Leah Remini: Scientology and the Aftermath (2016-19) (2) or
Are we being properly (mis)informed or not? (Review of TV show that ran 3 seasons. Hosts: Leah Remini and Mike Rinder)
Breaking with the “Church of Scientology” does not necessarily mean breaking with “Scientology”. Scientology is an application, not an entity or a Church. People commonly reason this would be one and the same, it is not! You do not have to be in the Church or agree with them to use information. The Church has no monopoly of the information at all. This is even accounted for in US law.
Leah Remini and Mike Rinder are driving in downtown Clearwater, Fl. where the service organization Flag is located.
At 5:10 Leah Remini: “I mean, you know they can see us, right? They've got cameras beyond belief.”
One should realize they didn't had any cameras, and all these guards going around, in the late 80s when I was there. Really a lot has changed since. One should ask when and for all why that changed!
Mike Rinder's personal story
At 14:29 (s01e01):
At 6:09 Mike Rinder:
“My name is Mike Rinder. I was a Scientologist for 46 years. I was the International Spokesperson for Scientology for more than 20 years until I left in 2007.
Part of my job was to discredit and destroy critics who spoke out against the Church. If the Church believed that someone was an enemy and needed to be silenced or destroyed, it was my job, and I did it.”
If I was told to follow someone, I made it happen. If I was told to discredit someone, dig up dirt on them, get their backgrounds investigated, I made it happen. Everything from following them 24 hours a day to having people camped outside their home to people knocking on their door to being vilified on the Internet to following them wherever they travel. I was the guy.
I feel bad about the people that got hurt as a result of my actions, but I feel it's important to tell the truth of what really goes on behind the scenes, what really is happening in Scientology.”
He states “If the Church believed”? Who exactly and how was that determined? He does not explain where these instructions come from. Also there is valid criticism and unsupported critique, is there no distinction made at all?
The same thing in the second paragraph: “If I was told to ...”. Who told him? You are not supposed to get ordered around doing things. If you are assigned a responsibility, you do what this requires of you, and part of that is not following orders!
The organization is run by its policies, what policies exactly is Mike Rinder operating on? He does not tell no explain.
“HCO PL – Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter. This is a permanently valid issue of all third dynamic*, org* and administrative technology. These regardless of date or age, form the know-how in running an org or group or company. The bulk of hat* material is made up from HCO PLs. They are printed in green ink on white paper. ... Every org must have a full master and bulk files of these or it won't be able to make up hats or hat packs* for staff or know what it's doing and will fail. It took 20 years to find out how to run orgs.
HCOBs – Hubbard Communications Office Bulletins. These are the technical issue line. All data for auditing and courses is contained in HCOBs. They are red ink on white paper ... .” LRH (from HCO PL 24 Sept 70 “Issues – Types of”)
Mind that these hat packs only contained standard references available to all. Or did Mike Rinder had a special hat pack just for him? He does not tell.
At 8:31 Mike Rinder: “I grew up in Australia. My parents got into Scientology when I was about six years old. They were very early adopters of Scientology. Back then, there were governments around the world who were investigating and going after Scientology as a cult. When I was growing up, there was an inquiry that was held in Australia. The ultimate conclusion of it was the practice of Scientology is harmful. It's detrimental to society. So, therefore, it's banned. You know, I look back on it and I think it sort of was the foundation of this -- this mind-set in Scientology of it's us against the world. That was ultimately why I joined the Sea Organization when I was 18.”
He thus originates from Australia. The TV show shows newspaper headings dating to 1965. There was a commotion about Scientology in New Zealand. This lead to an ‘Enquiry Into Scientology in New Zealand’, this was published in 1969 as ‘The Commission of Inquiry Into the Hubbard Scientology Organisation in New Zealand’, carried out by Sir Guy Richardson Powles and E. V. Dumbleton. It addressed among other disconnection. One may wonder of Mike Rinder knows about this, it having been carried out and published by a neighbouring country. Also because of an enquiry into Scientology being in the news in Australia.
The year before in 1968 we had seen the “Code of Reform” being distributed, which was a questionnaire that was send out to the public. The outcome of the questionnaire, and the changes in policies it lead to, were the following year published as ‘A Report to Members of Parliament on Scientology’ (more here, separate window).
Another significant publication was the ‘Enquiry into the Practice and Effects of Scientology: Report’ that was carried out by Sir John Foster, published in London 1971. This addressed among other fair game.
Now, does Mike Rinder know anything at all about these reports and enquiries? One should expect he would know about them considering the position he had taken on in the Church. We however find that he does not say a single word about them.
At 9:30 Mike Rinder: “I joined with the idea that I was going to be trained as an executive in Scientology, to defend Scientology, to help it grow. I wanted to go and be where L. Ron Hubbard was, which, at the time, was on the Apollo, the ship that was in the Mediterranean. The Apollo is a ship that L. Ron Hubbard purchased in 1968 to be his floating headquarters for Scientology. He was under heavy attack in the United Kingdom, which is where he was living at the time, and decided that the safest place to be was at sea where you can raise your anchor and sail out into international waters and nobody has any jurisdiction over you.”
He says “to defend Scientology”. This would have been reason for him to know about these independent enquires that were undertaken as they did not aim to find fault with Scientology as such. It was objectively looked into and presented.
Mike Rinder fails to mention that one went out to the seas because of the delivery of OTIII for safety reasons. He could at least have made mention of that.
At 10:20 Mike Rinder: “I gradually sort of progressed up the ranks to various different positions, and ultimately, I became the head of the Commodore's Messenger Org. Commodore's Messengers are the people who work directly for L. Ron Hubbard, so the messengers became his personal assistants and ultimately became the people that ran Scientology. I was one of the first 8 or 10 people, and I gradually became the head of the Office of Special Affairs for the world. The Office of Special Affairs had the responsibilities of dealing with legal cases, dealing with government relations, and dealing with enemies of the Church.”
He aimed to “go and be where L. Ron Hubbard was”. He joined the Sea Org when he was 18, if he was born in 1955, that gets us to 1973. Which is interesting as L. Ron Hubbard was missing in action during 4 Dec 72-mid Sept 73, no one knew where he was. And when a person returned mid sept 73 he was shunning public but also keeps his distance from staff. Therefore the question need to be asked how much did Mike Rinder actually see of L. Ron Hubbard?
Fair Game
At 11:27:
At 11:12 Mike Rinder: “The objective of that part of the Church that deals with ‘enemies’ also, which I used to be the head of is to get rid of ‘attackers.’”
At 11:25 Leah Remini: “A policy called Fair Game.”
At 11:35: “Nobody knows the policy of Fair Game better than the one who used to enforce it, and that's Mike Rinder.”
Side-note: That sounds like a misnomer. Referred is here to a “policy”, in Scientology that means you will need to have a written HCO PL that is confirmed valid and that not has been cancelled! These are the rules of policy letters and mimeograph section of the organization. An “enforcer” is just some person that does something for some reason. If he does something and he can not show a valid policy letter or reference that supports it, then he is not following policy and he would be ultimately forbidden to carry it out.
I worked in this area at Flag from a variety of angles, and I do know the rules of the area very well indeed and they are very very strict. The description however that we get from Mike Rinder about his duties and working situation sounds like they didn't follow any of these rules at international management. He admit himself that he “was told to” do things, and then he did it. Why? You don't carry out orders if you perform well according to your post hat duties. It doesn't work that way. There is something like an illegal order. (read more about hats and orders here, separate window)
At 11:40 Mike Rinder: “Fair Game is the idea that anybody who is an enemy or a critic of Scientology may have anything done to them with the idea that the ends justifies the means. ...
Theatrical video presentation segment from the TV show (11:53-12:27)
... And there was a bunch of writings by L. Ron Hubbard that described how you get rid of an attacker. It basically says that you can do anything to a critic or an enemy of Scientology and not be subjected to any form of Scientology justice or ethics handling as a result.”
At 12:15 Leah Remini: “But the Church claims that policy has been cancelled.”
At 12:19 Mike Rinder: “It was cancelled for PR reasons. And that this does not change the treatment of SPs, Suppressive Persons.”
Now, what does that mean, that they literally were working of a cancelled policy letter, laying there right in front of them? I really wouldn't think so! Mike Rinder does not say that either. Now if he was working of that cancelled policy letter would it not have to be laying right in front of him? Mike Rinder does not say that, but he does not explain anything either!
The video segment presents two HCO PLs.
§1 - The first one is:
HCO PL 18 Oct 67 IV “Penalties for Lower Conditions” that said:
“ENEMY —
SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.” LRH
It was cancelled and replaced by HCO PL 21 Jul 68 “Penalties for Lower Conditions”:
“ENEMY - Suppressive Person order. May not be communicated with by anyone except an Ethics Officer, Master at Arms, a Hearing Officer or a Board or Committee. May be restrained or imprisoned. May not be protected by any rules or laws of the group he sought to injure as he sought to destroy or bar fair practices for others. May not be trained or processed or admitted to any org.” LRH
Already since Jul 68 the fair game practice was abandoned!
This reference is quoted in full in the earlier mentioned ‘Enquiry into the Practice and Effects of Scientology: Report’ by Sir John Foster, London 1971. Now does Mike Rinder know about this ‘Foster Report’ (as it is often referred to), does he know about it or not?!
§2 - The second HCO PL that Mike Rinder presents is HCO PL 21 Oct 68 “Cancellation of Fair Game” at the same time that he is saying that “It was cancelled for PR reasons. And that this does not change the treatment of SPs, Suppressive Persons.”. What does the HCO PL say? (full text is given):
“The practice of declaring people FAIR GAME will cease. FAIR GAME may not appear on any Ethics Order. It causes bad public relations.
This P/L* does not cancel any policy on the treatment or handling of an SP*.” LRH
It was a practical release, as apparently, staff within the church was still using the term fair game in various ways. Of course it does not have to change how you regard or deal with that “SP”. It says very clearly how you will deal with him in HCO PL 21 Jul 68 “Penalties for Lower Conditions” that, and here it comes, was ISSUED 3 MONTHS EARLIER than the one presented here. It did not require a cancellation of the practice of fair game, because IT WAS ALREADY CANCELLED!
Various people on the Internet have been making the claim that a trick was being played by the organization and/or L. Ron Hubbard. I reason instead that these people are playing a trick themselves with the claim they make that has no foundation policy letter wise at all. The problem is that most people really DO NOT HAVE A CLUE how the policy letter system works in Scientology. It is very precise! I know because I worked with it! Mike Rinder is as gullible as Leah Remini about it, neither appear to know anything about Mimeo and its procedures. Leah Remini was the uncritical believer and Mike Rinder just did what he was told to do.
Let them explain this... by 1981 this HCO PL 18 Oct 67 IV “Penalties for Lower Conditions”, was superseded by a total of 7 references, each one cancelling the previous one. And even the 1981 HCO PL was finally cancelled by HCO Admin Letter 30 Sept 91 “Cancellation of Issues”. How can you still claim the fair game policy letter that original instated it was in use? Please explain! (see list of references here, separate window).
Don't have you hopes high up, as people will still continue to make the claim!
Now, why was this fair game brought into use in the first place? For this one does need to understand what was going on since the early 60s. The organization was under heavy attack and a quick effective remedy needed to put in use. If you are threatened with extinction then what will you do? Stand at the side and just look? No, you will not. You label the persons that are a threat and isolate them there they can do no harm.
Its pre-history is addressed at link here below: (separate window)
Was it a good choice to bring in fair game? Probably not if you see that people are keeping mention of it alive till this very day. HCO PL 21 Jul 68 “Penalties for Lower Conditions” could have been issued already back then instead of HCO PL 18 Oct 67 IV “Penalties for Lower Conditions”.
Harassment and intimidation
At 12:33 Mike Rinder: “The Church says the Fair Game policy was cancelled but carries on just as it did before. The videos of the intimidation tactics, the cameras in people's faces.”
I think Mike Rinder should explain why HCO PL 18 Oct 67 IV “Penalties for Lower Conditions” is not appearing on any hat checksheet that I have seen ever! Do people and Mike Rinder for some reason think there is a secret drawer some place that gets pulled open when no one is looking? Well, did you have such a secret drawer, Mike?! Otherwise the basic rule in Scientology policy is that if a particular reference is cancelled, then that means it is forbidden to use or apply it.
Mike should answer to: “If you were ordered to go after some person or persons, then who instructed you to do exactly what?”. Now these intimidation endured from those people saying they were acting for Scientology. The same goes here, who ordered them to do exactly what? Where do the foul accusations, the relentless screaming, the unsolicited house calls, the spying and smearing come from? (see footage on TV episode) Is it because they were shown a cancelled policy letter?! “So Mike, why did you do that you did?”
Now, these silly people that harass, wildly scream and intimidate, and so on and on, do they appear intelligent or mentally stable to anyone, anyone at all? Not to me they do! Then what are they doing in Scientology? Who permitted them? As it wasn't L. Ron Hubbard. See video clip here, separate window).
At 12:48 Mike Rinder: “It's the smear sites that are on the Internet that are put up by the Church.”
I have seen these websites they have put up. They even register domains with the name of the persons they aim to harass and slander. Who does that?
At 32:46 Christie Collbran (Mike's present Wife): “The garbage man came and knocked on our door and said, ‘I feel really bad but I need to tell you that I'm being paid by a private investigator to steal your trash.’”
Wow, who does that really?
At 33:47 Leah Remini: “The Church of Scientology will hire private investigators at $10,000 a week.”
Now, this is interesting, if this is where the donations to the Church go to, then wow!
At 34:00 Leah Remini: “It's sophomoric and vitriolic. It's -- It's -- It's so many words I can't -- Like that a per-- a human being, a grown-up person claiming to be part of a Church that has all the answers and -- and are the epitome of morality. This is what they're doing.”
At 34:32 Leah Remini: “You are allowing the bully to get away with behavior that shouldn't be coming from a Church. It's not some little f***ing kid behind a computer. We're talking about a church. I don't give a f*** what they do, but they shouldn't be doing that and hurting people and trying to destroy their lives.”
Quite so. If you claim to have “all the answers” of life and beyond why do you need to squash people? What does that tell you about the people in that church?!
Now, who is thinking up all these things? The question to ask is if this is doing Scientology or not? There are things in Scientology that say that certain measures to be taken if there is imminent danger or attack. Here it is a matter of surviving basically. But going after people that have left, why would you at all bother about them?! May be because you fear others would leave as well? Why would you fear that if you have right?
Mike Rinder (2) wife and children
At 14:42 Mike Rinder: “I met my ex-wife Cathy on board the Apollo. I was 19, and then we got married in 1976 when we came here to Clearwater, and in January of 1978, our daughter Taryn was born. I didn't have that much interaction with her. She was in the nursery all day long. Cathy and I worked. We would see her for an hour a day and then at the end of the night.”
At 15:45: “Benjamin was born in 1983, and by that time, we were in LA, and he too was raised in the Sea Organization. My biggest regret and something that I can't change now is that I caused two children to be born into and raised in Scientology. I effectively lost them because I brought them into the world and raised them as Scientologists.”
Mike Rinder did not raise them, he let them be raised by other persons. He instead allowed them to be subjected to be groomed as and become sect members. This is what you always get if you isolate people there you can form them. If the educators and teachers are not of the right timber this is what you will end up with. They were programmed in a way of thinking and subjected to regimes, day in day out.
I fear that Scientology as a topic does not have much to do with that having happened.
There is quite a bit of writing found in Scientology about this the second dynamic (the family). But it will only do its part if you actually use the information. Parents have to be there for their children, if not you can lose them.
At 15:10 Leah Remini: “The core belief of Scientology is that you are a spiritual being, that you have lived many lives and you will live many lives. So your mother is really not your mother. I mean, she's your mother this lifetime, but you're going to have many mothers. So they put very little significance on interpersonal relationships between family members and the same with marriage.”
This is the strangest notion! What is she saying?! “your mother is really not your mother”? I have never seen this anywhere in the writings of Scientology. Where did she get this from?
Did Leah Remini ever read about the importance of the second dynamic? There is even a whole book written about that.
At 15:32 Mike Rinder: “Scientology teaches that you are doing something that is more important, and it is so important and so vital that nothing can distract you from it.”
Apparently Mike Rinder is saying the same nonsense. I would say that he is reflecting on his own attitude and agreements when he was in that organization. If “Scientology teaches” you that, then where is that written or taught?! Can Mike Rinder please reveal that!
Now, I have seen staff making up stuff like this just because they wanted you working longer on your post. There is a persistent push-push-push on production. The far majority of the staff at Flag while I was there, were not attending the course room. See, you have 2½ hours of enhancement time, as it was called, for each day of the week. Statistics/post production however was regarded important and thus seniors were not seeing to it to send their juniors to have their enhancement time, which they should have done.
Mike Rinder about David Miscavige
At 16:19 Mike Rinder: “David Miscavige is the Chairman of the Board of Religious Technology Center. He is the undisputed dictator of Scientology. With David Miscavige, it is way less a spiritual activity than it is a money making activity. Things at the International Base had degenerated. It was very, very Stalin-esque, and in the year 2000, things really started to go downhill, and the conditions became incredibly oppressive, and then, a couple of years later, The Hole started.”
What is interesting here is that these things date to quite late in the history of Scientology. David Miscavige came to power basically in 1982, at such a time that the Religious Technology Center (RTC) was incorporated. It meant changes, significant changes. Everything seemed to be going in a different direction. From this time on the RTC or rather David Miscavige was calling the shots.
At 17:07 Mike Rinder: “The Hole is a building that David Miscavige designated at the International Headquarters of Scientology in Hemet where myself and eventually about 100 people were locked in two double-wide trailers, sleeping on the floor, eating slop 24/7 in a building that had a security guard at the front door and bars on the windows to prevent anybody from escaping, to beat one another up until they confess to their crimes. People were put in The Hole because, for whatever reason, they displeased David Miscavige. Honestly, the reasons for that could have been anything from answering a question wrongly, not answering a question, a facial expression that was inappropriate, falling asleep after being up for a couple of days. I mean anything... whim you're in The Hole.”
I wonder here what this got to do with Scientology. It reminds more of a concentration camp of sorts.
Now, if you take in account the things that L. Ron Hubbard wrote about the characteristics of so-called suppressive persons, then would it hard to figure out that it must have been a suppressive mind that must have thought up something like that? So, then why putting up with something like that?!
At 18:10 Mike Rinder: “In addition to that, I was one of the people that was a primary target of Miscavige, physical beatings routinely. ... Over the years, anywhere from 50 to 100 times, he would assault me, attack me, hit me, punch me, kick me, whatever. I look back and I go, yeah, so why just take it? And there's a few reasons why you just take it. One is you believe that you did something wrong. Two, you're in a mind-set that you go, well, I've caused upset to Mr. Miscavige, and this is a terrible state of affairs. He shouldn't be upset. He's the leader of Scientology. -There are various things that puzzle me very much here, this regarding ‘why just take it?’.”
(1) Why would “you believe that you did something wrong”?
You are in Scientology no? Haven't you learned anything about yourself, Scientology principles and can not determine if you have done something wrong or not?
(2) Why would anyone at all care about having “caused upset to Mr. Miscavige”?
I don't get this! Scientology is a toolbox with useful information. What does that got to do with ‘leader worship’?
You have to be seriously mentally conditioned if you take all that and reason like that! Matt Pesch who appeared in the first episode realized that “It's totally mental.”. It is a mental barrier that is holding you.
Mike Rinder (3) family responses after leaving Church
At 25:03 Mike Rinder: “I had been married to my wife for 31 years when I left. I asked to be able to speak to her. I didn't have the opportunity to. She sent me a handwritten letter saying ‘F*** you. I'm filing a divorce.’”
Mike Rinder's then wife also denies the beatings. A matter of word against word I guess...:
At 31:23 Catherine Benardini: “Mr. Miscavige never laid a hand on Mike Rinder. I lived with Mike Rinder for over 35 years. I know every square inch of Mike Rinder's body. I've been with him, we've been together all our lives.”
At 25:25 Mike Rinder: “My children disconnected from me. I understood why they did it. I understood that they really had no choice. They know no life outside of Scientology, and I feel a responsibility for having created that circumstance.”
“They know no life outside of Scientology” says it all almost.
At 1:20 Taryn Kelly (Mike Rinder's Daughter): (Leah Remini reading from letter)
“I'm utterly mortified and disgusted to see what you've been doing, attempting to stop Scientology, something that helps so many people.”
“You're not worried about me. You don't care about me or Benjamin or mom or anyone. You hate other people and you hate us, too, and that couldn't be clearer. You don't respect anything I believe, and luckily, I didn't turn out like you.”
“I help people and feel good when I do. I'm a caring person, a Scientologist. You cannot deal with the truth and you negate it due to your own crimes, crimes of not doing your job and instead being lazy and incompetent. It was embarrassing. It was so embarrassing being your daughter.”
At 30:31 Taryn Kelly (from video footage): “When I was in hospital, when I was getting married, when I was needing help on any part of my life in any situation, he was never there.”
Mike Rinder's response:
At 30:42: “Now my daughter will say, oh, I was always lazy and she was embarrassed to be my daughter. Well, it's funny that never came up when I was in the Church.”
It is pretty common to write something like that, they all sound the same. Now, how did the daughter got into Scientology, wasn't it through her father? Without that, she may have stood on the other side of the fence today. Mike Rinder was in Scientology for almost half a century (46 years), doesn't that put any weight into the scale either? There is no rationality or analysis. It is interesting and very frightening to see how a mind can be molded.
You isolate, you set up mental fences, you forbid television. You repeat a same story/scenario all the time. You keep them occupied 24/7. Now, who isolated a whole country in that 1930s, what effect did it have on its youngsters?
Mike Rinder and his brother:
At 30:53 Mike Rinder: “My own brother would say that I did anything if the Church tells him, ‘Oh, we know that Mike did X, Y and Z.’ Even though I grew up with him and I spent my entire life with him and he knows that that's not true, because the Church now tells him that that's the case, he will now say that.”
Andrew Rinder (Mike's brother). At 31:12:
“Ultimately, he is who he is and that is someone who is quite evil.”
Who says something like that? And why? Mike Rinder is “quite evil” because he tries to be honest and made a decision that is not liked?
Response from Mike Rinder:
At 31:35: “They believe wholeheartedly that their eternity depends upon the well-being of Scientology, that if they don't follow the party line, they are forsaking their only hope at eternal spiritual salvation.
And then, at a very much more pragmatic level, they will have nowhere to live, no one feeding them. They won't have someone to send them to the doctor. They won't have anything because they rely on the Church to provide all of that for them.”
This is an indeed very accurate description of the situation! What are they gonna do if they have to leave the Church?!
The question is how they reason if they think there is “hope at eternal spiritual salvation” that is if you tell lies! It goes wholly against any auditing principle of Scientology. Forget your hopes if you do like that.
They are also ignoring that Mike Rinder has been in Scientology for 46 years!!! But no, they say that he, suddenly, is “quite evil” and things. Don't they expose themselves by their behaviour and the things that they say!
Leah Remini and some of her ideas...
At 12:57 Leah Remini: “The Church has definitely set up that the evil is anyone who opposes Scientology. If you are attacking Scientology or criticizing Scientology, you are evil, period. No grey area.”
One should discriminate here. One should define which is which. Are you criticizing Scientology or are you exposing unacceptable behaviour of its staff?
At 13:11 Mike Rinder: “And nobody understands what goes on better than me because I was in that position of being the one that was responding on behalf of the Church.”
Does that mean “on behalf of the Church” or on “behalf of” Scientology as a topic?
At 28:04 Leah Remini: “Parishioners are taught very early on, you do not question the Church of Scientology. Questioning anything you've read about the Church of Scientology means you are an enemy. You are -- You are taking on now the colors of an enemy to the Church.”
This is just not true. I know many staff that expressed disagreements with how the Church may behave/has behaved in various situations. It was shared privately, not publicly, just from person to person or small groups where opinions were given about certain events. Mind though that it was not the topic of Scientology itself that was questioned here!
You were only then considered an enemy if you went outside of the channels and communication lines of the Church!
At 32:30 Leah Remini: “I heard about Fair Game while I was in the church, then I was told that it -- that that policy didn't exist anymore. And then they showed me the policy, that it was cancelled. So that's enough to squash any fears that you have that Fair Game is in existence.”
Fair Game among staff was sometimes talked about, but it was always spoken about in a past tense, something that once was.
Apparently, according to what Leah Remini says elsewhere, she believes today it was not cancelled. Then.. how does she think the Church applies it? Do they pull this cancelled policy letter out of some secret drawer? She does not address that.
At 43:18 Leah Remini: “Nobody deserves to have their family torn apart because of a belief system.”
Scientology is not a belief-system, it is an application only! But people/followers will always turn it into calling something a belief. That which comes closest to that is it's Creed, but that is nothing more than some general concepts. See here, pop-up window.
The irony is that Scientology as a topic is not even advocating that. On the other hand if you are rewriting/adding policies like they did since 1982 (see overview here, separate window), and start to be entirely inflexible about that, then it can get very bad indeed. Because people don't analyze, they follow!
At 43:36 Leah Remini: “This is abusing people spiritually and robbing people of their lives. Fair Game is something that I'm passionate about exposing. This is not some little thing.”
Then expose it as not doing Scientology. Use it as a weapon against those that harass. Don't go along with playing their game! The only way you are going to have some effect, over time, is if you reach the people within the organization. The way to do that is holding up their own policies right in their face.
Following the party line
It is sad really as I experience that those that have been wronged by the Church generally won't listen to me. Each time when I have spoken out on platforms and places I have been attacked, accused and got kicked out of there. You thus follow their party line or you're gone. Isn't ironic that the people that once followed blindly the partly line within the Church, that the bulk of them today still follow a party line, but a different one! they changed sides, but behave and reason in the same way! Let this sink in for a moment!
Anyhow, they just don't want to hear what I have to say. The only thing they want to hear is how bad all of Scientology is, which is like saying to themselves how naïve they must have been to have stayed on for so long a time! Ah well.. man does as man does. And man needs something to blame... Agree with me or else! Just as they accuse the Church of doing.
A thorough study of the history of Fair Game in the Church can be consulted at link here below: (separate window)
[Wiki: Remini describes the heavy financial and emotional price she and other current/former Scientologists have paid to move along “The Bridge to Total Freedom.”]
Mary Khan's story (Incl. Redoing stuff, and paying for it, on command (2); Do as you're told, or else...; New OT VIII eligibility; Do as you're told, or else... (2) sec checking)
Scientology books (claimed requirements)
At 5:49:
At 4:28 Leah Remini: “All right, so the first thing I want to show you is, you know, all my books. Scientologists are required to buy every book ever written by L. Ron Hubbard.”
Excuse me? I never did that! Of course the Bookstore Officer tried to have you buy stuff, it's his job, but I only picked that I wanted and that was the end of that. I know nothing about any policy that required one to do that. It is simply not true. It was also tried to have you buy the books needed for your course, but these are available to you for use in the course room.
It is duly noted we don't see any older materials and editions of the materials in her ‘library’. These contain quite a bit of materials written by L. Ron Hubbard that are not found in the latest materials that she has.
At 5:02 Leah Remini: “So, this is not the whole library, but just so you understand that every Scientologist is required to read every page and listen to every lecture that L. Ron Hubbard ever wrote.”
Excuse me?Where does it say “is required to read ...”?! Also this is just not true.
“So, this is not the whole library”, when earlier she said “Scientologists are required to buy every book ever written by L. Ron Hubbard.”. Then where does she keep them, does she actually have them?
I didn't know that L. Ron Hubbard “wrote” “every lecture”? She obviously misspoke, but it was not corrected on the TV show.
At 5:22 Leah Remini: “Then we're being told that, you know, libraries are requesting L. Ron Hubbard's works. Then you buy packages of these things. To donate to libraries.”
Libraries were not“requesting L. Ron Hubbard's works” that I know of!
There were these efforts to persuade parishioners to donate money for that purpose. I never gave any. Apparently you can tell Leah Remini anything, she believes it, and she pays.
At 5:34 Leah Remini: “So, these are the basic books. There's like 12 of them. And so, you're required to buy the basic books and read them.”
No, you are not “required” to do that!
I have no idea how she comes up with 12? As of 2007 there were 18 basic books, prior to that there were 23 books. See list here (pop-up window).
At 5:41 Leah Remini: “Then they go, ‘Hey, we found mistakes in these books.’ So you have to buy a new set. Hmm.”
Excuse me, “have to buy”? I never did that. I said to them that it is like saying that the books that came out while L. Ron Hubbard was still around and alive were no good. With my background in old books I went instead for original early editions.
The claimed “mistakes” were minor issues, like comma's out of place. Claims were made for example about ‘Science of Survival’ for excessive use of comma's. Nonetheless there does exist a limited edition manuscript version of the book carrying handwritten side notes from L. Ron Hubbard (this was released before the official book). By inspection it appeared they were the same as the original published book from 1951. Are we going to take the, by others corrected version, or the original version that were passed by L. Ron Hubbard?
These previous versions were also up for shredding. They did that in the organizations around the globe, and parishioners were advised to get rid of them if they had them at home. Thus shredding books that were okay when L. Ron Hubbard was alive. Reflect on that! In Clearwater, Florida, at Flag, they went even into parishioner's houses when they were not at home and took away the now considered unacceptededitions of the books. Wow!
At 6:17 she is holding the SP-PTS course pack in her hands:
At 6:06: “... this would be like a typical course. Like --”
“Okay, so this would be a required course. It's like $650.”
Not “required” as such, but it is promoted much. The price sounds very steep. Is this Celebrity Center prices as these would be higher than at say a local Cl IV Scientology organization.
At 6:20: “What's required of you now?
So, this is, uh, two weeks, full-time. Full-time means 9:00 in the morning till 10:00 at night, every day, seven days a week.”
There are 4 study periods for each day in the week in the course room of each 2½ hours.
At 6:29 Alex Weresow (producer of the TV show): “What if you have a job?”
At 6:31 Leah Remini: “You work it out.”
This is interesting as Alex is taking it as if it only can be done full time. Leah does not correct him! No, she feeds it! I have here a pack of that course and it says on the first page of the check sheet:
“LENGTH OF COURSE:
10 days full time
3 weeks part time”
Thus you can do it part time if you choose so. Realize as well these are rough indications. You go through the materials yourself and it takes the time it takes, usually longer. Here the part time option literally would amount to 2 study periods (5 hours for each day during 3 weeks. The absolute minimum requirement for a course that I got agreed to was 3 study periods (7½ hours) a week. Many students studied in the weekends making for 8 study periods (20 hours) till some course was completed. It is flexible and adjustable to the personal situation of the student.
So, what it Leah Remini trying to pull here?! Does she not even know such basic things after 35 years? She is standing there on the TV show with the check sheet in her hands! It is deliberate misinformation!
At 6:24:
Right after she continues feeding that concept:
At 6:32: “That's the thing in Scientology is that I don't think people get. When you're in Scientology, you are doing this every day. If you're not doing this, you're getting counseling every day, 2½ hours a day minimum.”
Where is she getting this from? That is unbeknownst to me!
Directly following that we get the cream on the cake with a dramatic video clip with haunting sounds (at 6:49-6:59):
It is utter bullocks, what is she pulling here? The policy letter quoted is unrelated to this as well.
At 7:00 Leah Remini: “There is no other religion that I know of that requires 2½ hours of your day, a quarter of a million dollars minimum, and at least 40 years of your life.”
I don't even know this from Scientology! Per the guidelines as found in policy letters from the earlier days she got it three times wrong. The hours are wrong, the price is wrong, and the years are wrong. this is all addressed on this website and also in this analysis of the TV show.
The hours you spend are on your own discretion. The price you can read about in next section following here under. The years could be roughly 6-7 years for most people everything accounted for (training/auditing) pending how much time you spend on a daily basis. It could be less time.
Cost for services
At 7:14 Alex Weresow: “And over the course of -- of your Scientology career, how much did you spend?”
At 7:19 Leah Remini: “Total? Millions.”
At 7:22 Alex Weresow: “And how much does the average parishioner pay, say, to get to the level that -- that you went to?”
At 7:28 Leah Remini: “Any parishioner, no matter how much money they make, are gonna spend, at the very least, a quarter of a million dollars.”
In 1996 someone posted, on a news group on the Internet (ARS), a comparison of pricings for the Upper Bridge (OT levels and things): 1974 got you to $5,625 - 1996 got you to $151,250.
The Lower Bridge (Dianetics and Grades) could be done rather inexpensively with co-auditing. Here you have two students doing the auditing courses after they audit each other (co-auditing).
The goal was:
“(a)Cheap, broad services for everyone.
(b)Personal services at a much higher (but cheaper than any other field) price.” LRH (from HCO PL 23 Sept 64 “Policies: Dissemination
and Programs”)
Then we got to 1976 and everything changed as it was regulated that each month the prices would go up 2½-5% because of claimed “inflation”. By the early 80's prices were skyrocketing and got sort of stabilized. Violating now in effect the original rule! The policy letter is still valid this day that I know.
A detailed study about all of these matters touched here above can be consulted at link here below: (separate window)
At 7:34: “Every parishioner of the Church of Scientology is paying an enormous amount of money to get better, to gain spiritual awareness. It is just what is the culture of Scientology, which is pay.”
Well, there is something like a “Free Scientology Center” (see HCO PL 17 May 65 III):
“Effective when ordered by the HCO Secretary in each org, depending on when the org is ready for it. ...
Organize a Free Scientology Center in your Dept of Processing. This is not the HGC*. It is the student clinic. It is a section of the Dept of Processing
It is open evenings and weekends. It is run by students under org guidance.
No fee may be charged.” LRH
I have to admit that I haven't seen this established in the Church. But then L. Ron Hubbard endorsed it, should you then not establish it? The policy letter is valid till this day that I know.
The Bridge
At 8:14-17:
Upper Bridge
Lower Bridge
Click to expand
Take note that this is the Bridge that is in use in the Church since 1980. It is the only one that Leah Remini knows about.
At 8:00 Mike Rinder: “The Bridge to Total Freedom, is the series of steps that were laid out by L. Ron Hubbard that every Scientologist must follow in order to attain the ultimate in spiritual enlightenment and in spiritual freedom.”
At 8:19 Leah Remini: “This is what we would call The Bridge, right? In Scientology, all you are doing is doing these steps to go all the way up this Bridge as a spiritual being.”
At 8:32 Leah Remini: “You know all those courses they talk about are $35 and -- they're just not even -- they're like throwaway courses -- just to get you indoctrinated into some of the terms.”
Her choice of words is interesting, “indoctrinated”? So, reading materials, clearing up words you do not understand that you clear up with a common dictionary, that somehow is ‘indoctrination’? Not sure what she means with “terms”, what ‘terms’?, does she mean terminology? If that is the case. Would that not apply to any specified area of a topic, when you study for becoming a doctor or something. Does that mean that all doctors are being ‘indoctrinated’?
At 9:07 Leah Remini: “So, by the top of this Bridge, Alex, you should be able to do [bleep] with your mind. Move things. You're able to cure cancer in yourself. You're cause over life.”
Wow, this is frequently hinted at by registrars of the organization (that sell you services). “cause over life” is one thing, it is a wholly other thing to pull off telekinesis or cure cancer. These are just not a named part of the deal. There are however End Phenomena (EPs) listed at this Bridge which are provided to give an indication that the person has achieved that goal of some level or process, which is what they are for. It is this the person attests to. That's all. The original and complete EPs you find on the Dec 70 Grade Chart, see here (separate window). They are much more detailed and extensive than on the Bridge that the Church uses since 1980.
At 9:20 Alex Weresow: “Okay, so Grade II -- "Relief from the hostilities and sufferings of life." You both have reached Grade II?”
At 9:28 Leah and Mike: “Yes.”
At 9:30 Alex Weresow: “Do you feel like you have relief from the hostilities and sufferings of life?”
At 9:33 Leah and Mike: “No.”
It is a release point in a case of a person at the moment of finishing the process and attesting for it. The immediate hostilities and sufferings of the person are addressed in the processing. This new outlook on life should stay at least for a while. It means you are now ready to do Grade III. This till you commence on Grade VI-VII where the source of this is addressed and will be erased. This step however is virtually abandoned by the present Church, this since 1978.
Both Leah and Mike say,“No.”. Then did either Leah and/or Mike ever do Grade VI-VII? Ask them!
There is also the matter of doing this Bridge in the right sequence, and that means you don't start with the Grades. No, you start with Dianetics. Now, are you expecting to achieve end phenomenas of processes when not having done Dianetics first? I address this here (separate window). Did Leah and Mike do the right sequence? Ask them what exactly they did!
Many things are basic. You would at least expect that a person respectively having been in Scientology 35 and 40 years, that is Leah and Mike, that they have understood something, but this may be too much to ask...
At 9:43 Leah Remini: “Here, let's say -- ‘Ability to communicate freely with anyone.’ I have not been able to do that. ‘Ability to recognize the source of problems and make them vanish’ -- You're still here [ironically to her producer Alex].”
She still can't “communicate freely with anyone”. I guess the keyword would be “freely” then. Why? She is though more than just outspoken on the TV show, and also very frequently interrupts people with her unasked for commentaries when they are speaking. Is that all compulsory then?
E-meter: Auditing versus sec checking
At 10:19 from ‘Scientology promotional video’: “Auditing is the process of asking specifically worded questions designed to help you find and handle areas of distress. This is done with an auditor, meaning "one who listens." An auditor does not offer solutions or advice. They are trained to listen and to help you locate those experiences that need to be addressed.”
At 10:47:
At 10:41 Leah Remini: “Every Scientologist is taught very early on, this thing doesn't lie.”
That is essentially so, but it also will require an auditor that interprets and sets it up correctly.
At 10:56 Mike Rinder: “Auditing can become very stressful and very draining because you're being asked that you come up with things that satisfy whatever it is that the person on the other side of that E-meter believes you need to come up with. The difference between auditing and sec checking is, auditing, in theory, is those steps that you take toward attaining spiritual enlightenment. Sec checking is the action the organization takes to gather information about you or what is going on.”
One should as well distinguish sec checking from confessionals. Sec checking will try to locate areas of transgressions the person may have against a group or its morals. Confessionals is entirely for the benefit of the person. There are peculiarities of the two and can be confused and therefore even misused. I address this in brief here (separate window).
At 11:51 Mike Rinder: “And the theory is that the E-meter will tell, really, how bad you are.”
Really, and that's all what the E-meter is for? Where does he get that “theory” from? Who gave that definition? Then where is the source for that claim, “how bad you are”? Would be interesting to have Mike explain!
The E-meter only registers mental charge or attention, it does not register bad or good!
At 11:59 Leah Remini: “They have security checking for kids from the age 6 to 12. And what that does is it sets up the Church as the parent.”
Indeed, it also shows a copy of the HCOB on the TV show, HCOB 21 Sept 61“Security Check Children”. Certain discoveries had been made doing a bad deed, then withholding it and use it afterwards as a motivator to repeat the bad deed as long as it was undisclosed. This is essentially the whole principle behind that type of auditing. A variety of forms were put together during 1960-61 in order to establish how it could unburden the person and also free him from this mechanism. This HCOB about children was one of these forms that had been written up.
Leah Remini comes with the marvelous evaluation that “it sets up the Church as the parent”. How exactly? I don't actually know it being in use.
By 1968 it was concluded that for security reason they served no purpose and it was cancelled for finding transgressions one may had against the group. And thus HCO PL 26 Aug 68 “Security Checks Abolished” was issued. However the confessionals that had benefit for the individual were kept in use.
The Catholic Church also has this procedure about confessing to your priest in order to unburden the confessor. Here the priest may not reveal any of that he may have heard. This is the same as it was setup in Scientology, but so during 1982-85 various policies had been devised to make this line rather thin. Ever since sec checking has become a standard structure within the Church that is not particular attractive or just. Needless to say it has been terribly misused.
A detailed chronology about all the above can be consulted at link here below: (separate window)
At 12:10 Mike Rinder: “You may be paying someone $800 an hour to sit and interrogate you.
And I'm -- I'm sitting here, trying to explain to this person something that they're not believing me. They're not -- They -- They don't believe that I'm actually telling the truth. And if you keep doing that to someone, you get them to the point where they will basically say anything in order to put an end to it.”
You thus “interrogate” a public taking services, and then that public will have to pay the bill also? If confessional auditing (read sec checking) is not aimed for case gain of the person (which the public signed up for to receive), someone else will have to bear the cost for interrogation stuff, obviously!
Wow, while receiving an auditing session you will be “trying to explain to this person something that they're not believing” you? All that would really be a blatant violation of the Auditor's Code to which each auditor has to abide to, of which the first one reads:
“1.
I promise not to evaluate for the preclear or tell him what he should think about his case in session.” LRH (consult all of them here, pop-up window)
(from HCO PL 14 Oct 68 “The Auditor's Code, AD18”)
The problem is that a person undergoing such auditing as Mike Rinder describes will get very very upset, this for obvious reasons. The auditor will not get the person through a floating needle* with the examiner*. After each audition session the person has to attest with this examiner who only lets you grab the cans, ask a few questions, and get a floating needle, means all is well with the person. Next is that the C/S* (Case Supervisor) will see where the auditor has gone wrong and will have to send him for correction of his auditing routines (cramming*).
Now, doesn't Mike Rinder know about these things? Is he really saying that he says? What he says is plain silly. It is not standard Scientology procedures at any length!
Redoing stuff, and paying for it, on command
At 13:16 Leah Remini: “The Church of Scientology is a business, and it's a financial burden to most people. Once you get to Grade I, they'll say, ‘We messed up your Grade 0,’ or ‘A 'new' paper was found that was taken out of Grade 0, and we need to redo your Grade 0 at your cost.’ Right?”
This is something the Church, according to people telling, started to pull since so about early 2,000s. I recall personally instances in where it was told at Church events that they redid something and that it was recommended that you redo this or that. I don't recall it as a must, but surely considerable persuasion was put into it. In any case it should be obvious that if the church for some reason made a mistake or missed something, that the Church ultimately is responsible for that. That follows is that the Church has to account for and reimburse for the paying public without any extra cost for that public. If you buy a book and the cover is separating from the rest of the book, you will get it replaced from the printer/published for a new copy at no cost. The Church can't force a public to pay again for the same thing.
There is the matter of the “conditions of exchange”. Here it would amount to option 2 “partial exchange”, see here (separate window).
Per this it doesn't appear the Church does provide for even a “fair exchange”. Not a very fine application of their own policies, would it not?
Consider also that the technology was announced done by 1970. So by 2000 it was all set up and ready to go for 30 years already. This just doesn't allow for any error!
“So technical progress has been:
CLASS VIII - 1968.
COMPLETE DIANETICS - 1969.
COMPLETE SCIENTOLOGY - 1970.
This is quite an achievement.” LRH (from ‘LRH ED 117 Int’, 26 Aug 70 “Current Cases”)
Leah Remini and her donations (Incl. IAS)
At 13:50 Leah Remini: “You have to buy books, you have to buy CDs. You have to donate to the various social-betterment organizations of the Church of Scientology.”
All rubbish, it is promoted, sure, there are so many things I did not buy. I also never donated anything to “various social-betterment organizations” and such things. I simply said, “No!” Did you never say no, Leah?? Why is that?
At 13:58 Leah Remini: “You also have to become a member of the International Association of Scientologists. So, there's a membership fee on top of that.”
No, you surely don't “have to”, but if you get 20% discounts on services and materials why would you not? Why does Leah Remini not tell these things? The actual membership fee is insignificant compared to what she herself donated to this IAS (read on below). And she only talks about some membership fee?
An annual membership originally cost you $300, a lifetime $2,000 (prices have gone up a bit now, but not much). The thing is that IAS events were repeatedly called for and you were asked to “donate” more and more money to get some higher IAS status (Crusader, Patron and so on). I personally never bothered about that.
The Church called the cost for services and materials as donations. I often said that these were no donations. These were the cost for a service rendered. If you don't pay that price you will not get the service. A donation is something you give for charity. It always said on receipts from the Church “Donation for ...”, which I figured was wrong.
At 14:06 Leah Remini: “All this adds up to hundreds of thousands of dollars -- uh, hundreds of thousands of dollars people don't have, but -- but they find it. They will take out, uh, credit cards, loans. They will mortgage their home. They will take money out of a kid's college fund, your 401(k). However you have to get the money, you do it.”
‘Platinum Meritorious’
It is unfortunate but it is true. People have done these things. It is often promoted by the person selling you services in the Church (the Body Registrar) that if you do this, you will become more able, and you then can also create more money. See, you will earn more than those loans cost you, so the sales talk often goes. People were even persuaded to take loans to donate to IAS. I recall a staff at a local org doing that, he had to even take on an extra job. He really didn't look very happy. I recall some people even commending him for the ‘good deed’. It wasn't for long that he disappeared from the lines altogether.
At 5:06 on this episode of the TV show when Leah Remini was showing her ‘library’ this IAS award was seen standing on one of the shelves. She was awarded this after donating $2.5 million, that is for no service in return. Now, did she take loans for that? Or did she use the money that she earned from her Hollywood career? Once she stated her success was due to Scientology. Was it? I guess that it indeed will cost you “hundreds of thousands of dollars” thataway...
Mary Khan's story (Incl. Redoing stuff, and paying for it, on command (2); Do as you're told, or else...; New OT VIII eligibility; Do as you're told, or else... (2) sec checking)
At 16:21: “My name is Mary Kahn. I was a Scientologist for 40 years. And I was OT VIII, so that's as high as you can go.”
The original OT VIII was never actually released, then it was cancelled and replaced with something else calling it New OT VIII. This was released 7 Jun 88. Strangely enough, on a screen dump on the episode at 19:58 it reads “In 1987, Mary reached the highest level of Scientology, OT VIII.” Which of course is incorrect!
At 20:03:
An Auditor Class VI is a very well trained auditor that makes for pretty much a full-fledged auditor. You would have studied some 460 lectures, further written materials, done drilling and so on.
Redoing stuff, and paying for it, on command (2)
At 20:38 Leah Remini: “You had already gone up The Bridge, but then you had to redo everything at a certain point.”
At 20:42 Mary Kahn: “Yeah.”
At 20:44 Leah Remini: “At your expense.”
At 20:45 May Kahn: “Yes.”
If she got along with that, and she apparently did, paying 100,000s, then why would you do such a thing? On this Bridge chart there is indicated an end phenomena for each process. If you have achieved that and you attested for that then that means you are done. Why would you even consider doing it once more?!
This is very very surprising for a Class VI Auditor to be doing! She would have studied all the auditing materials in chronological order. She should know better if you had done that.
At 20:47 Leah Remini: “Each course costs money, but the other thing is, they constantly invent new things. You will get to a certain place in Scientology that maybe took you 10, 20 years to get to. And then, all of a sudden, they say, “Yeah, that was done wrong,” or they found new technology that was hidden, so “We have to go back -- go back down and do it.” And so you have to -- and then you have to pay for that again. So it's -- it's never-ending.”
Leah Remini repeats this once more on this episode!
Well, just decline on that! Don't do it. No one can force you. There is simply no “new technology that was hidden”! You can always find ways to do something that improves, but this has no effect on the Bridge that you already have completed. Just say, “No.”.
At 21:36 Mike Rinder: “Under David Miscavige, there has been a concerted effort to repackage all of the writings and materials of L. Ron Hubbard.”
True, but just don't fall for it. The old books are just fine. See, if you are criticizing the books and materials that came out when L. Ron Hubbard was around, you in effect are criticizing L. Ron Hubbard. They in effect then claim, “He made mistakes, and we are correcting him!”. I thought that was a no-no-no?! Think that through please.
Do as you're told, or else...
At 22:11 Mary Khan: “I had a Sea Org member tell me one day -- ... ‘Well, Mary, by the way, I meant to tell you, I took $1,500 off your credit card.’ ...
I looked at him, and I went, ‘Well, out here in the real world that's called a felony.’ And I said, "You're paying me back today."
And when I said, ‘Why did you do that?’ He said, ‘I had no care or concern about the future consequences. I was just trying to solve right now.’”
At 22:40 Leah Remini: “His quota. The target that he was given.”
In the Church you are keeping these statistics for post-production, and the goal is to keep the trend going upwards. There is put a lot of pressure on that by seniors. This explains the behaviour of this staff member that Mary Khan tells here above.
It is interesting that Mary reveals this, as it shows how scared quite a few of the staff are, particular when it comes to Sea Org. I recognize the thought pattern that I have observed as well.
At 22:44 Mary Khan: “This is very oppressive, and I think it's illegal, but any Scientologist really doesn't have a leg to stand on.”
Wow, a Scientologist has really a lot of legs to stand on, it just requires knowledge and for all courage! See, you just say, “No, I am not gonna do that.”. There are also policy letters that say that if an offense against the law of a country has been committed, that it gives you the right, and the duty, to report to the police. That is if you can not get this corrected within the Church. It is this simple! And of course you immediately withdraw the permission that they can draw money from some credit card.
I have written down some of my experiences when I said “No!”. See here (separate window).
At 23:01 Leah Remini: “Mary, you're dealing with people who don't realize that they were victims.
Scientology has brainwashed us all into thinking we're responsible for the condition that we're in.”
At 23:26 Leah Remini: “At a certain point, we have to realize, we were victims of a cult, you know, which is why we believed, you know, everything that -- that we're told.”
“brainwashed”? Éh no, it is a fundamental truth of life itself. Of course you are responsible for a condition you are in, but you have to take the necessary actions to become cause and then reverse and correct it. You are certainly not a “victim” as Leah Remini tries to tell. You are only then a “victim” if you don't act! So, act!
At 23:48 Mary Khan: “Now, I'm just toeing the line because I don't want to lose my family. The disconnection thing, it's like it's -- it's there hovering above you all the time. It's like an automatic understanding of, if you buck the system, this is where it will go.”
If a group or an organization pulls stunts like that, then it is not something to have, so leave or correct!! As they are doing wrong...
I addressed ‘disconnection’ already in season 1/episode 1.
Can't do anything other then wonder, why does a trained Class VI Auditor that also had run the whole Bridge, why does this Mary Khan not take a cause position? Did she, for some reason, not have an open communication with her son?
New OT VIII eligibility
Mary Khan was now called to go to this ship The Freewinds, to do her final steps on her Bridge, which is New OT VIII.
At 25:50 Mary Khan: “I did not want to go to the ship at all. I had such a foreboding about it, but I felt like I didn't have a choice.”
At 25:58 Mike Rinder: “You are a captive audience on board a ship, so there are people that want to extract money from you, and they have you, and there's no hiding.”
At 26:21 Mary Khan: “My beef is the pressure with trying to get money out of people. It was relentless, and the only reason I persevered was to try to save my family.”
At 26:36:
I recall this ‘eligibility’ as a thing of the day at Flag at the time of the Maiden Voyage. Back then (late 80s) I was positioned at the Freewinds Relay Office (FRO), the org that dealt with the applications and was sending people to the ship to do their New OT VIII. There was a section in FSO that was retrieving all Ethics folders, reports written about the person, and so on. A folder summary was compiled and if needed the person was to undergo a certain handling, which could in some cases very well have been confessional/sec check auditing. The focus, at least at that time, was however much more on that demands were placed because the person only had paid his/her way on the Bridge, but had done little to nothing to help others. They were urged to become active otherwise they were not eligible to do their New OT VIII. There were people that applied that had empty Ethics folders and no recorded activity. Their application then was denied.
This Mary Khan applied at the time it was released, she was probably on the Maiden Voyage in 1988.
Do as you're told, or else... (2) sec checking
At 26:40 Mike Rinder: “If you want to continue in Scientology, you do what the organization tells you. If the organization says, ‘You're in trouble. We have reports about you. We, uh, believe that you're engaged in X, Y, and Z bad stuff,’ then ‘We are going to tell you that you must get a sec check in order to prove that you are clean and that you are eligible to continue your progress up The Bridge.’”
Now, think about this for a moment. If you are treated in such manners, do you think they are able to deliver you freedom?
One should respond with, that they show these reports, as you have a right to get a copy of each and every one of them according to policy letters. No one can order a sec check on you on such superficial grounds. They have to show, in fact, you would have interfered negatively with other public on the lines of Scientology.
You can also practice Scientology outside of that Church. This is a simple reality! the Church does not own any monopoly at all, although they like to believe (and promote) as if they have.
At 27:11 Leah Remini: “If you're being security checked, it's because they think you've done something and you're hiding something. And so they will not let you out of that room until you give it up.”
Unfortunately this is true. I was myself once, at Flag, subjected to tailor-made sec checks, but they could not find anything on me. Something that the person in Ethics HCO, who ordered them, really did not like. She tried to find something to nail me, fortunately the auditor strictly followed the Auditor's Code. The person who ordered the sec checking insisted they needed to find something, but she was corrected by the HGC (arranges auditing), that made clear there was nothing to find after which they concluded the auditing.
I have no real reality on “they will not let you out of that room until ...”. I can only conclude that in such cases the Auditor's Code was very seriously violated.
At 27:27 Mike Rinder: “There are numerous examples of people who, in sec checks, have resorted ultimately to just making stuff up. It's a very stressful thing to -- to walk down the path of, ‘Now I'm going to start lying just to get out of the room.’”
Now, why-why-why would you do that? I never made anything up, nor was I ever inclined to! Stand up and leave the damn room if something is off!
Of course you can make up stuff, without you really realizing it yourself. Because if you repeat the same questions, seeking for particular things, you can get what in auditing is called an overrun. Here the person being audited is trying to supply an answer when there isn't. An alert auditor should stop the auditing session and turn it over to the C/S that will review the case.
At 29:42 Mary Khan: “I would never be processed again. Because, as soon as you pick up the cans, the guy on the other side is the one in control, and I was never gonna give them control of me again.”
The auditor, assuming he follows the Auditor's Code, is only in control of the processing, or rather the reactive mind*. He is not in control of the person he is auditing!
Now, this Mary Khan, she would be a trained Class VI Auditor and she has not understood these things?
At 30:40 Leah Remini: “The thing in Scientology is that any information you receive is from your church. You are not allowed to be critical of the organization.”
This is just plain rubbish! I did that so many times, and got away with it as well!
At 30:50 Mary Khan: “By this point, I knew that things were wrong in the Church. Having that thought was dangerous. Somehow, that thought percolated up and came out of my mouth. And it was honestly like, ‘Oh, my God.’ It was -- my mind was free. Right. And because of that, there was something about, ‘Wow, I'm gonna find out, what is going on?’”
Surely took her a very very very long time! All those years (1973-2013, 40 years), trained as Class VI Auditor, done the whole Bridge, and finally, somehow, she can see? What hás she been doing all these years? It is surreal to me.
At 32:03 Leah Remini: “When you're in the Church of Scientology, there are certain rules you do not break. One of those rules are not to be critical of the Church. The word ‘critical’ means ‘enemy.’”
Here she goes again. It is just rubbish. I broke her rule all the time. You can be critical, you can write reports. You become only then become an “enemy” if you go public with your critique. Why does Leah Remini persist with this?
Someone in HCO FSO Ethics (Chf Staff MAA) tried to frame my person. I reported the whole thing (I bypassed the local internal communication lines and send it directly to international management), I resisted évery step of the way. They pulled tailor made sec-checks, intimidation tactics, and even disconnection. It all backfired and was thwarted. In the end she was pulled off post and was literally kicked out of the Church (declared). I had the ED Int confirming me this later in time. Use the tools that are available to you, there are lots and lots of them, PLEASE!!!!
This Mary Khan and her husband act on the same rubbish.
At 32:35 Leah Remini: “Mary took the risk of telling her husband that she was having doubts about Scientology. The next time he went into the Church, which was probably the next day, he revealed that his wife was having doubts. Then what happens is, the Church starts to go to work on Mary by pulling her in for interrogations at her expense, start threatening her with her family disconnecting from her and her husband disconnecting from her, and it almost worked.”
Because of this Mary's husband goes like:
At 32:59 “There was a brief time when I'm going, you know, ‘Am I gonna divorce my wife or not?’”
Why?
At 33:12 Mary's husband: “This friend of mine, Ben, who I've known since I was in junior high school -- so they sent him to talk to me to say, you know, ‘Listen, you got to divorce your wife and just -- you know, you got to disconnect.’”
Excuse me? Next Mary's husband tells this friend:
At 33:39: “‘So, you're basically telling me that if I don't divorce my wife, I'll get declared?’ And that's basically the way you handle people, and he said, ‘Yeah.’.”
Is this application of Scientology? Really?
At 34:01 Mary Khan: “May of 2013, I got called in because there was a K.R., a knowledge report. I said, ‘Okay, I'll come in. I'll talk to you about anything.’ ‘But I am not gonna hold the cans.’ And he was going, ‘No, you ‘will’ hold the cans.’ And I went, ‘No, I won't.’ And he said, ‘Oh, yes, you will.’ I mean, it was so... It re-- still upsets me so badly, uh, because it was so oppressive, and I know...that they own me.”
It is what Matt Pesh already discovered. It is all “mental”! In the end Mary Khan refused and walked out of that door. But still hoping “that the door was not locked”. It wasn't locked. Another door was “barred”, she started “yelling”. And she said “Then let me go.”. They wouldn't. then she headed for the front door. Hoping that public would be there, as the Church does not like “to create a scene in public.” And she got out. By now they are all crying, Mary Khan and husband, Leah Remini and Mike Rinder.
How is that all that Scientology? No one owns you in the Church, if they do, then you submitted to that, so don't!
At 38:56 Leah Remini: “I'm not gonna change the Church policy, but I'm certainly going to let the world know what the Church is doing to families.”
You don't have them to get them to change any policy, you have to show they are not following existing policy!
At 41:11 Leah Remini about May Khan: “She has had her family destroyed because she stood up and said, ‘No.’”
No, it happened because she did not say, “No.” much earlier on...
It will change when you have much less “victims” in the Church. That which is so scary is that even trained persons play “victim” for some reason, they say they want to save their family and things. You don't save anyone by submitting and being a “victim”. The inevitable will happen anyway. Did anyone prevent their children from disconnecting? Do the right thing right now, and then you may have a chance to create some change. Keep the ball on your courtyard!
Another consideration I personally have is what kind of Class VI Auditor training this Mary Khan has done? It would be interesting to find out what happened there. It must have been some sort of quicky or sorts. She is total effect. I recall New Class IX Auditors that came to a local org here, they were insecure and did not seem to understand anything. This was not at all like that in the earlier days.
Vocabulary:
AD..:
‘After Dianetics ..’. The main book ‘Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health’ was first published in 1950. Therefore for example AD8, AD12, and AD29 would respectively give the years 1958, 1962 and 1979. 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. cramming:
A section in the Qualifications Division where a student is given high pressure instruction at his own cost after being found slow in study or when failing his exams. The cramming section teaches students what they have missed. This includes trained auditors who wish to be brought up-to-date on current technical developments. 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) E-meter:
‘Electro-meter’ or ‘Electropsycho-meter’. 1. It is an aid to the auditor (minister, student, pastoral counselor) in two-way communication locating areas of spiritual travail and indicating spiritual well-being in an area. (HCO PL 24 Sept 73 VII) 2. An electronic instrument for measuring mental state and change of state in individuals, as an aid to precision and speed in auditing. The E-meter is not intended or effective
for the diagnosis, treatment or prevention of any disease. (Scientology Abridged Dictionary) 3. Used to verify the preclear's gain and register when each separate auditing action is ended. (HCOB 5 Apr 69R) 4.Electropsychometer. (HCOB 23 Aug 65) 5. The meter tells you what the preclear's mind is doing when the preclear is made to
think of something. The meter registers before the preclear becomes conscious of the datum. It is therefore a pre-conscious meter. It passes a tiny current through the preclear's body. This current is influenced by the mental masses, pictures, circuits and machinery. When the unclear pc thinks of something, these mental items shift and this registers on the meter. (E Meter Essentials, p. 8) examiner:
That person in a Scientology Church assigned to the duties of noting pc's statements. TA position [needle reaction on E-meter] and indicators after session, or when he wishes to volunteer information. (HCO PL 4 Dec 71 V, R-1C) floating needle (F/N):
The idle uninfluenced movement of the needle on the dial (of an E-meter) without any patterns or reactions in it. It can be as small as one inch or as large as dial wide. It does not fall or drop to the right of the dial. It moves to the left at the same speed as it moves to the right. It is observed on a Mark V E-meter calibrated with the TA (Tone Arm) between 2.0 and 3.0 with GIs (Good Indicators) in on the pc. It can occur after a cognition, blowdown of the TA (Tone Arm) or just moves into floating. The pc may or may not voice the cognition. (HCOB 7 May 69 V) hat, hat packs:
The duties of a post. It comes from the fact that jobs are often distinguished by a type of hat as fireman, policeman, conductor, etc. Hence the term ‘hat’.
A ‘hat pack’ is a compilation of issues (HCO PL and any other) into a ‘pack’, this in the sequence as they appear on the course checksheet for that particular ‘hat’ (post or job). This course checksheet itself is placed at the front of the ‘hat pack’. 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). HGC:
‘Hubbard Guidance Center’. The department of the technical division of a Scientology organization which sets you up for and delivers auditing. IAS:
‘International Association of Scientologists’. A Scientology membership granting amongst other 20% discounts and other financial advantages. IMDB:
‘International Movie Database’. Internet address: https://www.imdb.com. Used as a source reference. LRH:
An usual abbreviation for ‘L. Ron Hubbard’. LRH ED:
‘L. Ron Hubbard Executive Directive’. Earlier called SEC EDs (Secretarial EDs). These are issued by LRH to various areas. They are not valid longer than one year if fully complied with when they are automatically retired. They otherwise remain valid until fully complied with or until amended or cancelled by another LRH ED. They carry current line, projects, programs, immediate orders and directions. They are numbered for area and sequence for the area and are sent to staffs or specific posts in orgs. They are blue ink on white paper with a special heading. (HCO PL 24 Sept 70R) Mimeo: Mimeograph section. The section within the Scientology organization that takes care of all the printed references, printing, storing, organizing, filing etc. Since the ’80s however the printing is not done anymore with a mimeograph machine (or ‘Roneo’), it became off-set printing. However the name Mimeo is still the name used to address this section. org(s):
Short for ‘organization(s)’. OT:
Short for ‘Operating Thetan’. Denotes a person having advanced to the higher levels in Scientology. PAB:
‘Professional Auditors Bulletin’. Scientology periodical (monthly) send to all members to keep auditors informed about the latest discoveries concerning processing procedures and other. P/L or PL:
‘HCO PL’. See at that entry in vocabulary. PTS, PTSness:
‘potential trouble source’. 1. Somebody who is connected with an SP (suppressive person) who is invalidating him, his beingness, his processing, his life. (SH Spec 63, 6506C08) 2. He's here, he's way up today and he's way down tomorrow. (Establishment Officer Lecture 3, 7203C02 SO I) 3. The mechanism of PTS is environmental menace that keeps something continually keyed in. This can be a constant recurring somatic or continual, recurring pressure or a mass. (HCOB 5 Dec 68) 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) Sea Org (SO):
Short for ‘Sea Organization’. This is the senior organization within the Church of Scientology that see to it that Advanced Organizations (AOs) and the Class IV-V organizations do function well. They send out so-called missions if there are indications or if they find that improvement or corrections are called for. They also provide for dissemination and other programs that the Scientology organizations are to comply with. Missions may be send out to implement these and instruct the organizations. Sec Check(ing):
Short for ‘security check(ing). third dynamic:
There could be said to be eight urges (drives, impulses) in life. These we call dynamics. These are motives or motivations.
The ‘third dynamic’ is the urge towards existence in groups or individuals. Also referred to as the ‘group dynamic’. Wiki:
On this page this is short for Wikipedia. Used as a source reference.
No one can order a sec check on you on such superficial grounds. They have to show, in fact, you would have interfered negatively with other public on the lines of Scientology.