that was removed in each and every one of them after he had been expunged from the Church of Scientology.
Now, we see that he is noted at the signatory area of these references as an assistant in these. But what does that mean? This is very clearly explained in HCOB 24 Jan 77 “Tech Correction Round-up” that was paving the way for a radical change in regards to the signatures that we find at the bottom of references. In where authors (other than L. Ron Hubbard) simply enough got demoted to be referred to as assistants. Strangely enough was this as well passed by at the time by the members of the Scientology community. The whole thing then escalated particularly during 1980-82 when an avalanche of non-LRH issues such as BPLs and BTBs got transferred respectively into HCO PLs and HCOBs as if written by L. Ron Hubbard himself. Where detailed studies show definitely that they were not.
This HCOB 24 Jan 77 “Tech Correction Round-up” in turn has been very detailedly analyzed which conclusively adjudicates that it would virtually be an impossibility that L. Ron Hubbard would have written it or was involved in it at all. It contains really a staggering amount of tech errors, errors of logic, errors of intelligence, etc.. This too had been missed by virtually EVERYONE!! People just adopted, swallowed it, didn't think, and went along ...
More information about these various matters here: (separate windows)
f) Fact vs Myth? Whose Bridge are we traveling on?
Mind that all this is not just an opinion anymore, we have the studies that back it up!
In turn if it be so that these things had been happening in these later ’70s, then it raises some very serious questionmarks about EVERY tech that came about AFTER the release of this HCOB 24 Jan 77 “Tech Correction Round-up”. Questionmarks about NED, about NOTs, about the entire Bridge turnaround during 1978-82.
Nonetheless this pretty much has all been ignored, we have many persons today that swear by NED, swear even more by NOTs. This whole Bridge has been embraced by both the Free Zone, Ron's Org and the Church of Scientology. They all offer virtually the SAME Bridge. Now, isn't that a bit well strange and contradictive? But whose Bridge is this actually?
Well, I guess they are all singing ...
“Oh, that's the way, uh-huh uh-huh, I like it, uh-huh, uh-huh. That's the way, uh-huh uh-huh, I like it, uh-huh, uh-huh.”
And now all together ...
“That's the way, uh-huh uh-huh, I like it, uh-huh, uh-huh. That's the way, uh-huh uh-huh, I like it, uh-huh, uh-huh. ...
And singing they do indeed, in choir, and that all the time, and they very much would like you to sing with them ... Yeah, but who is actually they?
Wakey, wakey, people ... !!
g) Man vs Sheep
People follow a stream, do like anyone else, do what is popular, do what is accepted by some (silent) majority vote, they are just not going to be a rock in that brook!
People do also tend to just not listen if in some degree you are making them wrong. You can repeat things tens of times, forward analysis from experts, throw infallible not to be questioned evidence on the table, then the next time you are faced with the same erroneous statement from this same opponent. It is as if you hadn't said anything. People are not just going to admit they had wrong or were in error. They will either deny, or change the topic. This world is not made up of a lot of people that abide to objectivity. Common people don't want to be wrong, it is as simple as that. The problem is that many have not come to realize yet, that if one can not admit having been in error about an obvious matter, that you would have made yourself even look more ridiculous!
Another angle of this is of course authority submission. People just seem to love that, follow the stream set by some oppressor, look left nor right, just go right on, I lead, you follow. Such an oppressor may seem to know matters because of the adopted authority he displays, but when getting down to facts, he will, theoretically at least, have lost all of his credibility. Amazingly enough though the sheep continues to follow that oppressor and instead persists in finding fault with he that exposed him!
Thus, only a limited (although not too limited!), enough awaken intelligent individuals, not too stuck in themselves, not too much into authority adoration, are actually willing to really, and I mean really, look. The same would apply to me writing all this here. “So, why are you wasting your time on this then!”, you may ask. Well, I haven't actually been wasting my time. For one, a lie can only be upheld so and so long. Secondly I have been on a personal adventure, all I do is sharing my notted down annotations of the things that occurred and that were found on that travel.
“Also received an offer once to work in a certain place in the world, to make men ‘more suggestible.’ It was at a dinner party. That was no less an official offer, because that's why I was at the dinner party—I didn't find out till I got there—to make men more suggestible! And I sat there, and the fellow evidently thought I was in a stunned silence. And I sat there with my dessert spoon halfway suspended, hoping against hope that I wouldn't break out in the hysterical laughter which I felt. I held it back, but I have never heard a better joke. That's carrying coals to Newcastle. Make him more suggestible! All you'd have to do is lean on him slightly and he'd go sound asleep!” LRH (from The Anatomy of the Spirit of Man Congress tape lecture #15 “What Scientology Is Doing – Organizations, The Control & Division of Man”, given on 6 Jun 55)
Sound snippet
Today's relevance of ‘The Manchurian Candidate’ concept
Originally a work of fiction going by that title written by Richard Condon and published in 1959. It is basically about the creation of a puppet (brainwashed individual) that can be activated (by showing some picture) to do what he has been programmed to, does it, and then has no recall of it. A creation thus of a so-called sleeper agent. Already in 1962 the book was made into a film with Frank Sinatra (remade in 2004 with Denzel Washington, but one should stick with the 1962 version). A similar concept was used by author Walter Wager in his book ‘Telefon’ (1975). A film version, with the same title, was released only 2 years later in 1977, directed by Don Siegel and starring Charles Bronson who had to hunt down a defector that had obtained a list with such sleeper agents and who was activating them through a simple phone call in where a short phrase was uttered. And again in the trilogy written by Robert Ludlum starting in 1980 with ‘The Bourne Identity’. During the 2000s we have Matt Damon playing that character in a series of films. It is all the same concept.
We find it further used in the ‘Columbo’ television series episode ‘A Deadly State of Mind’ from 1975, where we find a hypnotist in action. Particularly interesting is the 1973 episode ‘Double Exposure’ in where the perpetrator is inducing a programmed behaviour on his victim by use of subliminal cuts in a film which gets that victim killed. A technique which Inspector Columbo (Peter Falk) later in the episode uses to have the perpetrator expose himself.
A different although related concept we find used in the TV-series called ‘The Mentalist’ that run 2008-15. In where Patrick Jane (performed by Simon Baker) who portrays “Someone who uses mental acuity, hypnosis and/or suggestion.” to achieve his goals through manipulating people and his environment.
Then during the ’50s and ’60s we also have this MK Ultra project of the CIA which was all about experimentation with these sorts of phenomena.
This concept however had more or less already been touched and was immortalized on celluloid by Fritz Lang in 1922 with the release of ‘Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler - Ein Bild der Zeit’, and again in 1933 with ‘Das Testament des Dr. Mabuse’ (after the books by Norbert Jacques). A super-villain or master-manipulator (a role performed by Rudolf Klein-Rogge) working with mind control through use of the will (telepathic hypnosis). Dr. Mabuse is also a master of disguise. His powers go beyond enjailment (asylum) or even the grave. The aim is to coerce people to do things you want them to do, without them realizing that they are doing that.
Purposely creating this state of mind in individuals is a phenomena that in Scientology is referred to as PDH*, or Pain-Drugs-Hypnosis. Here you subject a person to Pain and/or Drug the person (in order to create an in part unconscious state of mind), and then (im)plant your commands into the person's mind through the method of Hypnosis. This is actually easier done than commonly is thought. It is also much more widely spread than commonly is thought. In fact we see it all around us, as man generally is just not very awake or aware. It is the actual reason why advertising techniques do result in huge results in regards to sales figures, and why they are still pursuing it! After all they are trying to convince (or program you) to get some item or something you do not actually need. Man is constantly subjected to all sorts of brainwash.
And indeed it is so very easily achieved as for example Paul McKenna (hypnotist) clearly has demonstrated numerous of times live on television and elsewhere. Derren Brown is another such a person, a British illusionist. As late as Oct/Nov 2011 he appeared in a series of television programs ‘Derren Brown: The Experiments’. Particularly noteworthy is its first episode, entitled “The Assassin”, in where Derren Brown successfully hypnotised a member of the public to ‘assassinate’ Stephen Fry (a British celebrity) while he was live performing on stage. One of the questions asked with this test was if it would be possible to hypnotise (program) a person to perform such an act even it was against the morals of the person that was set up for it. Then committing the act and have no memory of having done that afterwards. The results were interesting as the person set up for this said afterwards that his focus was on aiming at a target and not on anything else. It would thus appear that one can bypass any morals. Further we have Jesse Ventura that has this television program ‘Conspiracy Theory’, one of these episodes is ‘Manchurian Candidate’ (2010). Jesse: “You don't think this stuff is real? Think again!”.
We find it recorded in some HCOBs that even the first-born son of L. Ron Hubbard would have been subjected to that (see HCOB 19 Jan 60 “Casualties” & HCOB 9 Feb 60 “Cancellation of Certificates”). Here it resulted in that ‘Nibs’ Hubbard then took his belongings and left, not ever to return to the organization or his father. His behaviour in later years can be described as erratic, as he is going back and forth, making devastating claims and then retracting them as easily, not once, not twice, no, he did that 3 times. (more about all that here, separate window)
Now, how would you go about to disrupt an area, a group or an organization? Right, you could program some person(s), and send him/her/them out. The person him/herself would not know about it, and thus, rather conveniently, can then not confess anything either, but he/she will carry out what he/she has been programmed to carry out. You could in fact send out a whole bunch of such persons out there. You can be assured that matters will get disrupted if you send out such person(s) into the field. Into organizations, the Church of Scientology, the Free Zone, Greenpeace or anywhere. You let them infiltrate and let them then function as an authority of sorts. In essence they would be rather convincing in the claims they will make, as after all they are convinced themselves they have right. Success basically will be assured as people will follow authorities rather easily, no questions asked.
Thus you let them infiltrate, get them to do some bad things (or let them coerce other persons to do that), and then get these bad deeds exposed publicly. For example get some government entity perform a raid or sorts, and somehow get the confiscated papers in the hands of the public or media. Evidently that organization (whichever it is) will receive a blow. Now you can easily influence the public take on that organization or group overall.
Now, how realistic would it be to think that schemes like this would have been brought about? Is it all science fiction? Well, this technique is there, it actually exists. It may not work equally well on every person, but if you get into it, and test it out on a bunch of people, you are likely to get your perfect sleeper agent(s)! You just create your factory where such persons easily can be made. Mind that advertisements techniques that we see on television and the likes only works because man is that susceptible!
I won't delve into this any further then I have done here above. Just mind this:
“As the organization rapidly expands, so will it be a growing temptation for antisurvival elements to gain entry and infiltrate, and attempts to plant will be made.” LRH (from HCO PL 30 Oct 62 I “Security Risks Infiltration”)
“... the United States government and the efforts of that government since 1955, stepped up since 1963, to seize Scientology rather than forbid or stop it ... .” LRH (from HCO PL 14 Jun 65 III “Politics, Freedom from”)
And so, if you are diligent and subtle enough, you can get a subject to actually change direction, and have people adjust to that and swallow all of it. And of course the area or degree of application of this technique are manifold. It will in addition facilitate matters if you leave false leads and contradictory data all over the place, lots and lots of them. Simply confuse the area. There are patterns to be recognized here. Then the technique will work on very many levels indeed, as man is already living an illusion. He will get swayed just like that!
Data and information is to be understood and fully evaluated, compared with, etc., it is never supposed to be blindly followed. If you follow anyway, then you will likely get or have been tricked already. Just count on that!
I have been forwarded the following report: (pop-up window)
A warning signal can be if some person hides behind certificates and brag about that they are auditor Class such and such, and supposedly have done this and that. (who is going to check them out anyway)
So, a person that is putting far too much weight and attention onto his/her certificates (Auditor Class or other) or is getting annoyed because you don't immediately adopt the things the person forwards or claims. This should get you alarmed!
So, a person that wants to be believed or followed only for his word and upon his authority rather than it being based on clear verified data, and accordingly refrains from, simply refuses, or in any other fashion avoids to give any explanation or clarification and being factual about matters, or even justifies the lack of this, then you know that this person as a rule does not know what he is talking about. He does not offer anything, only because he has nothing to offer.
“I don't expect auditors or Scientologists to instantly agree with or seize upon whatever I say. I would be offended if they did and would feel they weren't a Free People. Since they are intelligent I expect them to think over what's said, try it, and if it's good for them, use it. ... In organizations and out I count upon initiative and good judgment.” LRH (from ‘PAB 79’, 10 Apr 56 “The Open Channel: What Do I Think of Auditors?”)
Vocabulary:
..R, ..RA, ..RB (etc) or #R, #RA (etc):
For example: ‘HCO PL 24 Sept 70R’ & ‘HCO PL 24 Sept 70RA’, etc. The given date denotes the first time it has been published in issue-form. The R, RA indication may also follow after an issue-number. The R stands for ‘Revision’ and would refer to that it has been revised since it was first published.
If it is revised a 2nd time it is indicated as RA, a 3rd time RB, then RC, and so on. audit, auditing, auditor:
The application of Scientology processes and procedures to someone by a trained auditor (listener). The goal of the auditor is to make the receiver of the auditing look at incidents and reduce the mental charge which may lay upon them. The auditor may not evaluate and has to adhere to the Auditor's code. bank:
The mental image picture collection collection of a person. It comes from computer technology where all data is in a “bank”. (HCOB 30 Apr 69) See also at ‘reactive mind’ in vocabulary. BPL:
‘Board Policy Letter’. Color flash–green ink on cream paper. These are the issues of the Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology and are separate and distinct from HCO Policy Letters written by LRH. Only LRH issues may be printed green on white for policy and only LRH issues may have the prefix HCO. These Board issues are valid as Policy. (BPL 14 Jan 74R I, New Issues).
This issue-type was established in January 1974. In October 1975 a project was started to cancel HCO PLs not written by L. Ron Hubbard and if still found being of value having them reissued as BPLs. By 1980 all BPLs had been revoked. BTB:
‘Board Technical Bulletin’. Color flash–red ink on cream paper. These are the issues of the Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology and are separate and distinct from HCO Bulletins written by LRH. Only LRH issues may be printed green on white for Technical Bulletins and only LRH issues may have the prefix HCO. These Board issues are valid as tech. (BPL 14 Jan 74R I, New Issues).
This issue-type was established in January 1974. In December 1974 a project was started to cancel HCOBs not written by L. Ron Hubbard and if still found being of value having them reissued as BTBs. By 1980 all BTBs had been revoked. C/S:
‘Case/Supervisor’. 1. That person in a Scientology Church who gives instructions regarding, and supervises the auditing of preclears. The abbreviation C/S can refer to the Case Supervisor or to the written instructions of a case supervisor depending on context. (BTB 12 Apr 72R) 2. The C/S is the case supervisor. He has to be an accomplished and properly certified auditor and a person trained additionally to supervise cases. The C/S is the auditor's “handler.” He tells the auditor what to do, corrects his tech, keeps the lines straight and keeps the auditor calm and willing and winning. The C/S is the pc's case director. His actions are done for the pc. (Dianetics Today, Bk. 3, p. 545) engram: 1. Simply moments of physical pain strong enough to throw part or all the analytical machinery out of circuit; they are antagonism to the survival of the organism or pretended sympathy to the organism’s survival. That is the entire definition. Great or little unconsciousness, physical pain, perceptic content, and contra-survival or pro-survival data. (Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, p. 68) 2. A moment when the analytical mind is shut down by physical pain, drugs or other means, and the reactive bank is open to the receipt of a recording. (Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, p. 153) 3. The word engram is an old one borrowed from biology. It means simply, “a lasting memory trace on a cell.” It may be engraved on more than the cell, but up against Dianetic processing, it is not very lasting. (Science of Survival, p. 10) 4. A recording which has the sole purpose of steering the individual through supposed but usually nonexistent dangers. (Science of Survival, p. 10) 5. A mental image picture which is a recording of a time of physical pain and unconsciousness. It must by definition have impact or injury as part of its content. (HCOB 23 Apr 69) 6. A complete recording, down to the last accurate detail, of every perception present in a moment of partial or full unconsciousness. (Scientology 0-8, p. 11) Free Zone: Free Zone generally is regarded being those groups (as in plural) that practice Scientology outside of the control of the official Church of Scientology. Various of these groups may have their personal approach about how to use the Scientology technology. See also my note here (separate window). Grade Chart or Gradation Chart:
Classification, Gradation and Awareness Chart. On the right side of the chart there are various steps called the states of release. The left-hand side of the chart describes the very important steps of training on which one gains the knowledge and abilities necessary to deliver the grades of release to another. It is a guide for the individual from the point where he first becomes dimly aware of a Scientologist or Scientology and shows him how and where he should move up in order to make it. (The Auditor 107 ASHO) HCOB:
‘Hubbard Communications Office Bulletin’. Color flash–red ink on white paper. Written by LRH only , but only so starting from January 1974. These are the technical issue line. All data for auditing and courses is contained in HCOBs. For more information go here (separate window). HCO PL:
‘Hubbard Communication Office Policy Letter’. Color flash–green ink on white paper. Written by LRH only, but only so starting from January 1974. These are the organizational and administrative issue line. For more information go here (separate window). lock: 1. An analytical moment in which the perceptics of the engram are approximated, thus restimulating the engram or bringing it into action, the present time perceptics being erroneously interpreted by the reactive mind to mean that the same condition which produced physical pain once before is now again at hand. Locks contain mainly perceptics; no physical pain and very little misemotion. (Science of Survival, p. 112) 2. A situation of mental anguish. It depends for its force on the engram to which it is appended. The lock is more or less known to the analyzer. It's a moment of severe restimulation of an engram. (Dianetics: Evolution of a Science, p. 84). LRH:
An usual abbreviation for ‘L. Ron Hubbard’. org(s):
Short for ‘organization(s)’. PAB:
‘Professional Auditors Bulletin’. Scientology periodical (monthly) send to all members to keep auditors informed about the latest discoveries concerning processing procedures and other. PDH, PDHed:
‘Pain Drugs Hypnosis’. A person is put into a trance through use of pain, drugs and hypnosis and is told things. Roughly it means you have become stimulus response without really having control of yourself anymore. preclear (pc): 1. A person who, through Scientology processing, is finding out more about himself and life. (The Phoenix Lectures, p. 20) 2. A spiritual being who is now on the road to becoming Clear, hence preclear. (HCOB 5 Apr 69) 3. One who is discovering things about himself and who is becoming clearer. (HCO PL 21 Aug 62) Qual Library:
‘Qualifications Library’: Located in Division 5 (Qualifications Division), Department 14 (Dept. of Correction). The Qual Division monitors not only technical quality and honesty but the administrative quality and honesty of the entire organization. HCO establishes the org, but Qual makes it run. reactive mind: 1. That portion of a person's mind which works on a stimulus-response basis (given a certain stimulus, it gives a certain response) which is not under his volitional control and which exerts force and the power of command over his awareness, purposes, thoughts, body and actions. It consists of GPMs, Engrams, Secondaries and Locks. (Scientology Abridged Dictionary) 2. Stored in the reactive mind are engrams, and here we find the single source of aberrations and psychosomatic ills. (Scientology 0-8, p. 11) 3. ‘bank’: a colloquial name for the reactive mind. This is what the procedures of Scientology are devoted to disposing of, for it is only a burden to an individual and he is much better off without it. (Scientology Abridged Dictionary) 4. The reactive mind acts below the level of consciousness. It is the literal stimulus-response mind. Given a certain stimulus it gives a certain response. (The Fundamentals of Thought, p. 58) Saint Hill Special Briefing Course (SHSBC):
This was a course delivered by L. Ron Hubbard at Saint Hill, England during 1961-66 and comprises of 447 lectures. Its result is a very adept auditor and thorough know-how of Scientology itself. The materials are studied in chronological sequence so as to fully understand the development of the technology. This will make you a Class VI Auditor. Snr C/S Int:
‘SeniorCase/Supervisor International’. The highest ranking technical (relating to auditing) person within the Church of Scientology after L. Ron Hubbard. SHSBC:
‘Saint Hill Special Briefing Course’. See at that entry in vocabulary.
Foreword
Originally a work of fiction going by that title written by Richard Condon and published in 1959. It is basically about the creation of a puppet (brainwashed individual) that can be activated (by showing some picture) to do what he has been programmed to, does it, and then has no recall of it. A creation thus of a so-called sleeper agent. Already in 1962 the book was made into a film with Frank Sinatra (remade in 2004 with Denzel Washington, but one should stick with the 1962 version). A similar concept was used by author Walter Wager in his book ‘Telefon’ (1975). A film version, with the same title, was released only 2 years later in 1977, directed by Don Siegel and starring Charles Bronson who had to hunt down a defector that had obtained a list with such sleeper agents and who was activating them through a simple phone call in where a short phrase was uttered. And again in the trilogy written by Robert Ludlum starting in 1980 with ‘The Bourne Identity’. During the 2000s we have Matt Damon playing that character in a series of films. It is all the same concept.
This concept however had more or less already been touched and was immortalized on celluloid by Fritz Lang in 1922 with the release of ‘Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler - Ein Bild der Zeit’, and again in 1933 with ‘Das Testament des Dr. Mabuse’ (after the books by Norbert Jacques). A super-villain or master-manipulator (a role performed by Rudolf Klein-Rogge) working with mind control through use of the will (telepathic hypnosis). Dr. Mabuse is also a master of disguise. His powers go beyond enjailment (asylum) or even the grave. The aim is to coerce people to do things you want them to do, without them realizing that they are doing that. 
Particularly noteworthy is its first episode, entitled “The Assassin”, in where Derren Brown successfully hypnotised a member of the public to ‘assassinate’ Stephen Fry (a British celebrity) while he was live performing on stage. One of the questions asked with this test was if it would be possible to hypnotise (program) a person to perform such an act even it was against the morals of the person that was set up for it. Then committing the act and have no memory of having done that afterwards. The results were interesting as the person set up for this said afterwards that his focus was on aiming at a target and not on anything else. It would thus appear that one can bypass any morals.