PDA

View Full Version : Who invented / devised the RPF?



Pages : [1] 2

CarmeloOrchards
28th December 2010, 10:43 AM
I don't know that this is true:

I'd like any kind of verification or repudiation.

Who, if someone other than LRH, did create the RPF?

Is it a source of pride, shame, or what ?

Ogsonofgroo
28th December 2010, 10:58 AM
I don't know that this is true:

I'd like any kind of verification or repudiation.

Did Ken Urghart (spelling?) create the RPF?

Is it a source of pride, shame, or what ?

From every trustable account I have read in the last several years the whole scheme came from Hubbard's demented mind, ultimately he created everything CoS, even that which he stole from others :coolwink:

One of the more concise articles states

The Creation of the RPF
The RPF built directly upon the punitive, some might say, "brainwashing" role that the DPF had developed. Hubbard's motivations for establishing the program in January 1974 included personal retaliation. Having gone ashore in late 1973 to ride his motorcycle on Tenerife in the Canary Islands, Hubbard took a spill and sustained injuries. Recovering on board his flagship, Hubbard blamed the accident on unnamed crew members whom he believed were not carrying out his orders with sufficient diligence. In response, he ordered the creation of the RPF,[7] with the intention of assigning to it anyone who had a "'counter-intention' to his orders or wishes…, along with all trouble-makers and back-sliders" (Miller, 1987: 321; see Kent interview with Pignotti, 1997: 6; Kent interview with Ernesto, 1997: 2).

Full article Solitarytrees (http://solitarytrees.net/pubs/skent/brain.htm#rpfrpf)
If you desire further reading I can find more fer ya :)

denouncethecriminals
28th December 2010, 11:11 AM
I have been investigating this matter carefully because the RPF criminals are my main target.

Hubbard did not do everything all alone, neither David Miscavige. There were more, many more and their names should also go down in history as infamous criminals of Scientology.

I consider that targetting Hubbard or DM alone is a mistake, because there are those who used their power to destroy people's lives.

Staff who were considerate and wanted to help were abused because of their goodwill by the Ken Urquharts and similar characters.

Why have only the names of the victims while the perpetrators of the crimes go unnamed? There is no justice for these type of actions, at least we should denounce them here in a forum for all to see.

denouncethecriminals
28th December 2010, 11:31 AM
I don't know that this is true:

I'd like any kind of verification or repudiation.

Did Ken Urghart (spelling?) create the RPF?

Is it a source of pride, shame, or what ?

CarmeloOrchards, I found this thread with a lot of information.



http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=14684&page=2

DartSmohen
28th December 2010, 12:15 PM
Before the "RPF" there were other forms of "treatment".

In the Sea Project it began in 1967 in Las Palmas with the introduction of the savage ethics penalties for lowered conditions.

Anton James was assigned liability. He was kicked off the ship and forced to live on the dock where he built a hovel from bits of wood, canvas and cardboard. Scraps of food were thrown nto the dock. He had no cutlery or crockery, he had to eat the scraps off the ground.

Later on in 1968 Hubbard devised the "Tank squad". Here lower condition assigned personnel were forced into claustrophobic spaces and lay on their backs, or fronts and chip away at the tank. The idea was to convert the tank from sea water to fresh water so the ship could cross the Atlantic.

Following this there was the "Mud Box Brigade" where individuals had to descend into the stinking bilges and carry out a long cleaning program.

Next came the "overboarding" You already know about that.

Do I need to go on ?.........

Dart

denouncethecriminals
28th December 2010, 12:24 PM
Yes, and that was insane. Thank for bringing that up.

But the one which stayed was the RPF. And still is there destroying lives.



Before the "RPF" there were other forms of "treatment".

Dart

DartSmohen
28th December 2010, 04:26 PM
Yes, and that was insane. Thank for bringing that up.

But the one which stayed was the RPF. And still is there destroying lives.

It is all down to the mindset of the individuals involved. I have already written about how we dealt with things on our RPF. I was bosun, Mick Parkee was my maa and Tony Phipps was a member. We wouldn't stand for the sort of "victim" trip these guys let themselves get into. We did what we wanted and the Estates Chief knew to let us pick our own work details. We also ate better than the crew.

We made sure we had plenty of time for study and processing in order to complete requirements for getting out. There were times the crew ran out of sugar or butter. They came to us to "trade".

When I hear stories about how poor sods are on there for I think they deserve everything they get. You simply don't stand for it. Just say "NO". That soon breaks the mental cage.

Dart

AnonKat
28th December 2010, 05:18 PM
TANK SQUAD could you ad to the wiki ?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rehabilitation_Project_Force


The Rehabilitation Project Force developed out of a predecessor group, the Mud Box Brigade, aboard L. Ron Hubbard's private fleet in the late 1960s. The mud box is a small perforated screening box fitted to the suction pipe in the bilge of a ship, and is designed to catch larger solid waste before it can choke the pipeline and potentially damage the pump. The Mud Box Brigade was assigned to clean out the mud box as well as fuel lines, water hues, bilges and so on.[5] As this involved cleaning foul-smelling waste by hand, it was understandably not a popular task.

Hubbard defined the role as being essentially a punishment duty for unsatisfactory workers: "More candidates will be appointed regularly and promptly every time I find a freeloader who is loafing on post and drifting with the wind."[5] "This group is the most downstat [unproductive] and one gets assigned to it by being a freeloader, invisible on post, loafing and really goofing up on one's job."[6] J. Gordon Melton, however, suggested that "Hubbard understood it in terms of making retribution to the people who had been harmed by the nonperformance or incorrect performance of one's assigned tasks."[7]

In 1969 Hubbard replaced the Mud Box Brigade with the Rehabilitation Unit, again intended for those removed or disciplined

Before the "RPF" there were other forms of "treatment".

In the Sea Project it began in 1967 in Las Palmas with the introduction of the savage ethics penalties for lowered conditions.

Anton James was assigned liability. He was kicked off the ship and forced to live on the dock where he built a hovel from bits of wood, canvas and cardboard. Scraps of food were thrown nto the dock. He had no cutlery or crockery, he had to eat the scraps off the ground.

Later on in 1968 Hubbard devised the "Tank squad". Here lower condition assigned personnel were forced into claustrophobic spaces and lay on their backs, or fronts and chip away at the tank. The idea was to convert the tank from sea water to fresh water so the ship could cross the Atlantic.

Following this there was the "Mud Box Brigade" where individuals had to descend into the stinking bilges and carry out a long cleaning program.

Next came the "overboarding" You already know about that.

Do I need to go on ?.........

Dart

uniquemand
28th December 2010, 06:09 PM
To my knowledge, Ken is pretty forthcoming about this. I don't know of any crime this would fit: illegal order? Mental cruelty? If it was truely the military, whoever did this to their troops would be subject to the same sorts of punishment that the people who devised the Abu Ghraib tortures received. However, since it wasn't the military, and since the orders didn't hold the power of law, I think it would be tough to make a criminal charge stick. Possibly a civil suit. More likely, though, the judge would have to find that the plaintiffs could have left at any time and were under no compulsion to follow the order. Where that was not the case, false imprisonment charges could apply.

Mark A. Baker
28th December 2010, 09:32 PM
I don't know that this is true:

I'd like any kind of verification or repudiation.

Who, if someone other than LRH, did create the RPF?

Is it a source of pride, shame, or what ?

Ken Urquhart.


The RPF [Rehabilitation Project Force] came into existence while he was in his cabin after the accident. A guy called Gary Watson, who was the port captain, sent in some kind of programme of action to the Commodore and the Commodore set up a unit to take care of rebellious people or those not fitting in. I set up the RPF but it became very much different from what I envisaged - which was a place where you could be removed from the stress and strains of bureaucracy, with some physical work every day to take their attention off themselves and in the other half of day they could audit each other on problems they had.- Ken Urquhart

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/miller/interviews/urquhart.htm


Ken essentially confirmed this to me in a conversation I had with him once at a social gathering. According to Ken, his original intention was emphasis on the REHABILITATION of those put on the rpf. Unfortunately LRH chose to make the emphasis PUNISHMENT.


Mark A. Baker

Dulloldfart
28th December 2010, 10:03 PM
Unfortunately LRH chose to make the emphasis PUNISHMENT.


Mark A. Baker

Later emphasis seemed to shift to accommodation of whatever large renovation evolutions were underway (lots of people in the RPF), or alternatively vast numbers of new staff needed for a manning-up evolution (lots of people out of the RPF).

For the six months I was on the PAC RPF, and RPF's RPF, in 1996, the overall emphasis *within* the RPF itself was on rehabilitation, whatever was going on outside. There was very little graduation going on: a "graduation CSW" would be sent up to RTC (this was a huge sucker, containing all the pc folders, beautifully tabbed at all the relevant points to show compliance with the orders regarding RPF completion). It would be several months before the CSW came back disapproved for one arbitrary reason or another.

The RPF I/C, a post outside the RPF itself, was a bit of a cunt. After a couple of months, he was replaced by someone who was *amazing*, who filtered mail quickly, approved sensible CSWs and so forth. He lasted approximately a week, then was put in the RPF's RPF for whatever reason. His replacement was a REAL cunt, who yelled and screamed and didn't pass on mail or CSWs etc., and whose response to people asking to route out (it is allowed by Flag Order!) was to threaten to declare anyone who asked! He was still on post when I left a couple of months later.

Paul

Sharone Stainforth
29th December 2010, 12:27 AM
If Kenneth Urqhart wants to take the blame for the RPF then he should go turn himself into the authorities, where he should face prossicution for crimes against humanity. I am not joking.

However, as far as I am concerned LRH can take full blame for this, how conveniant he's dead and he won't be coming back, and if he ever should show his face again he should be rounded up and face trial, just like Miscavige should for all the harm he has inflicted on scientologists since his take over.Long before the RPF was initiated as being the RPF, we hadf the RPF in the sea org. It was punishment and what it did was fill LRHs need for being a sick control freak, something he did with great aplomb and fanfare.


Life on board the *Apollo* was a bizarre mixture of an educational cruise, being on the *Bounty* with Captain Bligh, and a version of the movie farce 'Carry on Cruising'. An inexperienced crew on a large ship can wreak havoc and the *Apollo* was no exception. Bungled navi- gation, incompetent and ill-trained youngsters cooped up together, it was potentially a recipe for disaster.

Ron solved the problem by making his crew into slaves. Crews mutiny, but not slaves. Penalties were draconian. 'Chain-lockering' was introduced by Hubbard as a punishment. McMaster remembers once being asked by the Master at Arms to come and help her, He pulled up the wedge from the chain-locker, a dank and unhealthy part of the ship into which offenders were flung without food as a punish- ment. Out crawled a little girl who turned out to be a deaf-mute who had been unable to write her name and had incurred the Commodore's wrath. The bilges were another favourite punishment cell (known as 'in the tanking'). Another penalty was being made to climb the dizzy heights to the crow's nest and stay there for a whole watch. But by far the most used (and abused) of the bully-boy tactics was 'overboarding' - Captain Hubbard's version of walking the plank. It originated in Melila when Dutchman Otto Roos, then Senior Auditor, had let a line slip as the *Apollo* was making a botched berthing. Roos is now a rich businessman. His macho manner and tough-guy approach meant that he was rarely on the side of those who were bullied. He discovered the traumatic effects of overboarding on some and declares that he ordered it stopped forthwith. But it didn't prevent McMaster being put over- board four times. The fifth and last time was on 5 November 1969. It was the last straw and when he went ashore he vowed to quit. A young lady chaplain had come to fetch McMaster from the hold because Hubbard wanted to present him with something on the poop deck to 'honour all he had done'. He says he knew right away it was a Judas kiss and Hubbard accused him of betrayal. His daughter Diana 1 (who occupied a senior position on *Apollo*) read out a list of 'high crimes' which McMaster says were all lies, and then eight burly Scientologists flung him overboard. He broke his shoulder in the fall.

1 One of Hubbard's seven children by his three marriages. (The daughter of Mary Sue.)

59 RELIGION INC.

Otto Roos has written a diary of those years on board ship. It is peppered with org-speak, but it is a fascinating insight into the period which is now idealized by Scientologists as a golden period when Ron was developing his higher tech and sailing around the Mediterranean discovering archaeological sites where he had lived in his past lives.

Extracts from Roos' diary have been widely circulated among the independent movement, since he is now among the Suppressive Persons and 'squirrels'. Here are some extracts from the Flying Dutchman's log:

'I was not all innocent and sweetness and light. Far from it. I had decided there were only two kinds of people there: those who got into the tanks and those who put them in, and that I was not going to get in, no way!...Having myself as a child experienced the atrocities of war, when many of my friends hadn't, I wasn't going down into those tanks. Rusty old tanks, way below in the ship, filthy bilge water, no air except via oxygen tubes, and hardly sitting height, in which sinners were put from 24 hours to a week, day and night, to hammer rust off the insides with Masters of Arms checking outside to hear if the hammering con- tinued, and occasional food out of a bucket. This was like the concentration camps of my childhood days....

'I would also have refused the crow's nest, which meant spend- ing 4 hours in the nest and 4 hours on deck, alternating for some 84 hours. The nest, a tiny bucket at the top of the mast, too small to sit or lie in, gets cold at night. One of our SPs (named O'Keefe) had a fear of heights and virtually had to be winched up there and down again every 4 hours.

'The severe "unreasonability" started in earnest in September '67 when Non-Existence included no right to food, and Ray Thacker, huddled in a corner, would be avoided by all and occasionally thrown a crust of bread....

'The Flag Orders at the time (instructions from HQ) usually dealt in "smashing THEM" (our "enemies") and smashing them we did, if not our enemies at least ourselves and most of our port relations.

'To say that LRH could not have known about this, can only be answered by "How could he not have?" on a little ship and holding all the comm. lines, after *originating* the policies. One walks around on a ship and looks. LRH has never been renowned for an inability to look.

60 LIFE ON THE OCEAN WAVE '...There was continued data about SMERSH (from James Bond books), the "Enemy", bankers, psychiatrists, newspapers, port officials, etc. Port flaps were all "their" doing. Our unreasonable (and very often unseamanlike and very unpro- fessional) methods had "nothing to do with it"....

'The billion-year contract was signed of our "free will' (and some Swedes, who objected, were immediately "beached" [sent away], "never to be given upper-level materials", and "declared"). "Beaching" I have seen many times and it did not im- prove port relations. A beachee, put ashore with his passport and no money (except his Sea Org "pay" sometimes) to make his way home, would go to his Consulate for help and have some explaining to do. Another way to bring on the "enemy".

'Nobody ever *dared* say anything about these things and risk losing his OT levels for "making the Commodore wrong".

'Our lives were completely mapped out 24 hours a day, *per- sonal* lives exactly prescribed, especially 2D [relations with the opposite sex]...The day started with "Musters", sing-songing KSW, followed by a mantra of "LRH, LRH, LRH", after which work, work, work, for little or no pay...' Roos was by now a Class XII auditor, the top rank, and was auditing Hubbard himself, a dangerous task which proved his undoing.1 The Commodore had some bad readings on the meter which were duly noted by Roos, but Hubbard would not accept these. The relationship which had flourished with LRH calling Otto up to his cabin to bounce ideas off him, deteriorated rapidly. Hubbard yelled and screamed to see his folders (which is not allowed). When Roos refused, Hubbard sent some 'hefty guys' to collect them and became even more agitated when he saw some meter-reads which did not fit in with either his 'tech' or his self-image. When Mary Sue Hubbard declared that LRH did not 'have such reads', Roos knew his number was up. MSH had previously been an ally and had ripped up the results of several 'Comm Evs' called on Roos for his sexual activities. He had been astute in avoiding super- vision up to this point. Apart from LRH/MSH he had no seniors and only once had fallen foul of Hubbard when he refused a posting to run the new advanced org in Scotland and was put on pot-scrubbing duties as a penance. McMaster was the great 'tech man' and was not a senior post holder. He therefore had no hold over Roos either. Indeed, 1 The auditing of members of LRH's family was case supervised by Ron himself.

Quoted text taken from Shy David's page;

http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/rel-inc3.htm

Arthur Dent
29th December 2010, 01:16 AM
With Dart in the RPF in the late 60's and not taking any shit and Paul in 1996 with a very different story, I am very curious how this transition took place over those some 28 years. That's a long time.

LRH dying and Miss Cabbage coming into power aside, 28 years of many people on those posts of RPF I/C and RPF'S RPF I/C, etc. and all those years of people ordering other people to he RPF while knowing what would happen to the person. How many people have been on the RPF over all these years?

If this was war they would be facing charges for war crimes.

I feel very bad for anyone who has been on the RPF and has suffered.
I have empathy for anyone on a post who felt they didn't have a choice but to order someone to the RPF or else they'd be going there or who felt it was justified. It was how the system worked. I get all that. But where does it end?? Who will end it? It certainly must end that is for sure.

When it boils down it was a method of creating criminals and perpetuating evil. The Stanford Experiment only lasted a week
The RPF has been going on since 1967 and it's now 2010 is over.
That's 43 years. That is an insane and evil accomplishment for Hubbard or anyone.

I'm not stating anything new; it just gave me pause. Some days I forget just exactly how evil this is.

AnonKat
29th December 2010, 01:20 AM
http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/mcmaster.htm


John McMaster, a dedicated $cientologist in the 1960s, was proclaimed by founder L. Ron Hubbard to be the "world's first real Clear." He was a charismatic promoter and lecturer, and as a key aide to Hubbard contributed greatly to his early financial success. He was the chosen ambassador of $cientology, lending to it his personal image of competence, gentleness and love. Among his accomplishments for Hubbard was the creation of the Power Processes - Grade 7 on the $cientology grade chart. Hubbard promoted him to "Pope" in 1966, a title not to endure. And though Hubbard's income soared, McMaster received none of it.
Under Hubbard, McMaster had no real power. He slowly became disillusioned as he saw $cientology organizations turn authoritarian and brutally punitive, far different from how he had portrayed them. He witnessed the imprisonment of a terrified 4-year-old in the Sea Org's dark, filthy, rat- infested chain locker for the "Ethics offense" of chewing one of Hubbard's papers. Such imprisonment became a common form of staff punishment. "Overboarding" was instituted, with "out-ethics" staff being forcibly thrown into the ocean. McMaster was overboarded several times, the last time being left struggling in the water with a broken collarbone for 3 hours. According to McMaster, in some orgs with no chain locker or overboarding facilities, the offender's head is shoved into a toilet bowl, which is then flushed.

McMaster fell from grace in 1968 when he challenged Hubbard for chain-lockering a little deaf-mute girl for a week. He was subject to hard labor, sleep deprivation and other hardships. "Hubbard wanted to break me," he states. In 1969 McMaster resigned from $cientology, and was declared "suppressive" by Hubbard.

McMaster stated in an interview: "I was so excited about the function of auditing ($cientology counseling) that I was willing to overlook Hubbard's faults - . That was up to a point of course, the final point being my realization that his intentions were entirely self-serving. I saw that he was in it for the money and personal power, and his actual intentions were not as stated. The basic function of auditing is a wonderful thing, but Hubbard perverted it."

Sad to say, John McMaster, Clear #1, was interviewed 2 years before his death in a Manchester England transient hotel (flop house). In a tiny room filled with dead flowers, he told of being tormented and taunted by Hubbard for being gay. He died of cirrosis of the liver due to a long bout of alcoholism - ONE MORE $CIENTOLOGY "SUCCESS STORY."

Steve Walker
29th December 2010, 02:17 AM
Thank you, Mr. Baker. And I agree with Dart. I was on the Flag RPF in 1977. The bosun was Gerry Armstrong! It may have been thought of and used as punishment by many of the exec's that assigned people there, and crew feared it, not so much for the physical nature of it but the elimination of one's status. I recall a few comments from crew that they longed for it for the same reason I found it beneficial - it allowed me to destimulate from the org insanity by placing attention on the MEST universe, plus we did scads of auditing - and we got good at it. This is as Ken Urquhart explained. I recall a similar conversation with him at ACC in 1982 or '83. As Dart explained, it is up to the individual to create the experience. One cannot be degraded without one's permission.

Steve Walker
29th December 2010, 02:19 AM
The abuses are legion, though.

Alanzo
29th December 2010, 02:37 AM
Thank you, Mr. Baker. And I agree with Dart. I was on the Flag RPF in 1977. The bosun was Gerry Armstrong! It may have been thought of and used as punishment by many of the exec's that assigned people there, and crew feared it, not so much for the physical nature of it but the elimination of one's status. I recall a few comments from crew that they longed for it for the same reason I found it beneficial - it allowed me to destimulate from the org insanity by placing attention on the MEST universe, plus we did scads of auditing - and we got good at it. This is as Ken Urquhart explained. I recall a similar conversation with him at ACC in 1982 or '83. As Dart explained, it is up to the individual to create the experience. One cannot be degraded without one's permission.

It is up to all the individuals involved to create the experience.

Not just one individual.

A person can be degraded, mutilated, harmed, and violated completely without his consent. He may choose to respond however he wants. But other people, and their actions, DO exist.

Criminals are those who commit criminal acts. Those acts are criminal, no matter the response by their victims.

L Ron Hubbard taught you that you are responsible for his criminal acts against you.

So the joke, I guess, is still on you.

Mark A. Baker
29th December 2010, 02:42 AM
It is up to all the individuals involved to create the experience.

Not just one individual.

A person can be degraded, mutilated, harmed, and violated completely without his consent. He may choose to respond however he wants. But other people, and their actions, DO exist.

Criminals are those who commit criminal acts. Those acts are criminal, no matter the response by their victims.

L Ron Hubbard taught you that you are responsible for his criminal acts against you.

So the joke, I guess, is still on you.

Responsibility is not the same as blame nor does the acceptance of responsibility excuse others from their responsibilities.

For an "eastern take" have another look at karma, Al. I know you've been studying it.


Mark A. Baker

Alanzo
29th December 2010, 02:50 AM
Responsibility is not the same as blame nor does the acceptance of responsibility excuse others from their responsibilities.

For an "eastern take" have another look at karma, Al. I know you've been studying it.

Mark A. Baker

I'm not sure of your point, Mark.

A criminal's acts are his own, and they exist.

His victim's acts are their own, too.

L Ron Hubbard, the criminal, worked very hard to get his victims to accept responsibility for his crimes, and to even justify them.

He made it part of the teachings of Scientology.

Institutional false imprisonment, kidnapping, and slavery - which are part of the RPF in Scientology are criminal acts - whether the victims of the RPF believe so or not.

Div6
29th December 2010, 04:09 AM
I'm not sure of your point, Mark.

A criminal's acts are his own, and they exist.

His victim's acts are their own, too.

L Ron Hubbard, the criminal, worked very hard to get his victims to accept responsibility for his crimes, and to even justify them.

He made it part of the teachings of Scientology.

Institutional false imprisonment, kidnapping, and slavery - which are part of the RPF in Scientology are criminal acts - whether the victims of the RPF believe so or not.

Al has a point here. The "curve ball" in this subject is in the PTS\SP tech, were it is explicitly forbidden to name "good hats" as SP's. That is a sure route to 100's (if not thousands) of hours of FPRD, and other forms of mental\spiritual abuse. The whole "management can do no evil" kick IS the "ser fac" of corporate Scn. THAT is the core of the institutional insanity.

denouncethecriminals
29th December 2010, 04:44 AM
Mark, then if the emphasis was on rehabilitation then why humiliate and have inhumane rules? Per his own words:

http://www.freezoneamerica.org/ivy/bluesky/part8.htm

The RPF should be fed on the remains of the food given to the general crew.

This requirement was well within the traditions of the Sea Org but nonetheless was wrong and unworkable.

I also demanded that RPF people not speak to any crew unless spoken to first. On the ship, this gave way to the practical needs of working together, and nobody made any fuss about it.




Ken Urquhart.



Ken essentially confirmed this to me in a conversation I had with him once at a social gathering. According to Ken, his original intention was emphasis on the REHABILITATION of those put on the rpf. Unfortunately LRH chose to make the emphasis PUNISHMENT.


Mark A. Baker

Mark A. Baker
29th December 2010, 04:54 AM
I'm not sure of your point, Mark.

A criminal's acts are his own, and they exist.

His victim's acts are their own, too.

That's my point, Al. The criminal absolutely is responsible for his acts. But the victim is also responsible for those of his own. The presence of a "criminal" does not supplant a "victim's" own responsibility.

Although this sort of terminology is itself biasing. The consideration of being a "victim" is itself a minimization of the personal responsibility of an individual and assignment of "power" elsewhere.



L Ron Hubbard, the criminal, worked very hard to get his victims to accept responsibility for his crimes, and to even justify them.

I'd state this differently. Hubbard didn't want people to accept responsibility for his crimes. He sought to convince them they were to BLAME for them. He victimized others by seeking to have them propitiate him. He sought to create a climate where he was to be viewed as an individual who could do no wrong and who therefore was tautologically not to blame for any wrongs that occurred.

The biggest "missed withhold" LRH had was how well the actual tech of scientology applied to him. He often seems as if he "misses his own withholds" in every one of his lecture's.



He made it part of the teachings of Scientology.

He did, although such contradicted the same basic principles upon which the subject itself is founded.

It always boils down to what is the individual going to choose to go by: Hubbard in his latest musings?, or the individual's own judgement & understanding? The choice is always the individual's to make, no matter whom he may seek to assign "responsibility" for his choice.


Mark A. Baker

HelluvaHoax!
29th December 2010, 05:29 AM
That's my point, Al. The criminal absolutely is responsible for his acts. But the victim is also responsible for those of his own. The presence of a "criminal" does not supplant a "victim's" own responsibility. Although this sort of terminology is itself biasing. The consideration of being a "victim" is itself a minimization of the personal responsibility of an individual and assignment of "power" elsewhere.
Mark A. Baker

Mark, your theories are hard to follow thru the haze of ambiguous language. Let's take a practical real-life example and see how it works:

A woman goes to the bank to cash her paycheck. Just then a gang of bank robbers crash in and take over at gunpoint, emptying the tellers' cash drawers into their sacks. The woman is taken as hostage where she is later raped, beaten and left for dead. She survives but is permanently blind from acid which has been thrown in her eyes to prevent her from identifying them. She goes on disability since she is unable to work.

She says she is a "victim" of the robbery.

Is she wrong?

What is her "responsibility" that you refer to?

Try to be specific rather than theoretical so that I understand what you are saying. Thanks.

denouncethecriminals
29th December 2010, 05:37 AM
Mark Baker

Are you justifying Ken Urquhart and Ron Hubbard? Are you saying that all of those crimes are fine simply because people 'were stupid by having good faith and desires to help others? is that make it OK to throw their food on the floor and treat them like dogs and to forbid them to talk to others?

Denounce those criminals my friends, because if we don't do, people will forget. Very convenient no]

Mark A. Baker
29th December 2010, 05:39 AM
Mark Baker

Are you justifying Ken Urquhart and Ron Hubbard? Are you saying that all of those crimes are fine simply because people 'were stupid by having good faith and desires to help others? is that make it OK to throw their food on the floor and treat them like dogs and to forbid them to talk to others?

Denounce those criminals my friends, because if we don't do, people will forget. Very convenient no]


I've been denouncing the crimes for 29 years. I might ask in turn: where have you been during that time?


Mark A. Baker

denouncethecriminals
29th December 2010, 05:41 AM
If Kenneth Urqhart wants to take the blame for the RPF then he should go turn himself into the authorities, where he should face prossicution for crimes against humanity. I am not joking.


Quoted text taken from Shy David's page;

http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/rel-inc3.htm

Sharone, where is this man Ken Urquhart? Is there any information sufficient to turn him to the authorities? So that the legal authorities carry a penalty for this man?

Is this man still alive? Is he married? Does he have children? What does he do for a living?

Sindy
29th December 2010, 05:42 AM
Sharone, where is this man Ken Urquhart? Is there any information sufficient to turn him to the authorities? So that the legal authorities carry a penalty for this man?

Is this man still alive? Is he married? Does he have children? What does he do for a living?

Ken is a good man and not a criminal. Drop this one.

denouncethecriminals
29th December 2010, 05:53 AM
I've been denouncing the crimes for 29 years. I might ask in turn: where have you been during that time?


Mark A. Baker

Mark, do not get agressive with me simply because we do not agree.:thumbsup:

I have been in the SO working my butt off day and night trying to help others.

denouncethecriminals
29th December 2010, 05:56 AM
Ken is a good man and not a criminal. Drop this one.

Excuse me, I don't know you. You cannot just butt in and tell me 'drop it', we are not in the church anymore Synthia.

Please allow me to decide for myself. The facts and per his own words he shows no responsibility for what he has done.

http://www.freezoneamerica.org/ivy/bluesky/part8.htm

Sindy
29th December 2010, 06:00 AM
Excuse me, I don't know you. You cannot just butt in and tell me 'drop it', we are not in the church anymore Synthia.

Please allow me to decide for myself. The facts and per his own words he shows no responsibility for what he has done.

http://www.freezoneamerica.org/ivy/bluesky/part8.htm

Go for it. He's a 72 year old man that does nothing but help people all day long but you can have at it if you want to. Chill.

denouncethecriminals
29th December 2010, 06:07 AM
Go for it. He's a 72 year old man that does nothing but help people all day long but you can have at it if you want to. Chill.


Synthia, you chill:thumbsup:

You have your opinion and I have mine.

Just because Ken Urquhart is an old man does no mean that we have to forget his crimes, right?

Sindy
29th December 2010, 06:15 AM
Synthia, you chill:thumbsup:

You have your opinion and I have mine.

Just because Ken Urquhart is an old man does no mean that we have to forget his crimes, right?

Look, you don't know him, do you? Please just get more information. Sure, have your own opinion of course. Now, I am not trying to squash your desire for justice by any means. Ken Urquhart is not a criminal in my book so you will never get me to jump on that band wagon. You have come plowing in here and you are, in my opinion, understandably upset but missing information.

denouncethecriminals
29th December 2010, 06:28 AM
Look, you don't know him, do you? Please just get more information. Sure, have your own opinion of course. Now, I am not trying to squash your desire for justice by any means. Ken Urquhart is not a criminal in my book so you will never get me to jump on that band wagon. You have come plowing in here and you are, in my opinion, understandably upset but missing information.

Synthia, no I am not missing any information. I think that you are the one missing it.

Please read this carefully and without prejudism, these are his own words, use your intelligence.

http://www.freezoneamerica.org/ivy/bluesky/part8.htm

Sindy
29th December 2010, 06:45 AM
Synthia, no I am not missing any information. I think that you are the one missing it.

Please read this carefully and without prejudism, these are his own words, use your intelligence.

http://www.freezoneamerica.org/ivy/bluesky/part8.htm

I will look more into it. This is the first I have heard of this and so I will get informed and I'll ask Ken about it too. I'm sure I will find that he has something to say. He is not what you think.

denouncethecriminals
29th December 2010, 06:51 AM
I will look more into it. This is the first I have heard of this and so I will get informed and I'll ask Ken about it too.

Yes, talk to him, perhaps he can help dismantle the concentration camp he created where there are still people is still squestered.

But be objective and do not blind yourself because he is old or because you like him.
Ken was Hubbard's buttler for many years and he also went on saying shit about him not that Hubbard did not deserve it. But he violated confidentiality. And yet he did nothing while working for him.

He now uses that he was close to Hubbard to embelish his credentiales as an auditor.

Sindy
29th December 2010, 06:53 AM
Yes, talk to him, perhaps he can help dismantle the concentration camp he created where there are still people is still squestered.

But be objective and do not blind yourself because he is old or because you like him.
Ken was Hubbard's buttler for many years and he also went on saying shit about him not that Hubbard did not deserve it. But he violated confidentiality. And yet he did nothing while working for him.

He now uses that he was close to Hubbard to embelish his credentiales as an auditor.

Well, I think there is more to it, and now I will have to find out.

denouncethecriminals
29th December 2010, 07:01 AM
Well, I think there is more to it, and now I will have to find out.

Synthia, you seem to be an intelligent woman. You are now out of the claws of Scientology open your eyes and see.
As a side note, I do not want you to jump in any band wagon. It might not be your goal to denounce. But learn the truth.

Mark A. Baker
29th December 2010, 07:30 AM
Well, I think there is more to it, and now I will have to find out.

In Ken's words ....


18. p.207. Jon raises the matter of the death of Susan Meister, and strongly suggests that foul play caused it. I never heard LRH mention foul play. By the time of this incident, we had GO people on the ship, and that office took charge of the investigation and handling of her terrible end. If they had proof of foul play it is conceivable that they would have withheld it - but not from MSH and I doubt extremely that she would have withheld it from LRH. It is possible that LRH would have withheld it from me.

I was involved unknowingly in Susan Meister's situation. A week or so before her death, she had written to LRH asking his permission for her to leave the ship and return home. At that time, his policy on such was to refuse (it varied). I composed a reply to this effect and included it in his mail for signature. He signed it. He was considerably put out when I reminded him of this - he had signed the reply without reading it or its original request (and this was not unusual practice for him - I should have known better). From then on, I put a warning note on any similar reply composed for him to sign.

Further, on Susan Meister: Jon quotes some letters she wrote home in high enthusiasm about Scientology and what she took to be the mission of the Sea Org. He quotes them as examples of how gullible SO members were. We had a number of people on the ship who came without a great deal of education but with at least some experience of street drugs (I don't know if Susan had a drug history or not; she was certainly not well educated). Finding themselves on the ship, and sometimes with menial jobs and very unattractive berthing, some of them let their imaginations run wild, and their false enthusiasms flap. Many of them graduated through that phase to some maturity and, in some cases, great ability. I believe that Susan Meister was unable to face the growth that staying on the ship challenged her to encompass; I will always deeply regret that her cry came through me, and I chose to adhere to the current policy rather than to hear her, listen to her, and help her in compassion and good sense. - K.Urqhart

http://www.freezoneamerica.org/ivy/bluesky/part8.htm



Mark A. Baker

Veda
29th December 2010, 07:50 AM
Susan Meister's letters reflected the paranoia that oozed out of Hubbard. Anyone who's read Hubbard's confidential writings and his transcribed confidential briefings during that period would know that. This mind-set filtered down to Susan Meister, who belived her Commodore, leader, and savior of the galaxy.

Hubbard was also ruthless, and regarded ruthlessness as a virtue.

From 'Suppressive Acts, Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists, The Fair Game Law', of 7 March 1965:

"A Suppressive Person or group becomes 'fair game'

"By Fair Game is meant, without rights for self, possessions or position,, and no Scientologist may be brought before a Committee of Evidence or punished for any action taken against a Suppressive Person or group...

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

"Such suppressive acts include public disavowal of Scientology... public statements against Scientology...

"[Suppressive acts also include] 1st degree murder, arson, disintegration of persons or belongings not [emphasis added] guilty of suppressive acts...

"[Suppressive Persons] place themselves beyond any consideration for their feelings and well being... persons who have been active in attempting to suppress Scientology... are all beyond any protection... and actions taken against them are not punishable."


The 12 February 1967 Policy Letter 'Admin Know-How, the Responsibility of Leaders' -a.k.a. The Bolivar Policy Letter:

"[The power asks] 'What are those dead bodies doing at the door'. And if you [the subordinate] are clever, you never let it be known HE [the power] killed them - that weakens you and also hurts the power source. 'Well, boss about all those dead bodies, nobody at all will suppose you did it. She over there, those pink legs sticking out, didn't like me'. 'Well', he'll say if he really is a power, 'Why are you bothering me with it if it's done and you did it. Where's my blue ink?...

"...always push power in the direction of anyone on whose power you depend. It may be more money for the power, or more ease, or a snarling defense of the power to the critic, or even the dull thud of one of his enemies in the dark, or the glorious blaze of a whole enemy camp as a birthday surprise...

"...Real powers are developed by tight conspiracies of this kind... and if they are right and also manage their man [the power] and keep him from collapsing from overwork, bad temper or bad data, a kind of juggernaut builds up."


http://www.xenu-directory.net/victims/meister1.html

A bullet hole in the middle of her forehead, but no powder burns.

Oh well, Susan Meister was just another down stat, low on the responsibility scale. She wasn't able to take advantage of the wonderful opportunities that being on Hubbard's floating insane asylum made available.


Came across this by accident. It's something that I hadn't read for a while. 'Leaving and leaves' by L. Ron Hubbard. It was written for Org staff, several years after Susan Meister's death (1976), but coupled with the Fair Game Law mind set, is cause for pause:

"...informing fellow staff members that one is leaving is properly labelled a suppressive act."

http://www.tampabay.com/news/scientology/article1048136.ece

dianaclass8
29th December 2010, 07:59 AM
In Ken's words ....


Quote:
18. p.207. Jon raises the matter of the death of Susan Meister, and strongly suggests that foul play caused it. I never heard LRH mention foul play. By the time of this incident, we had GO people on the ship, and that office took charge of the investigation and handling of her terrible end. If they had proof of foul play it is conceivable that they would have withheld it - but not from MSH and I doubt extremely that she would have withheld it from LRH. It is possible that LRH would have withheld it from me.

I was involved unknowingly in Susan Meister's situation. A week or so before her death, she had written to LRH asking his permission for her to leave the ship and return home. At that time, his policy on such was to refuse (it varied). I composed a reply to this effect and included it in his mail for signature. He signed it. He was considerably put out when I reminded him of this - he had signed the reply without reading it or its original request (and this was not unusual practice for him - I should have known better). From then on, I put a warning note on any similar reply composed for him to sign.

Further, on Susan Meister: Jon quotes some letters she wrote home in high enthusiasm about Scientology and what she took to be the mission of the Sea Org. He quotes them as examples of how gullible SO members were. We had a number of people on the ship who came without a great deal of education but with at least some experience of street drugs (I don't know if Susan had a drug history or not; she was certainly not well educated).

Finding themselves on the ship, and sometimes with menial jobs and very unattractive berthing, some of them let their imaginations run wild, and their false enthusiasms flap. Many of them graduated through that phase to some maturity and, in some cases, great ability.


I believe that Susan Meister was unable to face the growth that staying on the ship challenged her to encompass; I will always deeply regret that her cry came through me, and I chose to adhere to the current policy rather than to hear her, listen to her, and help her in compassion and good sense. - K.Urqhart

http://www.freezoneamerica.org/ivy/bluesky/part8.htm


Mark A. Baker

Mark, this is one of the things I hated when I was in Scn: A total stranger deciding wether I come or go. Someone who stupidly and blindly "adheres to policy" instead of common sense.

Thank god I never let anybody manipulate me.

Who knows if Ken had not denied her the right to go home, this woman would not have killed herself. What a sad story, like the Lisa MacPherson case.

Diana

dianaclass8
29th December 2010, 08:21 AM
Originally Posted by Mark A. Baker
In Ken's words ....


Quote:
18. p.207. Jon raises the matter of the death of Susan Meister, and strongly suggests that foul play caused it. I never heard LRH mention foul play. By the time of this incident, we had GO people on the ship, and that office took charge of the investigation and handling of her terrible end. If they had proof of foul play it is conceivable that they would have withheld it - but not from MSH and I doubt extremely that she would have withheld it from LRH. It is possible that LRH would have withheld it from me.

I was involved unknowingly in Susan Meister's situation. A week or so before her death, she had written to LRH asking his permission for her to leave the ship and return home. At that time, his policy on such was to refuse (it varied). I composed a reply to this effect and included it in his mail for signature. He signed it. He was considerably put out when I reminded him of this - he had signed the reply without reading it or its original request (and this was not unusual practice for him - I should have known better). From then on, I put a warning note on any similar reply composed for him to sign.

Further, on Susan Meister: Jon quotes some letters she wrote home in high enthusiasm about Scientology and what she took to be the mission of the Sea Org. He quotes them as examples of how gullible SO members were. We had a number of people on the ship who came without a great deal of education but with at least some experience of street drugs (I don't know if Susan had a drug history or not; she was certainly not well educated).

Finding themselves on the ship, and sometimes with menial jobs and very unattractive berthing, some of them let their imaginations run wild, and their false enthusiasms flap. Many of them graduated through that phase to some maturity and, in some cases, great ability.


I believe that Susan Meister was unable to face the growth that staying on the ship challenged her to encompass; I will always deeply regret that her cry came through me, and I chose to adhere to the current policy rather than to hear her, listen to her, and help her in compassion and good sense. - K.Urqhart

http://www.freezoneamerica.org/ivy/bluesky/part8.htm


Mark A. Baker

I want to add one more thing here, as this is the first time I read what Ken has done with regarding Susan's suicide. And now I understand Ken's behavior. Wow! I can see how he is now trying to stop an incident that happened more than 40 years ago!!!:omg:

Too late...
Diana

Veda
29th December 2010, 08:32 AM
Hubbard f__ked with a lot of people's heads. And it's still going on, through his alter ego, Scientology. And there are still people defending it and justifying it.

dianaclass8
29th December 2010, 08:35 AM
Hubbard f__ked with a lot of people's heads. And it's still going on, through his alter ego, Scientology. And there are still people defending it and justifying it.

Yes, my friend, you are right...thank god for the critics no one has to idolize him.
Diana

Ogsonofgroo
29th December 2010, 08:37 AM
Mark, this is one of the things I hated when I was in Scn: A total stranger deciding wether I come or go. Someone who stupidly and blindly "adheres to policy" instead of common sense.

Thank god I never let anybody manipulate me.

Who knows if Ken had not denied her the right to go home, this woman would not have killed herself. What a sad story, like the Lisa MacPherson case.

Diana

Meister's death was by other's purpose imho., a glazed over piece of history now, but lots of people suspect it was one of the earlier cover-ups perpetrated by Flubbard and his merry men. :bigcry: It stank of murder then, and it still does.
Crazy frikken LRon and his flock of sheeps, arghhhhhh.

dianaclass8
29th December 2010, 09:24 AM
Meister's death was by other's purpose imho., a glazed over piece of history now, but lots of people suspect it was one of the earlier cover-ups perpetrated by Flubbard and his merry men. :bigcry: It stank of murder then, and it still does.
Crazy frikken LRon and his flock of sheeps, arghhhhhh.

Yes, it is very sad...
Diana

Sharone Stainforth
29th December 2010, 12:04 PM
According to Mike Rinder whilst still in scientology - it is a retreat, for people to help find themselves.

Well, I guess these people found themselves, in a right bloody mess.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHwj4ebZSM8

Swap husband for Father and it's pretty much how I felt too at the age of 11 and 12. What were my crimes? Having bad thoughts about LRH, and I kept mine to myself, out of fear of worse punishment. Seems I was right.

With regards Kenneth Urqhart, if he did set up the RPF, then he should be made accountable. Age does not matter. By Scientology standards age means nothing. When you have lived for thousands of years, life time after lifetime, 72 years is nothing.I actually totally disagree with this statement, however scientologists set the standards and therefore should be prepared to live with their own contradictions.

In the real world, if you have committed a crime and setting up the RPF is/was a crime, then you should be held accountable, regardless of age.

AnonKat
29th December 2010, 12:38 PM
Go for it. He's a 72 year old man that does nothing but help people all day long but you can have at it if you want to. Chill.

KEN IS STILL CRAWLING UP THE BUTT OF L RON HUBBARD.

He is by his actions making the abused wrong.

He should be on the side of the abusal survivors and those who suffered under the REIGN of L Ron Hubbard

Sharone Stainforth
29th December 2010, 01:06 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFGmZ6Qm5iM&NR=feature

Steve Walker
29th December 2010, 05:23 PM
Greetings, Alonzo.
You turned that around very deftly. Allow me to be a mirror.
I understand you are saying that the only rational response to an experience like your vision of the RPF is anger, resentment. Any other response is the sign of a weak mind brought under the control of another.
I never said criminal acts were not committed, nor that LRH was not ultimately responsible. I am saying that the source of suffering is attachment.
You actually have no idea what lessons my experience with LRH imparted to me.

I wish you well.

Auditor's Toad
29th December 2010, 05:33 PM
It ain't easy, but, I've seen a freeloaders debt 'forgiven' when it was proven an RPF assignment was done incorrectly.

Begs the question of what difference does a freeloaders debt make.

Yes, one can make a "case" of the woman caught up in a bank robbery (etc) is not really a victim but is reponsible. Well, of course she is, she CHOSE the time she went to the dang bank, how can anyone BLAME the hapless robbers for her being there? ( And those who buy this drivel need to step forth and attest to Justifications Release".

Maybe on that one even Hubbard Qualified Justifications Release ".

Or even Sea Argh Qualified Hubbard Gold Qualified Justifications Release".

Sharone Stainforth
29th December 2010, 07:25 PM
Originally posted by Mark. A Baker, reposted by Diana Class8


Quote:
18. p.207. Jon raises the matter of the death of Susan Meister, and strongly suggests that foul play caused it. I never heard LRH mention foul play. By the time of this incident, we had GO people on the ship, and that office took charge of the investigation and handling of her terrible end. If they had proof of foul play it is conceivable that they would have withheld it - but not from MSH and I doubt extremely that she would have withheld it from LRH. It is possible that LRH would have withheld it from me.

I was involved unknowingly in Susan Meister's situation. A week or so before her death, she had written to LRH asking his permission for her to leave the ship and return home. At that time, his policy on such was to refuse (it varied). I composed a reply to this effect and included it in his mail for signature. He signed it. He was considerably put out when I reminded him of this - he had signed the reply without reading it or its original request (and this was not unusual practice for him - I should have known better). From then on, I put a warning note on any similar reply composed for him to sign.

Further, on Susan Meister: Jon quotes some letters she wrote home in high enthusiasm about Scientology and what she took to be the mission of the Sea Org. He quotes them as examples of how gullible SO members were. We had a number of people on the ship who came without a great deal of education but with at least some experience of street drugs (I don't know if Susan had a drug history or not; she was certainly not well educated).

Finding themselves on the ship, and sometimes with menial jobs and very unattractive berthing, some of them let their imaginations run wild, and their false enthusiasms flap. Many of them graduated through that phase to some maturity and, in some cases, great ability.


I believe that Susan Meister was unable to face the growth that staying on the ship challenged her to encompass; I will always deeply regret that her cry came through me, and I chose to adhere to the current policy rather than to hear her, listen to her, and help her in compassion and good sense. - K.Urqhart

http://www.freezoneamerica.org/ivy/bluesky/part8.htm

It is more than likely that LRH would never have admitted foul play to Ken Urquhart. I remember Ken as a weasley little butler on the ship, not an LRH Communicator. He may have been promoted at some stage, but not in my time. Which makes some of his statement wrong.Where some is wrong, I am inclined to believe there is much that is wrong.


There were always GO people on the ship, they did not come later.We all know what the Guardians Office were capable of and if we don't, then I suggest we look. LRHs Guardians Office, which was run from the ship Apollo by L. Ron Hubbard infiltrated government offices around the world. They also as one of their many operations tried to get Paulette Cooper imprisoned on bomb threat charges that werte false. It might have been run by Jane Kember and Mo Budlong and a whole host of other people but I assure you LRH and MSH were at the helm at all times.

To continue this charade of LRH didn't know, is rediculous. Why do you suppose he was on the run for so long, mmm,why do you suppose he let his own wife take the rap and go to jail instead of him, facing up and being a man.LRH was not a man, he was a monster.

Ken Urquhart calls himself an ex scientologist, poppycock, he is still very much a scientologist and is doing a good job of painting himself in exactly the same light as LRH.

Susan Meister

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2842889/susan_meister_shot_dead_by_scientology

Google Susan Meister, read her letters that did go to her family, one wanders why those letters got through? Because they praised scientology and life at flag as being the best place on earth to be. Her death has many similarities to Lisa McPherson, and happened at the mecca of technical perfection - the Flagship Apollo.

AnonKat
29th December 2010, 07:28 PM
I am hoping you will, in time, share that when you are ready Steve

Untill than hope you visit a protest if you didn't allready

ML AK

That Atachment brings suffering shit is nice in theory but I am pretty atached to having family and stuff thank you very much


Greetings, Alonzo.
You turned that around very deftly. Allow me to be a mirror.
I understand you are saying that the only rational response to an experience like your vision of the RPF is anger, resentment. Any other response is the sign of a weak mind brought under the control of another.
I never said criminal acts were not committed, nor that LRH was not ultimately responsible. I am saying that the source of suffering is attachment.
You actually have no idea what lessons my experience with LRH imparted to me.

I wish you well.

Voltaire's Child
29th December 2010, 07:33 PM
Ken Urquhart.



Ken essentially confirmed this to me in a conversation I had with him once at a social gathering. According to Ken, his original intention was emphasis on the REHABILITATION of those put on the rpf. Unfortunately LRH chose to make the emphasis PUNISHMENT.


Mark A. Baker

Anytime you have ANY punishment or rehabilitation detail, it's a slippery slope. IMO, there shouldn't have been ANY such.

There also should not be a Sea Org. Or staff contracts.

Sharone Stainforth
29th December 2010, 07:47 PM
http://www.lermanet.com/82cwcommission/3-300-346.htm

Mark A. Baker
29th December 2010, 08:22 PM
Anytime you have ANY punishment or rehabilitation detail, it's a slippery slope. IMO, there shouldn't have been ANY such.


The slipperiness comes from the desire to punish with which so many are overwhelmingly obsessed.

Rehabilitation in itself is a valuable goal. It is simply the intention to restore a person or thing to a valuable or beneficial state of existence. When "rehabilitation" is coerced and done in degrading circumstances then it is no longer rehabilitation but has become a form of punishment. Intention is all.



There also should not be a Sea Org. Or staff contracts.

To my mind the Sea Org was an idiocy from prior to its inception. Staff contracts in the Co$ as written are one-sided and exploitive, however typically in employment arrangements contracts are deemed necessary, although in society at large these are also growing increasingly one-sided.

What is needful of change is the character of the contracts which Co$ employees sign.


Mark A. Baker

Zinjifar
29th December 2010, 08:38 PM
The Sea Org is the purest expression of Scientology.

Zinj

AnonKat
29th December 2010, 08:40 PM
The Sea Org is the purest expression of Scientology.

Zinj

Trying to Implant us again Zinj ?

Mark A. Baker
29th December 2010, 08:46 PM
The Sea Org is the purest expression of Scientology.

Zinj

One man's view. Not surprisingly, one I don't share.

The SO did not come into existence in any form until 1965 (The Sea Project). This was long after the initial establishment of the subject of scientology and growth of a community of scientologists. The SO was intended from its inception as a vehicle intended to exert Hubbard's sole control over the whole of the scientology community. The SO were his minions and used for eliminating those perceived as rivals or threats to Hubbard personally.

Many of us who still use scientology regard the SO as that which has sought to destroy the scientology community even as it purported to be "promoting scientology tech". I recognize of course that this is not a view to which you are open.


Mark A. Baker

Alanzo
29th December 2010, 08:55 PM
Greetings, Alonzo.
You turned that around very deftly. Allow me to be a mirror.
I understand you are saying that the only rational response to an experience like your vision of the RPF is anger, resentment. Any other response is the sign of a weak mind brought under the control of another.
I never said criminal acts were not committed, nor that LRH was not ultimately responsible. I am saying that the source of suffering is attachment.
You actually have no idea what lessons my experience with LRH imparted to me.

I wish you well.
No I don't.

And yes, I made unwarranted assumptions about you in my post.

But I do believe very strongly that here on Earth, in the realm of the real universe and not in some infinitized realm of absolutes, criminal acts such as those perpetuated by Scientology's RPF should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Further, I believe that the Church of Scientology should have its ability to commit these crimes on people taken away forever.

me myself & i
29th December 2010, 09:50 PM
Steve penned:


I am saying that the source of suffering is attachment.

And?...... That's it?....

"The source of suffering is attachment?"

Steve, can you not see such an absolute statement as being bizarre and incomplete? Be honest here.

The source of suffering is attachment?

So a child dying of starvation in Africa is attached? To what? Food?

My God man, You Scientologists never cease to amaze me in your ability to mimic Ron in his capacity to imagine complex psychological realities to be understood with simple emotional slogans.

Do you honestly believe the source of suffering is attachment?

Or have you recently been reading some Siddartha material?

lol.

Mojo

Free Being Me
29th December 2010, 10:01 PM
The Sea Org is the purest expression of Scientology.

Zinj


One man's view. Not surprisingly, one I don't share.

The SO did not come into existence in any form until 1965 (The Sea Project). This was long after the initial establishment of the subject of scientology and growth of a community of scientologists. The SO was intended from its inception as a vehicle intended to exert Hubbard's sole control over the whole of the scientology community. The SO were his minions and used for eliminating those perceived as rivals or threats to Hubbard personally.

Many of us who still use scientology regard the SO as that which has sought to destroy the scientology community even as it purported to be "promoting scientology tech". I recognize of course that this is not a view to which you are open.


Mark A. Baker

I have to agree with Zinj, Mark. The Sea Org was not only designed as the ultimate KSW but also as the shining example every $cientologist should aspire to.

Hubtard WANTED every $cientologist to join the S.O., clear the planet, moving onto salvaging and clearing this sector of the galaxy. A perfect on policy spiritual global army all in Hubtards vision of what humanity should become.

The tech is the cheese bait sitting on the mouse trap to keep you in $cientology. The S.O. are there to keep you from noticing the trap exists should a disagreement occur.

I'm not sure what project rewind time warp you live in regarding $cientology Mark. Where $cientology is rainbows, candy canes and beautiful sunsets no doubt.

Hubtard created a Utopian philosophy of the soul yet sabotaged it with the S.O.? Is this the view to which a person is not open to?

Sorry, but I spit out the cheese long ago.

Zinjifar
29th December 2010, 10:04 PM
Ron didn't launch the Sea Org till he *could* launch the Sea Org. It wasn't till He had a close dedicated cadre of fanatics and enough money to buy some separation from wogdom that there *could* have been a Sea Org.

Until then, Ron was forced to make accommodations for Wog sensibilities. That's the '50s-'60s period that people remember as the 'good old days'; *before* Ron could actually implement His policies.

Zinj

Mark A. Baker
29th December 2010, 10:05 PM
"The source of suffering is attachment?"

Steve, can you not see such an absolute statement as being bizarre and incomplete? Be honest here.

And it is one of the most profound statements dealing with the nature of spirituality & human existence ever expressed by human philosophy.


Mark A. Baker :)

Mark A. Baker
29th December 2010, 10:09 PM
Ron didn't launch the Sea Org till he *could* launch the Sea Org. It wasn't till He had a close dedicated cadre of fanatics and enough money to buy some separation from wogdom that there *could* have been a Sea Org.

Until then, Ron was forced to make accommodations for Wog sensibilities. That's the '50s-'60s period that people remember as the 'good old days'; *before* Ron could actually implement His policies.

Zinj


This goes along way towards explaining your views of scientology. It does nothing to account on your part for the contributions made by persons other than Hubbard to the development of the subject of scientology.


Mark A. Baker

Veda
29th December 2010, 10:22 PM
-snip-

The SO did not come into existence in any form until 1965 (The Sea Project).

-snip-



The Sea Project was late 1966, and the Sea Org was 1967 and 1968, as I'm sure you know.

It was impractical earlier, as preliminary work (including using "positives" as "bait") was required to build a membership and develop the proper mind-set that would make joining the Sea Org, "the sensible thing to do."

But the foundation for what was to become the Sea Org had been in place since the 1950s:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=515020&postcount=456

Free Being Me
29th December 2010, 10:30 PM
Ron didn't launch the Sea Org till he *could* launch the Sea Org. It wasn't till He had a close dedicated cadre of fanatics and enough money to buy some separation from wogdom that there *could* have been a Sea Org.

Until then, Ron was forced to make accommodations for Wog sensibilities. That's the '50s-'60s period that people remember as the 'good old days'; *before* Ron could actually implement His policies.

Zinj

Absolutely, Zinj. First you have to have a following before you let loose a police force.

HelluvaHoax!
29th December 2010, 10:37 PM
This goes along way towards explaining your views of scientology. It does nothing to account on your part for the contributions made by persons other than Hubbard to the development of the subject of scientology.
Mark A. Baker


Certainly, the zenith of all contributions by others to Hubbard's opus is the tech of successfully pretending to be Clear and OT.

Without that contribution, Scientology would not have worked.

Zinjifar
29th December 2010, 10:39 PM
Certainly, the zenith of all contributions by others to Hubbard's opus is the tech of successfully pretending to be Clear and OT.

Without that contribution, Scientology would not have worked.

It works?? :omg:

Zinj

HelluvaHoax!
29th December 2010, 10:58 PM
It works?? :omg:
Zinj

Sure!

Scientology works for those who have achieved the ability to rise above reality.

Scientology is essentially a two-stage process.


(Entering Scientology): Suspension of disbelief.

(Advanced Scientology): Suspension of dissed bts.

In a nutshell, Scientology is a Suspension Bridge.

Ogsonofgroo
29th December 2010, 11:01 PM
It works?? :omg:

Zinj

Something of it does, how else could a drugged out hack writer of ill-repute con hundreds of millions out of unsuspecting, starry-eyed, idealistic, gullible, generally well-meaning people~ and some are still happy with it?
There is the 'con', then there is the 'long-con' (not to be confused with a 'Lincoln Continental'), then theres the 'Long-Con-of-LRon' ~ I mean it when I say he literally 'wrote the book' (s) on a really, really long scam.
How successful it is indeed, there are several folks here who've been raped and pillaged by the whole scam of LRon, and remain deluded enough to keep trying to salvage 'something' good out of the abhorant mess the old windbag created. It is an un-nerving and a dismal thing to watch at times, so much waste of time and energy...... *sigh*
A wee thought du-jour :)
:p

:roflmao: @ Hoaxy! Guess I took too long to write that response, yours were muchy betterness XP

me myself & i
29th December 2010, 11:13 PM
Steve penned:


the source of suffering is attachment.

Mark penned:


And it is one of the most profound statements dealing with the nature of spirituality & human existence ever expressed by human philosophy.

No Mark, it's not.

Firstly, the most profound statements dealing with the nature of spirituality & human existence ever expressed by human philosophy always have been and always will be expressed in silence (to oneself). And the moment that bond is broken, all hell breaks loose. So to speak. Lol.

Bear with me ....

The problem here is a Scientological one, from my point of view Mark. Namely, Mr. Hubbard thought in terms of human relativity but spoke in terms of spiritual absolutes. And he did so for the simple reason he understood his spiritual right to do so. Which is precisely what set him apart from his contemporaries. So to speak.

But the truth remains the man was insane. By any definition of the word.

And yes, he was brilliant too.

The two (insanity and brilliance) are necessarily one, from my point of view. And, however, more importantly & more germain to the post is this: when a student tries to copy their teacher whilst lacking the skills of their teacher, they tend to make a fool of themselves.

And that's the legacy of Mr. L. Ron Hubbard in regard to his Religion of Scientology in the whole wide world today Mark. To wit: it sucks. If you don't believe me step out of your world and into, say, walmart, and ask 100 shoppers what they think of Scientology. And try not to think in terms of absolutes as they answer you (i.e. these are mere wogs, stupid, destined to a horrible horrible dark dark falling into MEST forever and ever without scientology to help them, thinkingness).

Do you feel invalidated now Mark? I think not. And hope not. For you are a leader of the scientology hopeful.

Mojo

Free Being Me
29th December 2010, 11:22 PM
Sure!

Scientology works for those who have achieved the ability to rise above reality.

Scientology is essentially a two-stage process.


(Entering Scientology): Suspension of disbelief.

(Advanced Scientology): Suspension of dissed bts.

In a nutshell, Scientology is a Suspension Bridge.


http://lh3.ggpht.com/_Pe-BgCgLDCE/SxFwm4EiLGI/AAAAAAAAAlc/OTBeGwz71Iw/broken%20bridge%5B6%5D.jpg?imgmax=800

:D

HelluvaHoax!
29th December 2010, 11:27 PM
Scientology Works Success Story


I stopped at a traffic light that had turned red. I waited for it to change an inordinately long time but it was in a stuck condition.

Not wanting to commit any overts against the Way to Happiness by breaking the law and going thru the intersection, I waited several hours without any joy.

Then I cognited that I should use Ron's tech!

I immediately spotted that I was in "waiting" on the know to mystery scale and that blew a ton of by passed charge.

Then I realized that I could use postulates to make it go right.

I made a tone 40 postulate that the light would change to green.

It did change to green and I drove thru. Scientology works!

I also cognited that it is important to include in ones postulate a time factor. Because it took another 8 hours before the street maintenance crew arrived and fixed that light and I missed an entire day's work.

The next time this happens I will remember that wogs have a terrible com lag before they duplicate the postulates of an OT.

Thanks Ron!

Sindy
29th December 2010, 11:45 PM
Sure!

Scientology works for those who have achieved the ability to rise above reality.

Scientology is essentially a two-stage process.


(Entering Scientology): Suspension of disbelief.

(Advanced Scientology): Suspension of dissed bts.

In a nutshell, Scientology is a Suspension Bridge.
:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

Sindy
29th December 2010, 11:46 PM
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_Pe-BgCgLDCE/SxFwm4EiLGI/AAAAAAAAAlc/OTBeGwz71Iw/broken%20bridge%5B6%5D.jpg?imgmax=800

:D

Good one. I tried to do that but I cannot for the life of me figure out how to post an image. :melodramatic:

Sindy
29th December 2010, 11:48 PM
Scientology Works Success Story


I stopped at a traffic light that had turned red. I waited for it to change an inordinately long time but it was in a stuck condition.

Not wanting to commit any overts against the Way to Happiness by breaking the law and going thru the intersection, I waited several hours without any joy.

Then I cognited that I should use Ron's tech!

I immediately spotted that I was in "waiting" on the know to mystery scale and that blew a ton of by passed charge.

Then I realized that I could use postulates to make it go right.

I made a tone 40 postulate that the light would change to green.

It did change to green and I drove thru. Scientology works!

I also cognited that it is important to include in ones postulate a time factor. Because it took another 8 hours before the street maintenance crew arrived and fixed that light and I missed an entire day's work.

The next time this happens I will remember that wogs have a terrible com lag before they duplicate the postulates of an OT.

Thanks Ron!


:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: :omg: I cannot breathe.

Ogsonofgroo
29th December 2010, 11:52 PM
CLEAR!!!!!! *ZAPP*

(oh shi.... *loosens girdle*)

CLEAR!!!!! *BZZZZZT*

(thumpity, thump, thumpity, thump) Ahhhhhhhh :p

AnonKat
29th December 2010, 11:54 PM
YODA MESSING WITH HUBBARDS TONE SCALE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFnFr-DOPf8

SO FEAR LEADS TO SUFFERING

Free Being Me
29th December 2010, 11:54 PM
Good one. I tried to do that but I cannot for the life of me figure out how to post an image. :melodramatic:

Go to to google images for example, find the image you want, copy and paste the full HTTP address between <->.

picturesiteaddress

Mark A. Baker
30th December 2010, 12:28 AM
No Mark, it's not.


Well then it is fair to say that you completely reject the teachings of Gautama Siddhartha, aka The Buddha, as that principle is the basis for the entirety of Buddhist philosophy, and a fair bit of the Vedic teachings also.


Mark A. Baker

Panda Termint
30th December 2010, 12:32 AM
I liked the Suspension (of Belief) Bridge concept, HH.

Here's another;

Whilst still under the spell as a convinced scientologist, most feel they are treading a very exact and fine line as they "progress" up/over the so-called Bridge To Total Freedom. They may conceive of this as if they're balanced precariously on a narrow beam/Bridge which spans a bottomless abyss or chasm. They devote all their attention, energy and concentration to staying on this narrow beam-Bridge and avoid looking at the "chasm" at all costs. It's quite a balancing act.

The entirety of Ethics, Tech and Admin in the CofS is devoted to keeping their attention tightly focused and never-wavering. They shuffle across at a snail's pace. making whatever progress they make and are often made to "return to the beginning of the Bridge" for arbitrary reasons which, for some inexplicable reason, only serve to further narrow the focus of the traveller.

"Concentrate on the Bridge, avoid looking at the chasm (it is what we say it is), stay the course and you will eventually arrive at the other side!"

One day, for whatever reason, they say to themselves "Flock it" and decide to step off The Bridge and, lo and behold, they find it was all just a clever illusion; the "narrow beam to Total Freedom" rests squarely on solid ground and the step down is miniscule. For many, it's a step up! They find themselves on solid ground and they can see it for what it is now that their attention is unfixed from the Bridge.

They see that there is no bottomless chasm. There never was (at least, nothing approximating the Hubbardian Abyss they'd unknowingly created for themselves).

They are free to move about and explore life at will.

They discover Freedom from Freedom.

AnonKat
30th December 2010, 12:35 AM
Well then it is fair to say that you completely reject the teachings of Gautama Siddhartha, aka The Buddha, as that principle is the basis for the entirety of Buddhist philosophy, and a fair bit of the Vedic teachings also.


Mark A. Baker

WATCH AND LEARN

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rp6XjZxL3XE

HelluvaHoax!
30th December 2010, 12:42 AM
WHO INVENTED THE RPF?

According to Scientologists Ron invented the good part (rehabilitation) and others (unbeknownst to Ron) invented the barbaric cruelty.

How could Ron have not known?

Well, that's easy. When Ron was walking around on the Apollo and saw unbathed, sleep-deprived slaves running around in filthy boiler suits, eating food scraps out of a communal bucket with their hands, not speaking to anyone, off their regular post and sentenced to the depravity of laying down in bilge pumps scraping off rust all day and night---he merely thought they were applying the tech and doing tone scale "mood" drills.

Ron believed they were trying to flatten the mood of degradation.

If Ron the Humanitarian had only known the truth of how others had perverted Scientology tech, he would have put a stop to it right away!

Now ya see why we need KSW so others won't alter Ron's tech?

Gottabrain
30th December 2010, 12:48 AM
Here is a quote from Ken Urquhart's webpage:

"23. p.206. The RPF(1) was introduced by me, not by LRH. I designed it all by myself, in response to an order from him to do something about the people on board who were not, in his view, pulling their weight - but had time to complain loudly. Jon says that the RPF was equivalent to imprisonment; it was only slightly more so than being on the ship in the first place. A person in the RPF could have left if he/she had tried hard enough, just like anyone else on board; the RPF member would probably have had to work at it a bit harder."

http://www.freezoneamerica.org/ivy/bluesky/part8.htm

Wow, Ken. Just wow.

What kind of monster are you?

How little understanding do you actually have of human nature, individuals and of pain and suffering?

How necessary is it for you to continually try to justify creating the RPF, sending others to it, and keeping them imprisoned on it?

"could have left if he/she had tried hard enough...would probably have had to work at it a bit harder"

Ken, that is either completely imbecilic or diabolically evil. Let's start with the concept of "Learned Helplessness", which I know you are very aware has occurred in those degraded, despised, cut off from others and nearly always controlled on the RPF:

"In part one of Seligman and Steve Maier's experiment, three groups of dogs were placed in harnesses. Group One dogs were simply put in the harnesses for a period of time and later released. Groups Two and Three consisted of "yoked pairs." A dog in Group 2 would be intentionally subjected to pain by being given electric shocks, which the dog could end by pressing a lever. A Group 3 dog was wired in parallel with a Group 2 dog, receiving shocks of identical intensity and duration, but his lever didn't stop the electric shocks. To a dog in Group 3, it seemed that the shock ended at random, because it was his paired dog in Group 2 that was causing it to stop. For Group 3 dogs, the shock was apparently "inescapable." Group 1 and Group 2 dogs quickly recovered from the experience, but Group 3 dogs learned to be helpless, and exhibited symptoms similar to chronic clinical depression."

"However, not all of the dogs in Seligman's experiments became helpless. Of the roughly 150 dogs in experiments in the latter half of the 1960s, about one-third did not become helpless, but instead managed to find a way out of the unpleasant situation despite their past experience with it. The corresponding characteristic in humans has been found to correlate highly with optimism: an explanatory style that views the situation as other than personal, pervasive, or permanent. This distinction between people who adapt and those who break down under long-term psychological pressure was also studied in the 1950s in the context of brainwashing."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness

I am sure you are very aware of the impact of brainwashing, Ken, and I find it very interesting that you deny the effects while making your living using the techniques to your personal benefit.

Now let's take a look at another compassionate concept that you pretend to know nothing about. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

"Posttraumatic stress disorder (also known as post-traumatic stress disorder or PTSD) is a severe anxiety disorder that can develop after exposure to any event that results in psychological trauma.[1][2][3] This event may involve the threat of death to oneself or to someone else, or to one's own or someone else's physical, sexual, or psychological integrity,[1] overwhelming the individual's ability to cope. As an effect of psychological trauma, PTSD is less frequent and more enduring than the more commonly seen acute stress response.

Diagnostic symptoms for PTSD include re-experiencing the original trauma(s) through flashbacks or nightmares, avoidance of stimuli associated with the trauma, and increased arousal – such as difficulty falling or staying asleep, anger, and hypervigilance. Formal diagnostic criteria (both DSM-IV-TR and ICD-9) require that the symptoms last more than one month and cause significant impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.[1]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posttraumatic_stress_disorder

-------------

Ken Urquhart, you were a crim and monster in the SO and I don't see that you have changed at all. You still brush off the hell others went through on the RPF and promote it as being a "break" and a "work camp". You have no compassion for the people who suffered for many years later. How cold can you be? How can you call yourself a "counselor"?

Funny, the German people were fooled similarly by changing the words around to make things sound "good" for the Jews, too.

Gottabrain
30th December 2010, 12:56 AM
And I want to add one more related comment:

Everything Ken Urquhart ever wrote was crap. EVERYthing.

He wrote heaps of policies under his own name, or issued under L Ron's name with him as the "assisted by" person.

All the PLs found or known to have been written or issued by Ken Urquhart were cancelled BEFORE he left the SO.

They were all crap. They were all controlling, abusive policies that never actually addressed and handled any situation in a humane way. If I ever saw a BPL by Ken Urquhart, I knew never to use it. We all did.

He never understood human nature then and it is quite apparent he doesn't understand it any better now than he did then. He was an egotistical narcissist back then who probably only left because he was offended to see his BPLs cancelled. I don't see his narcissism has changed, nor his brutal incompassionate attitude toward others.

Mark A. Baker
30th December 2010, 01:09 AM
WATCH AND LEARN

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rp6XjZxL3XE

Nothing he said refutes a thing either Steve or I have said on this thread. What point, if any, did you have in posting this?


Mark A. Baker

HelluvaHoax!
30th December 2010, 01:13 AM
I liked the Suspension (of Belief) Bridge concept, HH.

Here's another;

Whilst still under the spell as a convinced scientologist, most feel they are treading a very exact and fine line as they "progress" up/over the so-called Bridge To Total Freedom. They may conceive of this as if they're balanced precariously on a narrow beam/Bridge which spans a bottomless abyss or chasm. They devote all their attention, energy and concentration to staying on this narrow beam-Bridge and avoid looking at the "chasm" at all costs. It's quite a balancing act.

The entirety of Ethics, Tech and Admin in the CofS is devoted to keeping their attention tightly focused and never-wavering. They shuffle across at a snail's pace. making whatever progress they make and are often made to "return to the beginning of the Bridge" for arbitrary reasons which, for some inexplicable reason, only serve to further narrow the focus of the traveller.

"Concentrate on the Bridge, avoid looking at the chasm (it is what we say it is), stay the course and you will eventually arrive at the other side!"

One day, for whatever reason, they say to themselves "Flock it" and decide to step off The Bridge and, lo and behold, they find it was all just a clever illusion; the "narrow beam to Total Freedom" rests squarely on solid ground and the step down is miniscule. For many, it's a step up! They find themselves on solid ground and they can see it for what it is now that their attention is unfixed from the Bridge.

They see that there is no bottomless chasm. There never was (at least, nothing approximating the Hubbardian Abyss they'd unknowingly created for themselves).

They are free to move about and explore life at will.

They discover Freedom from Freedom.


:clapping: :clapping: :clapping: Wonderfully brilliant and graphically memorable capture of life in Scientology! :clapping: :clapping: :clapping:

Gottabrain
30th December 2010, 01:15 AM
Mark, there is no similarity between Scientology and Buddhist philosophy beyond the fact that both believe in past lives.

Buddhism emphasizes the whole. Scientology emphasizes the mind and parts. Buddhism emphasizes personal paths, Scientology pushes a "Road to Freedom" that is the same for everyone.

Buddhism emphasizes spiritual growth through personal experience and connection to God (or the 7th and 8th Dynamics, if you will). Scientology claims to shortcut growth through experience, it is a selfish, (1st Dynamic)
activity, except when working to help the Cult in the SO or as a staff member, where "the end justifies the means".

Mark, you have not done the things Ken Urquhart has, nor made the comments he has. Do you really want to get in the middle of this? Because to my knowledge, you have never done anything like that and do not have any sort of criminal past in the SO or Scientology. Why stand up for someone like that? Thousands have suffered on the RPF.

dianaclass8
30th December 2010, 01:20 AM
Mark, you have not done the things Ken Urquhart has, nor made the comments he has. Do you really want to get in the middle of this? Because to my knowledge, you have never done anything like that and do not have any sort of criminal past in the SO or Scientology. Why stand up for someone like that? Thousands have suffered on the RPF.

I wonder if Ken Urquhart has ever done something to stop the monster he created. He, by his own words, recognized that it was destructive. So many lost lives, broken families, financial disasters and the fall of Scientology in general.

Diana

me myself & i
30th December 2010, 01:25 AM
Thousands have suffered on the RPF.

Probably more in the last how many years.

55?

Mark A. Baker
30th December 2010, 01:27 AM
Mark, there is no similarity between Scientology and Buddhist philosophy beyond the fact that both believe in past lives. ...

Your post is non-sequitur on an exchange of views discussing a remark originally made by Steve Walker.

BTW, nor as a point of fact do I agree with your opening statement in this post. There are numerous similarities between the two, but they are not the same.


Mark A. Baker

Gottabrain
30th December 2010, 01:33 AM
Your post is non-sequitur on an exchange of views discussing a remark originally made by Steve Walker.

BTW, nor as a point of fact do I agree with your opening statement in this post. There are numerous similarities between the two, but they are not the same.


Mark A. Baker

You don't have to agree. But only the most superficial look at Buddhism would find any vague similarities, and I could find more similarities on a much deeper level between Buddhism and Christianity than either of these with Scientology. The concepts of the Vedas go in a very different direction and deal with compassion, humility and realizing the connectedness of all of us. Concepts practically foreign to Scientology.

This thread is about the RPF. It is important. Derailing is not welcome.

Panda Termint
30th December 2010, 01:56 AM
I agree that threads about the RPF are important. This thread seems to have morphed into "Who can we blame for the RPF?".
The answer is and always will be Hubbard and his policies on dealing with perceived dissent.

Sindy
30th December 2010, 02:03 AM
I agree that threads about the RPF are important. This thread seems to have morphed into "Who can we blame for the RPF?".
The answer is and always will be Hubbard and his policies on dealing with perceived dissent.

Exactly

Mark A. Baker
30th December 2010, 02:04 AM
I agree that threads about the RPF are important. This thread seems to have morphed into "Who can we blame for the RPF?".
The answer is and always will be Hubbard and his policies on dealing with perceived dissent.

Moreover, the actual question asked by the op of the thread was answered on the first page. All else has been "comment".


Mark A. Baker

Gottabrain
30th December 2010, 02:06 AM
I agree that threads about the RPF are important. This thread seems to have morphed into "Who can we blame for the RPF?".
The answer is and always will be Hubbard and his policies on dealing with perceived dissent.

There were versions of the RPF before Ken Urquhart. And the zillions of changes to the RPF policies seesawed back & forth between more humane and less humane. Original version of Ken's had complete disconnection from family and friends. Later versions allowed some to see family. The latest does not.

Ken Urquhart was a willing minion of Hubbard who has not yet come to terms with the magnitude of his dramatizations within the SO. A big ego seems to be the first requirement to being willing to abuse and dehumanize others and he has to justify it to keep his big ego intact. I am not impressed with his dismissing those that suffered from the RPF so easily. He has a long way to go to become a mature and responsible human being in dealing with this. I am not pleased to see him put on a pedestal amongst the Indies who have never experienced the SO or RPF or seen firsthand how it operates.

And I won't tolerate him dismissing the hundreds of RPF testimonies of the pain and control we went through. The Exscn public needs to understand what really went on and he is working against that when he casually dismisses us with his arrogant, self-serving justifications and that is NOT okay!

If I ever hear back from ONE more Indy how they heard from Ken Urquhart how the RPF was originally such a great program, I will slam him again. I am sick of his spreading these lies just so he doesn't have to deal with his personal involvement in a responsible way.

Panda Termint
30th December 2010, 02:14 AM
Understood, Sheila, and yet we have testimony from more than a few who found it "tolerable" and even a relief from the constant stress of "normal" SO life. Go figure. :confused2:

I hold no brief for Ken Urquhart nor his role in implementing the RPF (I don't know the man) my point really is that, at least in the formative years, it was obviously something which Hubbard approved of and found desirable. It was part of his imposed Game.

Gottabrain
30th December 2010, 02:20 AM
Understood, Sheila, and yet we have testimony from more than a few who found it "tolerable" and even a relief from the constant stress of "normal" SO life. Go figure. :confused2:

Really? Anyone who is actually out of the cult so they can speak freely, and willing to put their name and the time period of when they were on the RPF and supply details so we know it is not made up? Or just general anonymous statements saying it was a good program? Because I haven't seen ANY testimonies with names stating this from anyone who is actually out and can speak freely about it.


I hold no brief for Ken Urqhaurt nor his role in implementing the RPF (I don't know the man) my point really is that, at least in the formative years, it was obviously something which Hubbard approved of and found desirable. It was part of his imposed Game.

I see your point, Panda. But Hubbard didn't do it alone, it took others, and some were quite zestful in implementing actions to degrade, humiliate and dehumanize others. Only a select few of us were willing to do that. Remember that.

Megalomaniac
30th December 2010, 02:20 AM
I agree that threads about the RPF are important. This thread seems to have morphed into "Who can we blame for the RPF?".

The question was, "Who invented/devised the RPF?"

Now, to patent an invention, you need to prove two things:
1. Originality. :think: It has to have never been done before. You can't just combine two or more earlier inventions in an obvious way and call it original.
2. Utility. :fire: It has to actually work. Or, at least, it has to not be impossible. In cases of inventions that violate natural laws, such as a perpetual motion machine, you have to provide a working model to the patent office.

Also, you have to keep it a secret until you're about ready to file. After it's public knowledge for more than a year, you lost your chance to get a patent.

I think the RPF would get a big thumbs down from the patent office. :no: Whoever "invented" it is going to have to try harder.

Voltaire's Child
30th December 2010, 02:22 AM
Your post is non-sequitur on an exchange of views discussing a remark originally made by Steve Walker.

BTW, nor as a point of fact do I agree with your opening statement in this post. There are numerous similarities between the two, but they are not the same.


Mark A. Baker

Agreed. The more I read about Buddhism, the more concepts I see that Hubbard clearly borrowed for Scn. They aren't identical, of course, but there are far more similarities than just the one thing.

Gottabrain
30th December 2010, 02:24 AM
Agreed. The more I read about Buddhism, the more concepts I see that Hubbard clearly borrowed for Scn. They aren't identical, of course, but there are far more similarities than just the one thing.

^^ The more deeply I study it, the less I see. It is a matter of opinion, though.

But THIS thread is about "Who invented / devised the RPF?"

Ken Urquhart claims he devised the RPF.

It is a common derailling tactic to shift a conversation to different religions or philosophies or a comparison of these. Can we please not do that here.

Sindy
30th December 2010, 02:25 AM
The question was, "Who invented/devised the RPF?"

Now, to patent an invention, you need to prove two things:
1. Originality. :think: It has to have never been done before. You can't just combine two or more earlier inventions in an obvious way and call it original.
2. Utility. :fire: It has to actually work. Or, at least, it has to not be impossible. In cases of inventions that violate natural laws, such as a perpetual motion machine, you have to provide a working model to the patent office.

Also, you have to keep it a secret until you're about ready to file. After it's public knowledge for more than a year, you lost your chance to get a patent.

I think the RPF would get a big thumbs down from the patent office. :no: Whoever "invented" it is going to have to try harder.

:lol::hattip:

Megalomaniac
30th December 2010, 02:37 AM
Here's a sample patent application:

CHILD DISCIPLINE COMPOSITION AND METHOD (http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20070077315.pdf)

A composition for substantially deterring unwanted behaviors in children is provided. The composition comprises water, goldenseal tincture, and apple cider vinegar in an effective amount. The composition is sprayed toward the mouth of the child after the child engages in the unwanted behavior. The composition may be sprayed from an aerosol can, sprayer, or the like.

Gottabrain
30th December 2010, 02:44 AM
Megalo, you're funny. :)

Patents need at least pictures or a mechanical design. Otherwise, it's just copyright. I know what you're saying.

But to get something a copyright can be any bits and pieces from anywhere and throw them together.

Ken Urquhart says he came up with the RPF and the first Flag Order instituting it was his, and L Ron signed off on it and it was issued as if it was written directly by L Ron. He even said it was for people who were not considered productive enough, which is interesting, as the first FO gave 4 reasons for going to the RPF:
List One Rockslammer
Repeated Stat Crasher
Low OCA Non Producer
Overt Product Makers

Anyway, there is a terrific discussion of Ken Urquhart's wonderful "original" RPF on Caliwog's blog, below:

http://caliwog.wordpress.com/2010/10/12/the-abcs-of-the-rpf/

Mark A. Baker
30th December 2010, 02:44 AM
I think the RPF would get a big thumbs down from the patent office. :no: Whoever "invented" it is going to have to try harder.

The u.s. marine corps certainly have a valid prior claim. The royal navy could easily contest that one though. :coolwink:


Mark A. Baker

Gottabrain
30th December 2010, 02:50 AM
The u.s. marine corps certainly have a valid prior claim. The royal navy could easily contest that one though. :coolwink:


Mark A. Baker

Mark, you don't know anything about patents and copyrights.

From Caliwog's blog (where you can also find links to the various RPF FO's and revisions):

Hubbard’s 1974 RPF Flag Order dictates who gets sent to the RPF, what duties they can and cannot perform, their schedule (“around 7 hours sleep, 5 hours study or auditing, 30 minutes for each meal, 30 minutes personal hygiene”), when they can be released, even what they wear (“a BLACK boiler suit, or ethnically acceptable cleaning outfit in very dark blue”). To give you some idea of how demeaning the RPF was meant to be, LRH said that RPF inmates could do “painting requiring no extra skill,” but could NOT do “any fine paint, carpets, woodwork, plaster, wallpaper, varnish or window replacement work.”

FO3434 also listed the RPFers rights and restrictions. Among the latter:

■“Has no liberties.
■“Is restricted to FH [Fort Harrison Hotel] at all times except when on authorized work cycles in other Flag buildings. Any travel between buildings is accompanied by a Security Guard. [emphasis added]
■“Receives 1/4 pay until released, then 1/2 pay*.
■“May not speak to or approach Flag staff or public… unless spoken to.
■“Some contact with a spouse or child is permitted during the RPFer’s meal time…once daily if the RPFer is upstat. [emphasis added]
■“May not have with them in the RPF ANY drugs or alcoholic beverages, radios, TV, taped music, musical instruments, chess games, or any such entertainment or luxury, or consume such when on authorized visits to spouse or child.” [emphasis in original]

http://caliwog.wordpress.com/2010/10/12/the-abcs-of-the-rpf/

omnom
30th December 2010, 03:10 AM
Now, to patent an invention, you need to prove two things:
1. Originality. :think: It has to have never been done before. You can't just combine two or more earlier inventions in an obvious way and call it original.
2. Utility. :fire: It has to actually work. Or, at least, it has to not be impossible. In cases of inventions that violate natural laws, such as a perpetual motion machine, you have to provide a working model to the patent office.


Man, I'd love if the US patent office had that much common sense. It does not need to work. Nor does it have to be unique - only "not obvious" in the opinion of the clerk.

One example:
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=hNeGAAAAEBAJ&dq=perpetual+motion

The US patent system is full of retarded ideas, sadly.
Don't even get me started on the concept of software patents...

Now, back to the concept of RPF, I doubt it'd be a unique idea, nor without large sections of prior art citations. Treating people like crap to condition them into a specific behavior is also sadly not unique, and has lots of prior art in a significantly similar fashion.

When it comes to CoS, the RPF (and RPF's RPF, which *may* be patentable, given that most dictators aren't *that* fucked up) still have "inventors" and implementors. They're all sick in the head.

Panda Termint
30th December 2010, 03:37 AM
Really? Anyone who is actually out of the cult so they can speak freely, and willing to put their name and the time period of when they were on the RPF and supply details so we know it is not made up? Or just general anonymous statements saying it was a good program? Because I haven't seen ANY testimonies with names stating this from anyone who is actually out and can speak freely about it.

You don't have to look too hard; I believe I've read 2 or 3 such testimonials here on ESMB and I've read others but don't have the links to hand.

As I said, go figure... I know it's hard to believe.

I have a friend, still in scn but now out of the SO, who spent something like 10 or 12 years (nearly half of his SO career) in various RPFs. He recently finished paying off an enormous Freeloader Bill and, despite my best efforts to convince him otherwise, he still thinks he's Saving the Planet.

I have trouble believing it, too. :omg:

(As to the rest of your comments; I agree!)

Gottabrain
30th December 2010, 04:08 AM
You don't have to look too hard; I believe I've read 2 or 3 such testimonials here on ESMB and I've read others but don't have the links to hand.

As I said, go figure... I know it's hard to believe.

I have a friend, still in scn but now out of the SO, who spent something like 10 or 12 years (nearly half of his SO career) in various RPFs. He recently finished paying off an enormous Freeloader Bill and, despite my best efforts to convince him otherwise, he still thinks he's Saving the Planet.

I have trouble believing it, too. :omg:

(As to the rest of your comments; I agree!)

Seriously, Panda, I have looked. Fake names, no details of when/where they were on the RPF. If anyone has one to add here that has just that BASIC criteria (actual name, when/where on the RPF), please do so. Because yes, it is very hard to believe. I don't believe it. I could see someone freshly out might not yet have had a chance to look honestly at the abuse of this program, but I haven't even seen that. Once someone leaves the Cult of Scientology and gets their self esteem and sense of self-worth back, the abomination of the RPF dehumanizing, reprogramming abuse becomes pretty clear.

Sorry to hear about your friend still being in the Cult. :( Even I actually paid my F/L debt shortly after finally getting out of the RPF. It took a while to completely get over the mind control and the idea that it was the "only road to freedom".)

Ogsonofgroo
30th December 2010, 04:08 AM
I liked the Suspension (of Belief) Bridge concept, HH.

Here's another;

Whilst still under the spell as a convinced scientologist, most feel they are treading a very exact and fine line as they "progress" up/over the so-called Bridge To Total Freedom. They may conceive of this as if they're balanced precariously on a narrow beam/Bridge which spans a bottomless abyss or chasm. They devote all their attention, energy and concentration to staying on this narrow beam-Bridge and avoid looking at the "chasm" at all costs. It's quite a balancing act.

The entirety of Ethics, Tech and Admin in the CofS is devoted to keeping their attention tightly focused and never-wavering. They shuffle across at a snail's pace. making whatever progress they make and are often made to "return to the beginning of the Bridge" for arbitrary reasons which, for some inexplicable reason, only serve to further narrow the focus of the traveller.

"Concentrate on the Bridge, avoid looking at the chasm (it is what we say it is), stay the course and you will eventually arrive at the other side!"

One day, for whatever reason, they say to themselves "Flock it" and decide to step off The Bridge and, lo and behold, they find it was all just a clever illusion; the "narrow beam to Total Freedom" rests squarely on solid ground and the step down is miniscule. For many, it's a step up! They find themselves on solid ground and they can see it for what it is now that their attention is unfixed from the Bridge.

They see that there is no bottomless chasm. There never was (at least, nothing approximating the Hubbardian Abyss they'd unknowingly created for themselves).

They are free to move about and explore life at will.

They discover Freedom from Freedom.

To have a bottom you would have to be up or down, bridge thingy makes perfe3c sense if you want to scare people and such, hm, abridge, a-bridge, a bridge... A connection, a bypass, over hostile waters...
Not lron's way.
You'd never get there... cannot or reach the, the 'other side', it's so high above there and you may fall off,
keep going,
keep going...
Turn your head
Cough.

Megalomaniac
30th December 2010, 04:12 AM
Well, I think they should provide a working model, for it to qualify as an invention.


I have a friend, still in scn but now out of the SO, who spent something like 10 or 12 years (nearly half of his SO career) in various RPFs.

12 years! :wtf: That's an awful lot of rehabilitation! Seems like there ought to be a faster way.

dianaclass8
30th December 2010, 05:03 AM
There were versions of the RPF before Ken Urquhart. And the zillions of changes to the RPF policies seesawed back & forth between more humane and less humane. Original version of Ken's had complete disconnection from family and friends. Later versions allowed some to see family. The latest does not.

Ken Urquhart was a willing minion of Hubbard who has not yet come to terms with the magnitude of his dramatizations within the SO. A big ego seems to be the first requirement to being willing to abuse and dehumanize others and he has to justify it to keep his big ego intact. I am not impressed with his dismissing those that suffered from the RPF so easily. He has a long way to go to become a mature and responsible human being in dealing with this. I am not pleased to see him put on a pedestal amongst the Indies who have never experienced the SO or RPF or seen firsthand how it operates.

And I won't tolerate him dismissing the hundreds of RPF testimonies of the pain and control we went through. The Exscn public needs to understand what really went on and he is working against that when he casually dismisses us with his arrogant, self-serving justifications and that is NOT okay!

If I ever hear back from ONE more Indy how they heard from Ken Urquhart how the RPF was originally such a great program, I will slam him again. I am sick of his spreading these lies just so he doesn't have to deal with his personal involvement in a responsible way.

Amen!!!!

Voltaire's Child
30th December 2010, 05:03 AM
^^ The more deeply I study it, the less I see. It is a matter of opinion, though.

But THIS thread is about "Who invented / devised the RPF?"

Ken Urquhart claims he devised the RPF.

It is a common derailling tactic to shift a conversation to different religions or philosophies or a comparison of these. Can we please not do that here.

Oh, I was just answering some commentary you and Mark were posting. Threads meander. It's not a tactic. It's just human nature.

Also, I don't agree that it's a derailing practice. I think it depends on the context. There are times when comparisons occupy a place in debate or discussion of a subject.

AFAIK, Ken Urquhart has been said to have devised the RPF. But at Hubbard's instructions. That means they both were responsible. I did meet Ken a couple months ago but didn't discuss anything controversial, really. If I were to talk to him about this, I would ask him how he feels about this now. That would matter to me. I've met exes who did a number of things when they were in the cult. Sometimes just a bit here and there and in other cases, far more. In fact,a few months ago, someone who really had fucked over a lot of people including me contacted me privately to apologize. That person would be an example of an ex who had done shitty things when in the cult. I know how the person feels about this now as this was mentioned in the apology. But how does Ken Urquhart feel now? Anyone ask him or hear him mention it?

dianaclass8
30th December 2010, 05:08 AM
But how does Ken Urquhart feel now? Anyone ask him or hear him mention it?

Voltaire; I have been corresponding with Ken and I have asked him that and many other questions and the man feels no remorse and has not had a change of heart. And not only that, he continues doing evil but this time he does it surretitiously. I have proof of that.

Diana

Voltaire's Child
30th December 2010, 05:09 AM
Oh, and would you guys please FUCKING STOP ATTACKING EACH OTHER!! JESUS FUCKING CHRIST!!

I don't give a flying fuck if this person doesn't know about this or that. Surely one can make such an observation without using such aggressive phrasing. And I don't care if this one pissed off that one's friend or allegedly outed that person.

There are AT LEAST two sides to every story. If not more. (I am reminded of those hexagonal sided gaming dice at this point). We all have feelings and reasons for what we do. I can understand dissecting a situation where someone created something like the RPF but do we really have to attack other contributors and tell them theyr'e Scientological or they don't know anything about stuff or that they're derailing this or that or that they maliciously outted someone?

Grow up!

Sindy
30th December 2010, 07:07 AM
Voltaire; I have been corresponding with Ken and I have asked him that and many other questions and the man feels no remorse and has not had a change of heart. And not only that, he continues doing evil but this time he does it surretitiously. I have proof of that.

Diana

I will correspond with him now too and get his answers to these things as well. Thanks. I'll get the details from him as this communication is too vague. Anyway, I have gotten to know you somewhat on FB and I like you very much. I also have a very dear friend that knows Ken extremely well and I respect her opinion and think her judgment is superb. She says not only nice and positive things about the man but extraordinary things. So, I feel that the communication on this thread so far has been a bit too inflammatory and defamatory. This is not to say that I don't believe that you have a personal issue and definite gripe. I need to learn more.

Peter Soderqvist
30th December 2010, 07:08 AM
Originally posted by Mark. A Baker, reposted by Diana Class8



http://www.freezoneamerica.org/ivy/bluesky/part8.htm

It is more than likely that LRH would never have admitted foul play to Ken Urquhart. I remember Ken as a weasley little butler on the ship, not an LRH Communicator. He may have been promoted at some stage, but not in my time. Which makes some of his statement wrong.Where some is wrong, I am inclined to believe there is much that is wrong.


There were always GO people on the ship, they did not come later.We all know what the Guardians Office were capable of and if we don't, then I suggest we look. LRHs Guardians Office, which was run from the ship Apollo by L. Ron Hubbard infiltrated government offices around the world. They also as one of their many operations tried to get Paulette Cooper imprisoned on bomb threat charges that werte false. It might have been run by Jane Kember and Mo Budlong and a whole host of other people but I assure you LRH and MSH were at the helm at all times.

To continue this charade of LRH didn't know, is rediculous. Why do you suppose he was on the run for so long, mmm,why do you suppose he let his own wife take the rap and go to jail instead of him, facing up and being a man.LRH was not a man, he was a monster.

Ken Urquhart calls himself an ex scientologist, poppycock, he is still very much a scientologist and is doing a good job of painting himself in exactly the same light as LRH.

Susan Meister

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2842889/susan_meister_shot_dead_by_scientology

Google Susan Meister, read her letters that did go to her family, one wanders why those letters got through? Because they praised scientology and life at flag as being the best place on earth to be. Her death has many similarities to Lisa McPherson, and happened at the mecca of technical perfection - the Flagship Apollo.

Soderqvist1: Cyril Vosper was SP-Declared 1968 and HCO Ken Urquhart signed the declare here!
http://www.suburbia.com.au/~fun/scn/books/vosper/vosper-enemy.txt

Soderqvist1: Some titbits from Cyril Vosper Book: “The mind Benders”

The Mind Benders
Find out who you really are?" That is what the Ethics Order told me to do."Vosper is to apply the Enemy formula which is: 'Find out who you really are.'" No good writing to Ken Urquhart and telling him, "Look, Ken, I've known you for years. You know who I am". I felt much better when I had finished my long list. I really was not an Enemy of Mankind. Should I send it in? Or was it all such complete nonsense that I would be wiser to ignore the Scientologists? But the children; what would they think of me if I didn't try to get back into Scientology? I posted it to Ken Urquhart. Over the following six weeks, I sent in another five of these applications of the Enemy Formula. I got more and more imaginative every time. In the end I was able to picture myself as one of the most evil beings ever to have inhabited the physical universe. It did not do any good though. I kept getting extraordinary letters from Peter Warren, telling me to "Find out who you really are". They were not going to up-grade me. But, by now, I really did not want them to. In the end I decided that I would not act out this idiocy any longer and went back to see my children.
http://www.suburbia.com.au/~fun/scn/books/vosper/epilogue.html

Soderqvist1: Ken Urquhart has said this to Russell Miller!

Bare-Faced Messiah
In truth, Mary Sue had much to complain about, because she had no doubt that she was going to have to take the rap for Operation Snow White. 'Hubbard abandoned her', said Ken Urquhart, 'and made it quite clear within the org that he had abandoned her. It's the one thing I find hard to forgive - that he was prepared to allow his wife to go to jail for crimes he was equally guilty of. After the FBI raid I was put to work making up reports to show that he did not know what was going on. In other words, I was to cover his ass. He was privy to almost all of it and was as guilty as Mary Sue.
http://www.clambake.org/archive/books/bfm/bfm21.htm#356

Soderqvist1: Ken Urquhart ‘s comments on the book “A Piece of Blue Sky" was written 2000-2001.
The link below is his point of view up to date!

Notes on the Main Reasons for the Degeneration of Scientology By Ken Urquhart
http://kgurquhart.blogspot.com/

I told you I was trouble
30th December 2010, 07:12 AM
I have seen posts (I think Dart was one and maybe Paul and/or Freewill were the others) stating that after being a part of the insanity of the org, the RPF was almost a relief and that they ate better and got more sleep!

It's all about comparative viewpoint ... and it does not make it right (because it is very wrong).

It was Hubbard that created the RPF but it seems that he tasked someone else with the initial creation of it.

Nothing new there then.

Panda Termint
30th December 2010, 08:47 AM
12 years! :wtf: That's an awful lot of rehabilitation! Seems like there ought to be a faster way.
Yes, Mac, but that was as I said, in "various RPFs". He was assigned to maybe 3 or 4 different RPFs at different times in his SO career, if I recall correctly.

HelluvaHoax!
30th December 2010, 10:13 AM
A comment on the notion of REHABILITATION. ( I feel a rant coming on---apologies in advance for what might be a long ramble...but i gotta get it out of my system :hysterical:)

Let's assume that a Scientologist who joins staff is somewhere on some generic scale of ability and competence. Let's make up a scale that goes from 0 to 1000.

Okay! Now Billy Blowdown is perhaps at 96 on that scale when he gets on the Bridge the first day.

According to Scientology scripture, a person's IQ raises 1 point for each 1 hour of auditing. And Training is supposed to produce equal gains to processing. So let's say Billy Blowdown does a few courses and gets some auditing before he signs a billion year Sea Org contract, so let's say, hypothetically, he should be HIGHER than 96 if Scientology works, right?

Arbitrarily, let's assume that Billy is at 150 on the scale when he enters the Sea Org.

Now, he gets a ton of EPF and mest work and Sea Org training and hat training and that should raise him on that scale (If Scientology works) let's say to 180.

Now he goes on post and continues his study and he is working with Clears and OT's in the most theta, on source environment so theoretically (if Scientology works) he should keep going up that scale, right? Let's say he peaks at 205 and that's his "level" while he works on staff.

Now, one day something happens and Billy Blowdown is sent to REHABILITATION.

I have questions about that.

Just how far down the scale did he have to fall to require REHAB?

Maybe a precipitous fall back to 150, like the day he joined the Sea Org? Hmmm, that would be a bad indicator for that to happen, since if Scientology worked he should be going UP the scale, right?

Well, let's say he really screwed up and went all the way back down to the level he was the first day he walked into the org (96)! Really a steep decline, isn't it?

Now he is officially on the REHABILITATION project force, designed (they say) to REHABILITATE him.

That should mean to return him to some former higher state or condition.

Realistically, if a person fell down the scale back to the beginning, it would tell me that Scientology doesn't work because the most elite practitioners are going in the wrong direction!!

But assuming that people can fall off their "highs" just how long would it realistically take to return that person to their former elevation? A few hours?
A few days? A few weeks? Months? Years?

If Scientology IS what is says it is....and if Scientology can DO what it says it can do---then the tech should be able to find the guy's why very quickly. And a little hatting and fix up should put this guy back on post in a very short time indeed.

The fact that people stay in the RPF for months and years is proof itself that Scientology does not work.

And it is proof positive that the product of the RPF cannot possibly be REHABILITATION because it does not take that long to fix a person who flubs on their job. I have owned many companies the past 30 years and if a person is qualified to work there in the first place, it usually doesn't take much more than a good talking session and perhaps a pay cut until they are doing what they are supposed to be doing. I have even had people who stole money get fixed with a stern talking to and I put him back on his job and he went on to become the top manager in the entire company, still working to this very day!

One thing is for certain.

Nobody is getting better from it. There is no "rehab". Otherwise, how come Billy Blowdown takes YEARS to get rehabbed when it only took him a few weeks to make those gains in the first place just before he joined the Sea Org?

It is something else entirely.

It's probably just exactly what it looks like. Cruel, cult brainwashing and behavioral modification thru outrageous indoctrination rituals.

It sure as hell ain't REHABILITATING anyone.

So, no matter who thought of it or who ordered it or who implemented it---it's a freakin extreme prison that breaks people and turns them into pliable, non-blowing zombies.

But, it fails to even do that. Because most blow soon after graduating from it.

Nice product there, Scientologists!

Zinjifar
30th December 2010, 06:35 PM
If I remember his story right, Chuck Beatty was in the RPF (and RPF's RPF) continuously for more than 8 years. I don't think his is the only case.

I assume that he was there because of his familiarity with the INCOMM system.

So, the RPF exists:

For punishment
As a threat
For slave labor
As a security measure to hold people captive who have been judged to 'know too much'.

The only 'rehabilitation' is bringing the miscreant into 100% Compliance with Command Intention.

Zinj

dianaclass8
30th December 2010, 07:24 PM
A comment on the notion of REHABILITATION. ( I feel a rant coming on---apologies in advance for what might be a long ramble...but i gotta get it out of my system :hysterical:)

Let's assume that a Scientologist who joins staff is somewhere on some generic scale of ability and competence. Let's make up a scale that goes from 0 to 1000.

Okay! Now Billy Blowdown is perhaps at 96 on that scale when he gets on the Bridge the first day.

According to Scientology scripture, a person's IQ raises 1 point for each 1 hour of auditing. And Training is supposed to produce equal gains to processing. So let's say Billy Blowdown does a few courses and gets some auditing before he signs a billion year Sea Org contract, so let's say, hypothetically, he should be HIGHER than 96 if Scientology works, right?

Arbitrarily, let's assume that Billy is at 150 on the scale when he enters the Sea Org.

Now, he gets a ton of EPF and mest work and Sea Org training and hat training and that should raise him on that scale (If Scientology works) let's say to 180.

Now he goes on post and continues his study and he is working with Clears and OT's in the most theta, on source environment so theoretically (if Scientology works) he should keep going up that scale, right? Let's say he peaks at 205 and that's his "level" while he works on staff.

Now, one day something happens and Billy Blowdown is sent to REHABILITATION.

I have questions about that.

Just how far down the scale did he have to fall to require REHAB?

Maybe a precipitous fall back to 150, like the day he joined the Sea Org? Hmmm, that would be a bad indicator for that to happen, since if Scientology worked he should be going UP the scale, right?

Well, let's say he really screwed up and went all the way back down to the level he was the first day he walked into the org (96)! Really a steep decline, isn't it?

Now he is officially on the REHABILITATION project force, designed (they say) to REHABILITATE him.

That should mean to return him to some former higher state or condition.

Realistically, if a person fell down the scale back to the beginning, it would tell me that Scientology doesn't work because the most elite practitioners are going in the wrong direction!!

But assuming that people can fall off their "highs" just how long would it realistically take to return that person to their former elevation? A few hours?
A few days? A few weeks? Months? Years?

If Scientology IS what is says it is....and if Scientology can DO what it says it can do---then the tech should be able to find the guy's why very quickly. And a little hatting and fix up should put this guy back on post in a very short time indeed.

The fact that people stay in the RPF for months and years is proof itself that Scientology does not work.

And it is proof positive that the product of the RPF cannot possibly be REHABILITATION because it does not take that long to fix a person who flubs on their job. I have owned many companies the past 30 years and if a person is qualified to work there in the first place, it usually doesn't take much more than a good talking session and perhaps a pay cut until they are doing what they are supposed to be doing. I have even had people who stole money get fixed with a stern talking to and I put him back on his job and he went on to become the top manager in the entire company, still working to this very day!

One thing is for certain.

Nobody is getting better from it. There is no "rehab". Otherwise, how come Billy Blowdown takes YEARS to get rehabbed when it only took him a few weeks to make those gains in the first place just before he joined the Sea Org?

It is something else entirely.

It's probably just exactly what it looks like. Cruel, cult brainwashing and behavioral modification thru outrageous indoctrination rituals.

It sure as hell ain't REHABILITATING anyone.

So, no matter who thought of it or who ordered it or who implemented it---it's a freakin extreme prison that breaks people and turns them into pliable, non-blowing zombies.

But, it fails to even do that. Because most blow soon after graduating from it.

Nice product there, Scientologists!



Helluva, I wish that Ken Urquhart read your post. But alas! He has no confront to come to this list and face the facts.

Diana

dianaclass8
30th December 2010, 07:26 PM
If I remember his story right, Chuck Beatty was in the RPF (and RPF's RPF) continuously for more than 8 years. I don't think his is the only case.

I assume that he was there because of his familiarity with the INCOMM system.

So, the RPF exists:

For punishment
As a threat
For slave labor
As a security measure to hold people captive who have been judged to 'know too much'.

The only 'rehabilitation' is bringing the miscreant into 100% Compliance with Command Intention.

Zinj

Zinj, I wonder what would happen if you and Ken Urquhart have a "tête à tête" about this..
Diana

nexus100
30th December 2010, 07:30 PM
Zinj, I wonder what would happen if you and Ken Urquhart have a "tête à tête" about this..
Diana

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3W5GDkgf2w

AnonKat
30th December 2010, 08:08 PM
Nothing he said refutes a thing either Steve or I have said on this thread. What point, if any, did you have in posting this?


Mark A. Baker

The Source of "Dukah" is atachement. If Dukah isn't nescercerely suffering perse but has another meaning like : Other determinism than it goes like: The Source of Other determinism is Atachement.

dianaclass8
30th December 2010, 08:14 PM
[QUOTE=nexus100;515766

Nexus, I assume that Zinj is Iñigo Montoya...LOL!

Diana

Auditor's Toad
30th December 2010, 08:20 PM
I remember being at the horseshoe when the police started taping the area off.

When I asked what happened I was told " Oh, somebody got shot out there in the street ".

Now, all these years later, I hear the truth.

Amazing how close some of us were to something as it happened and we never really knew what happened right there damned near in front of us.

Or how willingly I believed what I was told and never checked out anything on my own!

Others have said they feel stupid. I look back and feel REAL stupid.

Forgiving them is much easier than forgiving myself.

So much easier.

nexus100
30th December 2010, 08:22 PM
[QUOTE=nexus100;515766

Nexus, I assume that Zinj is Iñigo Montoya...LOL!

Diana

Always the swordsman!. You are correct, lady.

dianaclass8
30th December 2010, 08:23 PM
[QUOTE=dianaclass8;515781]

Always the swordsman!. You are correct, lady.

Yes, that is exactly how I picture Zinj!

Diana

AnonKat
30th December 2010, 08:34 PM
Watching this will cost you 40 minutes of your life you'll never get back


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6n-tXAHJf14

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtbV3wu5L1I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO6IiLoPpQQ

SchwimmelPuckel
30th December 2010, 08:43 PM
Helluva, I wish that Ken Urquhart read your post. But alas! He has no confront to come to this list and face the facts.

DianaHmm.. Urquhart could be useful for research.. In his strange and convoluted mind is the explanation for the 'Lucifer Effect', as in the Stanford Prison Experiment.. Him actually 'designing' the RPF and doing a 'CSW' for Hubbard.. Sheesh.. And him still believing that shit?

However.. It's still Hubbard who 'invented' the RPF! - Nothing in the RPF is new, everything has been done by Hubbard before. Urquhart, at the time and situation, was not allowed or inclined to 'invent' anything at all. Noone around Hubbard was I'm sure..

There is a Policy Letter describing, and introducing, the RPF? - I distinctly recall reading it and getting nauseous.. It was one of the major wake-up calls for me.

:yes:

Ogsonofgroo
30th December 2010, 08:54 PM
Hmm.. Urquhart could be useful for research.. In his strange and convoluted mind is the explanation for the 'Lucifer Effect', as in the Stanford Prison Experiment.. Him actually 'designing' the RPF and doing a 'CSW' for Hubbard.. Sheesh.. And him still believing that shit?

However.. It's still Hubbard who 'invented' the RPF! - Nothing in the RPF is new, everything has been done by Hubbard before. Urquhart, at the time and situation, was not allowed or inclined to 'invent' anything at all. Noone around Hubbard was I'm sure..

There is a Policy Letter describing, and introducing, the RPF? - I distinctly recall reading it and getting nauseous.. It was one of the major wake-up calls for me.

:yes:

Wouldn't happen to be this one per chance Schwim? >
Date: May 30, 1977
FLAG ORDER 3434RB Re-Revised 30 May 1977 An excerpt: "Some contact with a spouse or child is permitted during the RPFer's meal time or securing time once daily if the RPFer is upstat. All the above is providing no discussion of case or condition occurs and providing there is NO enturbulation whatsoever from or between either. In the case of a pre-school child contact is allowed more than-once daily during mealtimes and the schedule is to be worked out with the RPF MAA"
Somewhere I have the link to the doc but cannot find atm, this is from the Scientology Lies site but they only have this exerpt.
If ya want I can dig up the full docs if someone doesn't beat me to it, can't get to it this moment. I know its been saved to a few sources, and it is indeed twisted bit of LRonism (but what wasn't?).

:cheers: All!

AnonKat
30th December 2010, 08:56 PM
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/miller/interviews/urquhart.htm


The RPF [Rehabilitation Project Force] came into existence while he was in his cabin after the accident. A guy called Gary Watson, who was the port captain, sent in some kind of programme of action to the Commodore and the Commodore set up a unit to take care of rebellious people or those not fitting in. I set up the RPF but it became very much different from what I envisaged - which was a place where you could be removed from the stress and strains of bureaucracy, with some physical work every day to take their attention off themselves and in the other half of day they could audit each other on problems they had.

After the accident people were asking themselves why he was making such a fuss. Indeed, why was he in pain? The justification was again he was doing such an important job. He was going round a curve on a hill on his motorcycle. He got himself back to the ship and walked on board. He was very strong physically. He once told me on the ship that he had just pulled his own tooth.

I didn't always believe him, he wasn't infallible, had lapses of memory and there were times he couldn't be taken seriously. Not long after I became CS7 he found out they were hosing down the upper decks with fresh water and he thought that was terrible. He made us use sea water to wash down the wooden decks. Six months later he discovers they are using sea water and thinks it's insane. He blows up and says, why aren't you using fresh water? Something had happened to the electrical circuits because of corrosion from the sea water.

Now and again he would take over the supervising of case folders of people who were being auditied on the ship, either because he was doing some research and what to see exactly what was happening with what he had ordered to be done, or because he had found out there were some errors and people were not being handed correctly. Very often he'd be doing this after midnight and he'd call me in and chat away while he was going through the folders.

At Saint Hill he often talked about his track [past lives]. One he talked about more than once was the fact that on various planets he had hidden away treasure or was owed back pay. He talked about that more than once at Saint Hill and in '67 or '68 he had the Mission Into Time and what he was looking for was caches of stored treasure he had left behind. Now he has left money in trust with various people which he is going to come back and pick up in another lifetime.

I cannot accept the fact that he and other have lived before, many lifetimes, but part of his motivation is to come back and pick up his money. He definitely had tremendous abilities and skills in what he was doing, in this area of mental and spiritual abilities, very definitely superior.

I am convinced he believed it himself. I think he believed it was true, but one can make up things and believe they were true.

Sharone Stainforth
30th December 2010, 10:44 PM
Originally posted by Peter Soderqvuist:


Soderqvist1: Cyril Vosper was SP-Declared 1968 and HCO Ken Urquhart signed the declare here!
http://www.suburbia.com.au/~fun/scn/...sper-enemy.txt

Soderqvist1: Some titbits from Cyril Vosper Book: “The mind Benders”

The Mind Benders
Find out who you really are?" That is what the Ethics Order told me to do."Vosper is to apply the Enemy formula which is: 'Find out who you really are.'" No good writing to Ken Urquhart and telling him, "Look, Ken, I've known you for years. You know who I am". I felt much better when I had finished my long list. I really was not an Enemy of Mankind. Should I send it in? Or was it all such complete nonsense that I would be wiser to ignore the Scientologists? But the children; what would they think of me if I didn't try to get back into Scientology? I posted it to Ken Urquhart. Over the following six weeks, I sent in another five of these applications of the Enemy Formula. I got more and more imaginative every time. In the end I was able to picture myself as one of the most evil beings ever to have inhabited the physical universe. It did not do any good though. I kept getting extraordinary letters from Peter Warren, telling me to "Find out who you really are". They were not going to up-grade me. But, by now, I really did not want them to. In the end I decided that I would not act out this idiocy any longer and went back to see my children.
http://www.suburbia.com.au/~fun/scn/.../epilogue.html

Soderqvist1: Ken Urquhart has said this to Russell Miller!

Bare-Faced Messiah
In truth, Mary Sue had much to complain about, because she had no doubt that she was going to have to take the rap for Operation Snow White. 'Hubbard abandoned her', said Ken Urquhart, 'and made it quite clear within the org that he had abandoned her. It's the one thing I find hard to forgive - that he was prepared to allow his wife to go to jail for crimes he was equally guilty of. After the FBI raid I was put to work making up reports to show that he did not know what was going on. In other words, I was to cover his ass. He was privy to almost all of it and was as guilty as Mary Sue.
http://www.clambake.org/archive/books/bfm/bfm21.htm#356

Soderqvist1: Ken Urquhart ‘s comments on the book “A Piece of Blue Sky" was written 2000-2001.
The link below is his point of view up to date!

Notes on the Main Reasons for the Degeneration of Scientology By Ken Urquhart
http://kgurquhart.blogspot.com/

Right to clarify a few points, from the the hater of all Scientology in any shape or form, including that of L. Ron Hubbard, Mary Sue Hubbard and all scientologists both past and present that continue to grant any form of allegience to L. Ron Hubbard, Mary Sue Hubbard and ALL of Scientology.

I did not know or did I ever meet Ken Urquhart at St. Hill.

I met him on the Apollo and the only reason I remember him at all is because he was the one that had to show me how to get L. Ron Hubbard ready as that was to be part of our duties. Getting him dressed in his naval uniform, after assissting him washing. I remember him very clearly standing in the doorway of LRHs birth with a nervous smile when LRH commented on the fact that "I would soon get used to it", referring to my helping him dress.

If he was still LRH comm at that time, I did not know about it. As far as I was concerned he was LRHs butler, that is how he was portrayed.He cleaned his suits, that kind of thing, or at least that is what I was lead to believe due to things I heard LRH say.

Whilst on Messenger duty, when LRH was up and about and dressed I never came into contact with Urquhart at all. If he was squirreled away in an office somewhere dealing with communication, then I did not know about it.

Was he one of the people that frequented LRHs office whilst I was on Messenger duty? No. I could be wrong, but if he was LRH Comm, I would have thought he was in Comm with LRH quite a bit, wouldn't you?

If he was LRH Comm, then it would have been him (Urquhart) that not only was responcible for the letter my Dad sent to LRH when he was having trouble but also the letter I sent LRH when I requested a leave of absence.I wonder if he remembers that, seeing as he was LRHs Communicator.

Perhaps he was also responcible for the freeloaders debt letters I recieved as a 15 year old girl. What was my crime? I did not want to go back to a subversive regime on the Apollo.


How did I get to know LRH?
In 1963 I became his Household Officer at Saint Hill Manor, and ran his household; I spoke with him every day when he awoke, and during the day as he needed to in handling domestic affairs, and when I served meals. We became friends. He chatted to me a great deal about his past, and not only in his current life. In 1965, I became his representative in the Scientology delivery organization he created at Saint Hill; in 1966 he left SH and began the Sea Organization; he called me to join him in it in 1968. He created the post of LRH Personal Communicator and appointed me to it. Nothing went to his desk or into his office without my inspection and approval as 'Pers Comm' (except for business between him and his wife, Mary Sue) and everything that he issued came out through me. He did everything in writing or in conference; I would be present at all conferences and took the notes. He very frequently used me as a sounding-board for his ideas. He asked for my advice. When he wanted someone to chat with, he usually called on me. I did many projects for him. He left a great deal of routine management to me. For a number of years, we worked very closely together.

At least we can agree on something,that scientology websites are untrustworthy.As for ordinary people having wonderful gains from scientology. You should go to a picket of Scientology, speak to ordinary people whom have had contact with scientology in many forms and see just how many gains these ordinary people have had. Don't mention the fact that you are a practising scientologist though, as you may find you get short thrift.


The tendency of this organization to do and say anything that will make it look good and acceptable to the society it exists in. I know from direct experience that this organization had a history of contempt for human society certainly up to 1982. So far as I know, this contempt was common amongst those who took over its management in 1982, some of whom are still in place). Thus nothing that the site says is fully trustworthy. I take it that at least half of what I see and read is spin.
2.It comes over to me as an inescapable truth that large numbers of ordinary people are having, or have been having, wonderful gains from basic scientology actions. If this is so, then a large number of people have been delivering very good scientology technology to them. The people having the wins are happy to have them (I’m sure the Scientologists delivering to them are happy too). These are ordinary people leading “ordinary” lives but there are also people in trouble from crime, drugs, abuse, and injustice. They are all growing in self-respect, self-determination, resourcefulness, and helpfulness.



The dichotomy is that the technologies are based on such things as kindness, a positive outlook, trust, hope, and determination; the protection aspect, however, invites reactivity and becomes, on the whole, cruel, arrogant, insensitive, and out-of-present-time. The Scientology reactive protection aspect is a clear manifestation of counter-intention and of other-intentionedness. It has acted as a STOP on the theta flow of kindness, positive outlook, trust, hope, and determination. Therefore, it must go.

He might have always been capable of great kindness Ken, but he did not show it. By this line alone you are creating a falsehood, and you know it. He did not change in 1973. He had been a tyrant long before that. In 67, 68 and 69 he was a monster and that I do know because I was there.

By saying this Ken is creating the impression that he (LRH) changed dramatically in 1973. You can't wipe out 67, 68, 69 and 1970 -1973 and I can't help but wonder what LRH did to Ken in those years that he so badly wants to forget.



Up until 1972, when LRH left the ship to spend a year in the US (so as to avoid extradition from Morocco to France for trial), I had known him as capable always of great kindness. On his return to the ship in 1973, a year later, he had changed substantially. He became more and more bitterly angry but still capable of occasional kindness. By early 1975, when I last saw him, he had become all but unbearable.

I see the below as yet further attempts as making scientology alright as long as it is not run by Miscavige. None of it is alright and nothing will make it alright.


One could argue from this that one reason that Scientology deteriorated as it did is that LRH allowed too many people to become executives who were not trained auditors and who had not proved themselves willing and able (and courageous enough) to go into session with another human being and see the session through to a good result time and time again. I will go so far as to say that this is a major Why. There is nothing on earth to equal both the level of self-discipline and the level of self-respect that production as an auditor brings to the auditor as a person. For years I pined to complete my auditor training; when I finally got the opportunity I went through a certain amount of hell in proving myself, but in proving myself I grew and gained enormously and wondrously. I am eternally grateful to those who kept me going through that time; at least one of them is, as far as I know, a loyal member of Scientology to this day. This was an enormous kindness to me personally; my thanks have no bounds.



What is the training level of topmost management in Scientology today? I don't have the facts on that. But if you take a good look at a photo of David Miscavige, do you see a person with whom you would want for one second to be in session with as his preclear? Not on your life! He seems to have the presence of a hungry and very agitated alligator whose shoes are far too tight and whose lunch is late. I recall some of the executives I knew who are still there, perhaps in senior posts, or who have left not too long ago. Thinking of them sitting opposite me, and saying to me “This is the session” simply embarrasses me.


We have, in the directing of Scientology, not a finely-disciplined practitioner of auditing technology who knows how to set an example in the application of ethics technology and of management technology, but a person of a certain cast of mind which has some fixation upon the destruction of “SPs.” He is playing his game on the playing-field of Scientology; his moves create some chaos and confusion; they tend to pervert scientology into something ridiculous, stupid, and undesirable to mankind - the complete opposite of what scientology actually is.

Yet more brainwashing for the vulnerable.


Introduction
I am a veteran of Scientology and of the Sea Org, and of the Commodore’s Staff. I have spent the greater part of my working life near or in Scientology—between the ages of 19 and 44; it has remained a very large part of my life ever since. I was part of LRH’s household at Saint Hill Manor for eighteen months in 1963-4. On the ship, from 1968-74, except for his wife, Mary Sue, I was closer to L. Ron Hubbard than anyone. LRH’s elder daughter (by Mary Sue), Diana, served longer than I on his personal staff; only Mary Sue served longer than I on a single post at his personal staff level. Anyone could always say about Ron that he suffered no fools around him--that is, until he permitted some fools to gain control of him in the vulnerability of his later years.



The purpose of this site is to help those who already have some experience of Scientology and the Church of Scientology in its different forms, and who are seeking their own truth about L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology, and are looking for some help in answering their questions about scientology’s validity and its place in the world. I want to place here an easily available summation of experience with L. Ron Hubbard that isn’t coloured by the Church of Scientology’s fanatical party line -- that Hubbard was, in every possible respect, super-human, faultless, and incapable of error -- or by the fanatically rabid ravings of those for whom Hubbard is the Devil himself.

Quotes taken from Kenneth Urquhart's blog.
http://kgurquhart.blogspot.com/

signed,
one fanatically rabid raver,
Sharone

Gottabrain
30th December 2010, 11:14 PM
I have seen posts (I think Dart was one and maybe Paul and/or Freewill were the others) stating that after being a part of the insanity of the org, the RPF was almost a relief and that they ate better and got more sleep!


NO, Trouble. NO NO NO NO NO.

There are NOT any REAL testimonies here on ESMB or elsewhere that the RPF was "good" for anyone. I have challenged everyone on three threads to find these supposed "testimonies", ones who have left the C of S so they can speak freely, with their actual names and approx. dates the person was on the RPF and where, who supposedly said these things.

THere are NONE. NONE. Because this is a lie.

There ARE various posts here and there by anonymous posters (OSA bots) stating such things, giving no specifics.

Imagine my frustration and anger, and the anger of others who have ACTUALLY been on the RPF program and left Scn, to see this lie spread throughout the FZ and Indies. It is a bad attitude when anyone says such things who has never been on it and diminishes the effects of human degradation, long term imprisonment, and being cut off from one's friends and family with no freedom of movement while being pounded with sec checks, intimidation and harassment day after day. The lie has spread far and wide, and not one of you - not ONE of you - can produce a single testimony from someone who left the C of S with those simple facts (name, dates and where on the RPF)

Until someone DOES produce an actual testimony stating this, you need to stop believing it, because it is not true. If you can't personally come up with an actual testimony from ESMB or elsewhere that isn't anonymous, then you, too, have been fooled by the C of S Scns and OSA bots who post on here.

As well as by Ken Urquehart, who has personal reasons for wanting to make the RPF program seem less horrendous than it actually was and still is.

Voltaire's Child - Not everyone derails on purpose. I know you don't. Some do, though.

Re seeing family - what a joke. WHEN this was allowed (it is not now), it rarely happened anyway. Your spouse was supposed to bring the child (if upstat, if the RPF I/C allowed, etc), but that rarely happened, if ever. And in my case, I was divorced, had full custody, but my child was taken from me and illegally given to my ex-husband "so I could do the RPF program". He and the RPF decided that they would not bring my son to see me, either. He was 4 years old. And what kind of parenting is that, anyway? A full year of that - and I was routing out! I was physically forced on there by 6 grown men who encircled me. I was put on the RPFs RPF twice because I wanted to route out and all my personal things taken from me and stored somewhere unknown. I had no access to outside mail or phone calls and was under supervision constantly until the last 3 weeks when they wanted me to blow. I was pounded with hundreds of hours of mind-fuck sec checking, Int Rundowns (because I wanted to LEAVE!) and FPRD when I was already an FPRD comp before I ever arrived on the RPF. THe RPF stole a year of my life with forced imprisonment and separation from my son and it was hell. I am sorry those of you who wish to practrice Scientology want to see it as a "good program", but it is a lie. The RPF is a prison camp for degradation and re-indoctrination where the prisoners have no rights of any kind and are kept separated and under guard and watch.

AnonKat
30th December 2010, 11:22 PM
Creepy twitter is creepy

http://omgili.com/user%3A%22sharone-stainforth%22

Happy Days
30th December 2010, 11:24 PM
You don't have to look too hard; I believe I've read 2 or 3 such testimonials here on ESMB and I've read others but don't have the links to hand.

As I said, go figure... I know it's hard to believe.

I have a friend, still in scn but now out of the SO, who spent something like 10 or 12 years (nearly half of his SO career) in various RPFs. He recently finished paying off an enormous Freeloader Bill and, despite my best efforts to convince him otherwise, he still thinks he's Saving the Planet.

I have trouble believing it, too. :omg:

(As to the rest of your comments; I agree!)

Panda probably telling ya to suck eggs but anyway here goes.

The reason why your friend stays connected - It's called brainwashing and conditioning and psychological damage of one's ability to think for themselves and observe.

What is right about the RPF.... NOTHING .... it is abuse no matter how individuals try to candy coat it and eek out any possible gain they made... they need to balance the gains with losses... loss of freedom, loss of self determism, loss of youth, loss of income, loss of their health, loss of their own mind, spirit and body and for what????

Deprivation of one's rights and freedom is pure evil and belongs in the dark ages. The cult and individuals need to come up to the 21st century and live life now not dramatise some dark age torture program.

Whom ever created the RPF and those who perpetuated it along need to be held to account for human rights abuses.

paradox
30th December 2010, 11:27 PM
I remember being at the horseshoe when the police started taping the area off.

When I asked what happened I was told " Oh, somebody got shot out there in the street ".

Now, all these years later, I hear the truth.

Amazing how close some of us were to something as it happened and we never really knew what happened right there damned near in front of us.

Or how willingly I believed what I was told and never checked out anything on my own!

Others have said they feel stupid. I look back and feel REAL stupid.

Forgiving them is much easier than forgiving myself.

So much easier.

If you haven't viewed them yet, AT, check out the 2 clips from this post, http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=515701&postcount=165

eaglewoman
30th December 2010, 11:27 PM
It is my opinion that the RPF is one of the most suppressive and horrific,blood curdling institutions going on in the church of Scientology.I do not condone it in any way.
Regarding Ken URquhart:He was LRH communicator at the time and LRH told him to devise some kind of rehabilitation programme.Please read all that he wrote in his blog and not just part of it.He by the way has not read the latest books and doesn't know to what extent of absolute evil and torture and dehumanization this program has now been taken.His program meant to last a few weeks,people were supposed to get 7 hours of sleep and 5 hours of study and auditing.I don't even say i agree with that because i don't,but it is so far from what the RPF became.Ken himself also went to the RPF in 1980.
Now,i have never posted here before.But due to the attacks on ken i have decided to say a few things here.
I have worked with Ken at Flag for a few years and i know him as a human being and as a scientologist.Ken is a very hinorable man who has always cared about others and has a high level of integrity.He is a shy person and that has been misread as aloof by some who don't know him closely.But he has love and compassion and he cares very much about helping others.That is who Ken is.We have all evolved and we are all trying to heal from the damages of being in the cult.He is also always evolving.Ken is 72 years old,a gentelman and a man of honor.Like all of us i am sure he has many mixed feelings about his part in the Sea org.I know him and i know how kind he is and that he cares tremendously.
I just wanted to express my view point here.

Free Being Me
30th December 2010, 11:33 PM
I wish I had something to add to this thread. I was never in the S.O. or even heard of the RPF other than a vaguely defined correction system until I found ESMB. Such a practice is brutally inhumane and I'm personally disgusted I ever positively promoted $cientology.

AnonKat
30th December 2010, 11:33 PM
Ken is misguided in defending the dictator LRH was. He may be a gentlemen but is not and will never be free if he can not confront the fact LRH was an abusive man.


It is my opinion that the RPF is one of the most suppressive and horrific,blood curdling institutions going on in the church of Scientology.I do not condone it in any way.
Regarding Ken URquhart:He was LRH communicator at the time and LRH told him to devise some kind of rehabilitation programme.Please read all that he wrote in his blog and not just part of it.He by the way has not read the latest books and doesn't know to what extent of absolute evil and torture and dehumanization this program has now been taken.His program meant to last a few weeks,people were supposed to get 7 hours of sleep and 5 hours of study and auditing.I don't even say i agree with that because i don't,but it is so far from what the RPF became.Ken himself also went to the RPF in 1980.
Now,i have never posted here before.But due to the attacks on ken i have decided to say a few things here.
I have worked with Ken at Flag for a few years and i know him as a human being and as a scientologist.Ken is a very hinorable man who has always cared about others and has a high level of integrity.He is a shy person and that has been misread as aloof by some who don't know him closely.But he has love and compassion and he cares very much about helping others.That is who Ken is.We have all evolved and we are all trying to heal from the damages of being in the cult.He is also always evolving.Ken is 72 years old,a gentelman and a man of honor.Like all of us i am sure he has many mixed feelings about his part in the Sea org.I know him and i know how kind he is and that he cares tremendously.
I just wanted to express my view point here.

Panda Termint
30th December 2010, 11:36 PM
There ARE various posts here and there by anonymous posters (OSA bots) stating such things, giving no specifics.

Dart Smohen and Freewill are hardly OSAbots, Gotta.

Perhaps Dart or one of the others will deign to provide more details but I know most prefer to remain anonymous here.

I agree that the RPF is a horrible abuse of basic human rights. I've never been subjected to it but do understand the depth of your dismay and frustration about anyone who would claim it provided any benefit for them.

It's very hard to understand why anyone would endorse it in any way at all but it is obvious (at least, to me) that some felt they gained from doing the program. Perhaps it was just a scientological belief in the benefit of study and co-auditing combined with physical work, I don't know. I would like to hear more from people who have first-hand experience, yourself included. I think experiences differed from RPF to RPF, depending upon the time-frame and who was involved.

I detest the whole thing. I audited Repair on some RPFers when they got into trouble in their co-audits and have read much about it and but am always willing to learn more about it.

Just my (inexperienced) thoughts on it.

Terril park
30th December 2010, 11:38 PM
Hi GB,
Understand that the experience in your time of RPF was criminal.

You have seen on one or other of the threads that Dartsmohem
detailed the abusive precursors of the RPF.

Diana is attacking Ken U on an FZ thread and incidentally saying I'm in collusion with OSA. Lol! Maybe even Veda may wish to defend me on this!

I have Kens permission to post his comments from an FZ forum here.


=============
It may be of interest:

In 1970 or 71, LRH told me to do something about the people
on board who were being "case on post." This was after some
flap in which one or more persons had complained that they
couldn't do their work for this reason or that. It was during the
time he was confined to his cabin with the motorbike injury.

I then wrote the original RPF issue, a Flag Order (I think it was
3434). If anyone got hold of a copy and actually read it, it would
be very clear that apart from a couple of sops to the old and
harsh SO traditional treatment of the out-of-favour, the original
concept was humanitarian. The plan was that those who needed
it could get case handling. In exchange, the person would (a) do
needed MEST work on the ship, and (b) learn to audit another
RPF member and would be part of a co-audit. The group was
divided into two sections. One section did MEST work for half
the day. The other did tech study, drills, and co-audit. For the
second half, they switched.

The intention was very simple: they could destimulate to
some degree with the MEST work. They could take some
responsibility for another's case and have wins at that.
And they could sit in session and have wins that way.

There is no question that some abuses arose. Some
because of individual frailties and conflicts, and others
because of abuses in-built in the culture of the ship and
the SO.

To what degree am I answerable for those abuses? I
don't find a lot of guilt on my part. If and when I found out
about abuses in or to the RPF, I stepped in and handled
it immediately, with no ifs or buts. For the institutional
abuse that we all lived in and with and shared, I feel no
great individual accountability. Nobody was forcing any
of us to stay -- although the culture did make it difficult
to leave. But not so difficult that a modicum of will could
get anyone out of there.

Please note that the idea of "The RPF's RPF" was added
to the RPF by LRH himself, and within a few days of the
setting up of the first RPF.

The one thing I DO regret about my design for the RPF is
that I stipulated that they were to be fed what was left over
after the crew had eaten. This was a reflection of the old
way of lowering meals to people in the chain locker, in
buckets. It was a sop. I knew when I wrote it that I would
revise it out. As it happened, there was an emergency in
the stewards' department (housekeeping and galley) and
I permitted the use of RPF members to help out. As a
result, the RPF got fed just as well as anybody else (not
that we got the best of food). So, I had no reason to revise
what I wrote, although I should have done it. I was just so
busy with many other things. I think it says something quite
positive about the RPF and its contribution to life on the
ship that the stewards were so grateful to them for their
work that they went out of their way to ignore the leftover
rule and fed the RPF just as they deserved in any case.

Over the next few years, some general and specific
changes occurred. Firstly, SO units elsewhere started
setting up RPFs. Now, I was not on any direct line to
those RPFs. To get myself directly involved, I'd have to
have had solid, reliable relationships with two or three or
more other people on the ship through whom I'd get
the information I needed and whom I could trust to
forward my intentions down to the different areas.
This posed something of a nightmare.

To set up these relationships would have taken serious
work over several weeks. I didn't have any time in any
one day to devote to it. Personnel changed so often
and so abruptly that I'd be starting all over again very
often. I had so much to do in one day I didn't have any
energy to squeeze in something else. So, the RPF's in
the outer units were at the mercy of anyone who
wanted to abuse them and was able to get away with
it.

During the same period, LRH veered towards a more
dominating, autocratic way of leading the organization.
Not that he wasn't that way a lot of the time before; it
became his focus. I couldn't and didn't follow him on
that path. He used others for that purpose. The goal
amongst the others seemed to be to do anything
whatever to get LRH's approval or to avoid his wrath.
Force became the order of the day. The further from
Flag the action was, the crazier it could be.

Thus, RPF's in the outer units were extremely abused
in the name of 'doing it for LRH.' They were abused in
ways I would not have tolerated for one second but by
the time I was finding out about it, there was too much
organization effort invested into the abuse for me to
overcome. Any interference on my part would have
merited (in others' view) scorn as "counter-intention"
against the intention to carry out what LRH's
intention seemed to be. And if it was perceived that
he wanted the Cedars building renovated within six
months, with the RPF working 24/7, then the RPF
worked 24/7, and the whole of the PAC SO was
behind that intention.

So, in the end, I am answerable to those who were
damaged by RPF abuse in that I neglected to control
LRH in the first place towards a kindlier and more
tolerant and more real attitude. Could I have in fact
controlled LRH? I don't really think so. But I was there;
I was in a position from which I could have controlled
him; I could have tried harder than I did. I failed.

A certain young lady can now categorically state that
I am therefore a no-case-gain SP. At least she now has
some truth on a situation.

All best wishes to all.
Ken

Panda Termint
30th December 2010, 11:39 PM
Panda probably telling ya to suck eggs but anyway here goes.

The reason why your friend stays connected - It's called brainwashing and conditioning and psychological damage of one's ability to think for themselves and observe.

What is right about the RPF.... NOTHING .... it is abuse no matter how individuals try to candy coat it and eek out any possible gain they made... they need to balance the gains with losses... loss of freedom, loss of self determism, loss of youth, loss of income, loss of their health, loss of their own mind, spirit and body and for what????

Deprivation of one's rights and freedom is pure evil and belongs in the dark ages. The cult and individuals need to come up to the 21st century and live life now not dramatise some dark age torture program.

Whom ever created the RPF and those who perpetuated it along need to be held to account for human rights abuses.
LOL, agreed! :yes:

Gottabrain
30th December 2010, 11:39 PM
Dart Smohen and Freewill are hardly OSAbots, Gotta.

Perhaps Dart or one of the others will deign to provide more details but I know most prefer to remain anonymous here.

I agree that the RPF is a horrible abuse of basic human rights. I've never been subjected to it but do understand the depth of your dismay and frustration about anyone who would claim it provided any benefit for them.

It's very hard to understand why anyone would endorse it in any way at all but it is obvious (at least, to me) that some felt they gained from doing the program. Perhaps it was just a scientological belief in the benefit of study and co-auditing combined with physical work, I don't know. I would like to hear more from people who have first-hand experience, yourself included. I think experiences differed from RPF to RPF, depending upon the time-frame and who was involved.

I detest the whole thing. I audited Repair on some RPFers when they got into trouble in their co-audits and have read much about it and but am always willing to learn more about it.

Just my (inexperienced) thoughts on it.

Does anyone here KNOW Dart or Freewill personally? Ever met them? Have either of them even stated when/where they were RPFed or for how long? Because I don't believe that either of them was on the RPF.

LINKS PLEASE. Because Nobody who has done the RPF would just brush it off as a "great way to catch up on your sleep" and have nothing more to say about it, and funny thing is, neither said WHEN or WHERE they were on the RPF either. That is such bullshit. I'd like to hear from them now.

And if that's ALL the FZers and Indies have as "testimony that the RPF program was good", you all need to take a hard look at this. Think VERY hard about it. Because it is just one more aspect of the brainwashing. A huge one - because the RPF is the absolute worst example of human rights abuses that exists in the Cult of Scientology. HOW can you justify it? HOW can you take a stupid statement like, "the RPF is great for catching up on sleep" by someone who has never been on it and cannot or will not provide any details of their supposed assignment when there are hundreds of detailed, signed testimonies from those of us who really DID do the program? And I'm not talking about people who were there temporarily for a few weeks and then had their assignments canceled!

Panda Termint
30th December 2010, 11:43 PM
Many of us know both Dart and Will. They're speaking their truth just as you are.

Emma
30th December 2010, 11:44 PM
I know Dart personally.

If he says he was on the RPF he was on the RPF. Mind you that was waaaay before DM's time.

Zinjifar
30th December 2010, 11:45 PM
well, thanks for expressing your view. ken isn't here, unfortunately. But, part of the problem is that there are malicious people exploiting Ken's ignorance about the *reality* of Scientology to paint a happy face on the monster.

Were that not the case, his ignorance would be merely irrelevant, even when deplorable. I'm sure he's a nice guy who always had the best of intentions. Unfortunately, those using his rose-colored reminiscences are not.

Zinj

Zinjifar
30th December 2010, 11:48 PM
I know Dart personally.

If he says he was on the RPF he was on the RPF. Mind you that was waaaay before DM's time.

And, the RPF was a horror long before DM's time, but, spotty in application. Some got off easy; most not. Some got away with thumbing their noses at the 'system'; most did not.

Zinj

Gottabrain
30th December 2010, 11:48 PM
I know Dart personally.

If he says he was on the RPF he was on the RPF. Mind you that was waaaay before DM's time.

Thanks, Emma. So identity confirmed. Now how about the details from him of when/where he was on the RPF? For how long? I want to know.

I have never met anyone who was RPFed and thought it was "a good program". What does Dart have to say about it? How about details? Was he there 3 weeks or 3 years? Big difference!

Any links? Anyone?

Gottabrain
30th December 2010, 11:49 PM
And, the RPF was a horror long before DM's time, but, spotty in application. Some got off easy; most not. Some got away with thumbing their noses at the 'system'; most did not.

Zinj

EXACTLY, Zinj!!

THANK YOU. We have that LRH vid of the RPF on the ship, the Hana Whitfield testimonies - and that shows plenty. It was a horror. Always was. Still is. And the program now goes on for YEARS AND YEARS. THAT is what the evil DM did to it - extended the imprisonment indefinitely.

Panda Termint
30th December 2010, 11:54 PM
If this is a Crusade To End The RPF, I'm in. :yes:
If this is a Crusade To Negate Alternative Viewpoints, I'm out. :no:

Emma
30th December 2010, 11:55 PM
People aren't lying when they tell you what they truly believe, even if its 100% opposite to what you believe.

For instance, I'll now tell you that I benefitted from my time on staff and it wouldn't be a lie. That's not how I felt when I left or even for years later, but it is my viewpoint now. And they aren't the same "benefits" that Scientology would say I'd get for being on staff.

I benefitted by being exposed to thought police and learning how vulnerable I can be. I benefitted by being mentally & spiritually manipulated and learning from it etc. There are quite a lot of benefits actually, but there has to be enough time and healing go on first before you can see it. But it's not a lie to see it when you do.

Zinjifar
31st December 2010, 12:01 AM
If this is a Crusade To End The RPF, I'm in. :yes:
If this is a Crusade To Negate Alternative Viewpoints, I'm out. :no:

Ending the RPF is the least of my worries. Swat the gad, not the gadfly.

But, I see this as something different than 'negating alternative viewpoints'. Like everything in Scientology, the RPF was arbitrary and subject to the conditions at the time/place it was taking place. And on the RPFer and the people enforcing the horror.

I don't find it hard to believe that *some* times and *some* places and for *some* RPFers that it could even seem like a summer camp. And a relief from the *usual* horror of the Sea Org.

But, that's not to say that 'The RPF is What You Make Of It'. It would be a fallacy for someone to pat himself on the back and say 'It was fine for me, because *I* didn't put up with any shit!'

No, sometimes it was less bad than others. The negative aspects are unredeemed by the occasional talent show in the gulag.

Zinj

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 12:05 AM
People aren't lying when they tell you what they truly believe, even if its 100% opposite to what you believe.

For instance, I'll now tell you that I benefitted from my time on staff and it wouldn't be a lie. That's not how I felt when I left or even for years later, but it is my viewpoint now. And they aren't the same "benefits" that Scientology would say I'd get for being on staff.

I benefitted by being exposed to thought police and learning how vulnerable I can be. I benefitted by being mentally & spiritually manipulated and learning from it etc. There are quite a lot of benefits actually, but there has to be enough time and healing go on first before you can see it. But it's not a lie to see it when you do.

Emma, I like your viewpoint.

Still, Dart has not provided any details. As I said, there is a huge difference between 3 weeks and 3 years.

I once allowed Harold Sims to be RPFed when there was a mission in the org that insisted on this. The mission was a short-term mission and I knew I could get him off as soon as it left. I discussed it with the Cont Justice Chief CLO WUS (Melanie) at the time - she was a good woman and while she held that post, she did all in her power not to hurt staff. She had a heart of gold and stuck her neck out more than once to keep staff from being abused.

Harold was on 3 wks before I got him off it with a Board of Review. He made some comment about getting sleep (which reminded me of Dart), but he still hated it.

The only thing "good" that came of my RPF assignment is my dedication to seeing the RPF program completely canceled and informing others of how terrible it really was. We suffered. My son suffered. Getting my feet on the ground afterward and raising him as a single parent with a father who decided I was an "SP" made it even harder. We went through many hard years. I'm glad he's doing well now, but to this day, he says he doesn't like to think back to his childhood, as it was so hard.

There is no comparison at all with the RPF and my time on AOLA staff, regardless of what insanities went on then. They were like night and day. Some of my time on staff I enjoyed, too. I worked with wonderful people and I'm happy to be reconnected with many of them now. :) While I was Estates staff, despite cleaning vents and losing part of my vision and having burns all over my arms from the one lightbulb I had to see, despite the terrible child conditions when I was a nanny, it was still better than the RPF. I still had some personal volition and freedom. I could still be myself. Can you understand that and why it was so different?

Alanzo
31st December 2010, 12:08 AM
Hi GB,
Understand that the experience in your time of RPF was criminal.

You have seen on one or other of the threads that Dartsmohem
detailed the abusive precursors of the RPF.

Diana is attacking Ken U on an FZ thread and incidentally saying I'm in collusion with OSA. Lol! Maybe even Veda may wish to defend me on this!

I have Kens permission to post his comments from an FZ forum here.


=============
It may be of interest:

In 1970 or 71, LRH told me to do something about the people
on board who were being "case on post." This was after some
flap in which one or more persons had complained that they
couldn't do their work for this reason or that. It was during the
time he was confined to his cabin with the motorbike injury.

I then wrote the original RPF issue, a Flag Order (I think it was
3434). If anyone got hold of a copy and actually read it, it would
be very clear that apart from a couple of sops to the old and
harsh SO traditional treatment of the out-of-favour, the original
concept was humanitarian. The plan was that those who needed
it could get case handling. In exchange, the person would (a) do
needed MEST work on the ship, and (b) learn to audit another
RPF member and would be part of a co-audit. The group was
divided into two sections. One section did MEST work for half
the day. The other did tech study, drills, and co-audit. For the
second half, they switched.

The intention was very simple: they could destimulate to
some degree with the MEST work. They could take some
responsibility for another's case and have wins at that.
And they could sit in session and have wins that way.

There is no question that some abuses arose. Some
because of individual frailties and conflicts, and others
because of abuses in-built in the culture of the ship and
the SO.

To what degree am I answerable for those abuses? I
don't find a lot of guilt on my part. If and when I found out
about abuses in or to the RPF, I stepped in and handled
it immediately, with no ifs or buts. For the institutional
abuse that we all lived in and with and shared, I feel no
great individual accountability. Nobody was forcing any
of us to stay -- although the culture did make it difficult
to leave. But not so difficult that a modicum of will could
get anyone out of there.

Please note that the idea of "The RPF's RPF" was added
to the RPF by LRH himself, and within a few days of the
setting up of the first RPF.

The one thing I DO regret about my design for the RPF is
that I stipulated that they were to be fed what was left over
after the crew had eaten. This was a reflection of the old
way of lowering meals to people in the chain locker, in
buckets. It was a sop. I knew when I wrote it that I would
revise it out. As it happened, there was an emergency in
the stewards' department (housekeeping and galley) and
I permitted the use of RPF members to help out. As a
result, the RPF got fed just as well as anybody else (not
that we got the best of food). So, I had no reason to revise
what I wrote, although I should have done it. I was just so
busy with many other things. I think it says something quite
positive about the RPF and its contribution to life on the
ship that the stewards were so grateful to them for their
work that they went out of their way to ignore the leftover
rule and fed the RPF just as they deserved in any case.

Over the next few years, some general and specific
changes occurred. Firstly, SO units elsewhere started
setting up RPFs. Now, I was not on any direct line to
those RPFs. To get myself directly involved, I'd have to
have had solid, reliable relationships with two or three or
more other people on the ship through whom I'd get
the information I needed and whom I could trust to
forward my intentions down to the different areas.
This posed something of a nightmare.

To set up these relationships would have taken serious
work over several weeks. I didn't have any time in any
one day to devote to it. Personnel changed so often
and so abruptly that I'd be starting all over again very
often. I had so much to do in one day I didn't have any
energy to squeeze in something else. So, the RPF's in
the outer units were at the mercy of anyone who
wanted to abuse them and was able to get away with
it.

During the same period, LRH veered towards a more
dominating, autocratic way of leading the organization.
Not that he wasn't that way a lot of the time before; it
became his focus. I couldn't and didn't follow him on
that path. He used others for that purpose. The goal
amongst the others seemed to be to do anything
whatever to get LRH's approval or to avoid his wrath.
Force became the order of the day. The further from
Flag the action was, the crazier it could be.

Thus, RPF's in the outer units were extremely abused
in the name of 'doing it for LRH.' They were abused in
ways I would not have tolerated for one second but by
the time I was finding out about it, there was too much
organization effort invested into the abuse for me to
overcome. Any interference on my part would have
merited (in others' view) scorn as "counter-intention"
against the intention to carry out what LRH's
intention seemed to be. And if it was perceived that
he wanted the Cedars building renovated within six
months, with the RPF working 24/7, then the RPF
worked 24/7, and the whole of the PAC SO was
behind that intention.

So, in the end, I am answerable to those who were
damaged by RPF abuse in that I neglected to control
LRH in the first place towards a kindlier and more
tolerant and more real attitude. Could I have in fact
controlled LRH? I don't really think so. But I was there;
I was in a position from which I could have controlled
him; I could have tried harder than I did. I failed.

A certain young lady can now categorically state that
I am therefore a no-case-gain SP. At least she now has
some truth on a situation.

All best wishes to all.
Ken
Terril -

When was this written and as a response to what, exactly?

Alanzo
31st December 2010, 12:14 AM
I think Mick Wenlock and Paul Dulloldfart have alternative viewpoints on the RPF, as well.

Scientology was experienced differently by different people.

There are trends in similarities of peoples' experiences around the planet and at different times, and those are important to note, as you will usually find LRH tech and policy - and the attempt to apply it 100% standardly - to be the common denominator of those similarities of experience.

But not every one has the same experience of Scientology.

I find that, generally, the more you committed yourself to Scientology, the more you were damaged by it.

HelluvaHoax!
31st December 2010, 12:16 AM
Who or What got "rehabilitated" on the RPF?

Extended periods of slave labor, imprisonment, isolation and the enforced purging of negative thoughts about Hubbard and Scientology is not rehabilitation.

The body and the mind are already programmed to heal themselves automatically after trauma. A protective scab develops and falls off naturally when healing has completed.

RPF is picking a scab on the tortured soul of a Scientologist that was injured by Scientology itself in the first place.

What turns it on turns it off does not apply to torture.

Alanzo
31st December 2010, 12:18 AM
The RPF has the same exact purpose and the same exact tech as a Maoist reconditioning camp.

paradox
31st December 2010, 12:24 AM
Hi GB,
<snip>
I have Kens permission to post his comments from an FZ forum here.


=============

<snip>

There is no question that some abuses arose. Some
because of individual frailties and conflicts, and others
because of abuses in-built in the culture of the ship and
the SO.

To what degree am I answerable for those abuses? I
don't find a lot of guilt on my part. If and when I found out
about abuses in or to the RPF, I stepped in and handled
it immediately, with no ifs or buts. For the institutional
abuse that we all lived in and with and shared, I feel no
great individual accountability. Nobody was forcing any
of us to stay -- although the culture did make it difficult
to leave. But not so difficult that a modicum of will could
get anyone out of there.

<snip>




How very telling.

Compare this charismatic cult leader's personal secretary's attitude in these 2 clips, http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=515701&postcount=165

The unshakable, unwavering and apparently undying admiration and devotion, loyalty to, his idol and its tek ... astounding ... as in:




As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly.

-Bible (Old Testament), Proverbs 26:11.

Free Being Me
31st December 2010, 12:25 AM
The RPF has the same exact purpose and the same exact tech as a Maoist reconditioning camp.

Banishment with extreme prejudice. Could you imagine the Boy/Girl Scouts operating like that? People of all stripes would be coming out of the wood work, frothing at the mouth.

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 12:38 AM
Who or What got "rehabilitated" on the RPF?

Extended periods of slave labor, imprisonment, isolation and the enforced purging of negative thoughts about Hubbard and Scientology is not rehabilitation.

The body and the mind are already programmed to heal themselves automatically after trauma. A protective scab develops and falls off naturally when healing has completed.

RPF is picking a scab on the tortured soul of a Scientologist that was injured by Scientology itself in the first place.

What turns it on turns it off does not apply to torture.

EXACTLY, HH. :thumbsup:

If an RPFer is/were sick, had back troubles, etc., there is/was no medical provided. Or rarely. One has to RUN at all times, regardless of physical limitations. So those with physical limitations were often “in trouble” and considered “out ethics” because they HAD the limitations!

The RPF were used as guinea pigs for "new tech". i.e., the Running Program was done on RPFers. Several became extremely ill, most were screwed up by it. If anything bad happened around an RPFer, the RPFer was automatically punished for it.

The RPF are subjected to continual mindfucking. WHAT ARE YOUR CRIMES? is the order of the day. Hundreds of hours of FPRD, run regardless of whether you feel done or not, run regardless of how good or bad it makes you feel until every sec check question under the sun, moon and stars has been asked and heaps and heaps of hand made lists run as well. We learned to force an F/N. It was sick. If one wanted to leave, one kept getting put on Int R/Ds and the RPFs RPF, which was very imaginative in how degraded one could be made, how little sleep one could receive, how hard one could be worked. There is no training or auditing on RPFs RPF and one is under constant guard, night and day, 24 hrs. How many years of FPRD do you think the RPF gets now?

The RPF cannot say a negative word about anything to anybody without being reported. To be reported is to end up on the RPFs RPF.

THe RPF cannot see or speak to their children, family, spouses or anyone not on the RPF. And we had children, family and spouses! That is the MOST painful part of it. We could not write ANYone outside the RPF and RPF I/C. Not children, parents, anyone.
We had no time off to ourselves. Not even hygiene time. We had about 10 min to take a shower. We were in a constant state of fear of getting the meager bit we had taken away if the RPF MAA was in a bad mood, or if something we said or did got taken wrong.

Sheila Huber

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 12:51 AM
I think Mick Wenlock and Paul Dulloldfart have alternative viewpoints on the RPF, as well.

Scientology was experienced differently by different people.

There are trends in similarities of peoples' experiences around the planet and at different times, and those are important to note, as you will usually find LRH tech and policy - and the attempt to apply it 100% standardly - to be the common denominator of those similarities of experience.

But not every one has the same experience of Scientology.

I find that, generally, the more you committed yourself to Scientology, the more you were damaged by it.

Alanzo, I AM STILL WAITING for Dart and ANY one else who had "wins" and "gains" from the RPF program to come forward and tell us the details of how wonderful it was to be degraded, imprisoned and cut off from family, friends and co-workers and to be completely mind-fucked. The RPF does not have any emphasis on "case gain". It is about disclosure of crimes. Anything else run on a person is to get it out of the way as quickly as possible so that FPRD and sec checks can be done. And it is a long, long sec check and FPRD program.

I know there are masochists and sadists in the world, but really. We are not talking about "Scientology the religion". We are talking about "the RPF program of reindoctrination and punishment". Very different.

Until Dart or someone else comes forward, you are assuming there were "wins" on the RPF. Best I've heard yet is that someone got sleep and a break from the org insanity. With no statement if he was there 3 weeks, 3 months or 3 years. I want to know when/where. Details!

That's a huge difference from "wins".

SO WILL YOU PLEASE QUIT JUSTIFYING THE RPF?

Are some of you on ESMB no longer against human rights violations? WTF?

Until that happens, don't assume the "experience" was meant to be anything other than punishment and reindotrination of those who dared to stand up against things they saw abusive within Scientology. Because most of the people who landed on the PAC RPF were really great people, the ones who really DID care, the ones who stuck their necks out to protect others, to stop insane policies that hurt people. They didn't belong there. I didn't belong there. Nobody belongs there. But it is a great mechanism to get rid of the odd person who thinks for themselves and try to get them back into being part of the machine.

Panda Termint
31st December 2010, 12:56 AM
The RPF has the same exact purpose and the same exact tech as a Maoist reconditioning camp.
Agreed, Al.

SO WILL YOU PLEASE QUIT JUSTIFYING THE RPF?
Are some of you on ESMB no longer against human rights violations? WTF?
Nobody responding here is "justifying the RPF" as far as I can see.

Zinjifar
31st December 2010, 01:00 AM
I don't think anybody's 'justifying' the RPF. Or even claiming 'wins', except in the backhanded way that every shitstorm has fertilizer.

Nobody has to lie to say that *His* RPF experience wasn't all that bad. I believe Dart, Mick and Paul when they say that their experiences were not the same as, say, Nancy Many's, who was assigned to the RPF while pregnant by *Ron*.

At the same time, to believe that it was your own force of personal 'will' that prevented the well documented excesses in your case seems like 'blaming the victim'. It may be some irritation on that perception that's causing some disagreement here.

Nobody deserved the RPF; for that matter, nobody 'deserved' Staff or Sea Org. Shit happens.

Zinj

Alanzo
31st December 2010, 01:07 AM
Alanzo, I AM STILL WAITING for Dart and ANY one else who had "wins" and "gains" from the RPF program to come forward and tell us the details of how wonderful it was to be degraded, imprisoned and cut off from family, friends and co-workers and to be completely mind-fucked. The RPF does not have any emphasis on "case gain". It is about disclosure of crimes. Anything else run on a person is to get it out of the way as quickly as possible so that FPRD and sec checks can be done. And it is a long, long sec check and FPRD program.

I know there are masochists and sadists in the world, but really. We are not talking about "Scientology the religion". We are talking about "the RPF program of reindoctrination and punishment". Very different.

Until Dart or someone else comes forward, you are assuming there were "wins" on the RPF. Best I've heard yet is that someone got sleep and a break from the org insanity. With no statement if he was there 3 weeks, 3 months or 3 years. I want to know when/where. Details!

That's a huge difference from "wins".

SO WILL YOU PLEASE QUIT JUSTIFYING THE RPF?

Are some of you on ESMB no longer against human rights violations? WTF?

Until that happens, don't assume the "experience" was meant to be anything other than punishment and reindotrination of those who dared to stand up against things they saw abusive within Scientology. Because most of the people who landed on the PAC RPF were really great people, the ones who really DID care, the ones who stuck their necks out to protect others, to stop insane policies that hurt people. They didn't belong there. I didn't belong there. Nobody belongs there. But it is a great mechanism to get rid of the odd person who thinks for themselves and try to get them back into being part of the machine.

I'm not justifying the RPF.

I am only saying that Mick Wenlock, and I believe Paul, too, have in the past stated that their experiences were not as bad as some people have reported. They were not saying that everyone's experiences were like theirs. They were being honest and truthful about their own experiences.

They were in no way condoning or denying the abuse of others, at all.

Only that their experiences were different.

And getting compliance to their OSA Mission Orders, of course.

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 01:20 AM
I don't think anybody's 'justifying' the RPF. Or even claiming 'wins', except in the backhanded way that every shitstorm has fertilizer.

Nobody has to lie to say that *His* RPF experience wasn't all that bad. I believe Dart, Mick and Paul when they say that their experiences were not the same as, say, Nancy Many's, who was assigned to the RPF while pregnant by *Ron*.

At the same time, to believe that it was your own force of personal 'will' that prevented the well documented excesses in your case seems like 'blaming the victim'. It may be some irritation on that perception that's causing some disagreement here.

Nobody deserved the RPF; for that matter, nobody 'deserved' Staff or Sea Org. Shit happens.

Zinj

Thank you, Zinj.

Do Dart, Mick and Paul realize that their statements are the basis for most of the FZ and Indies disregarding the abuse of the RPF program itself? For others thinking the program can be "good" "depending on your viewpoint"?

Never mind Ken Urquhart for a minute. Of course he finds it hard to confront the full consequences of implementing such an oppressive program. He has personal reasons for trying to make lighter of it. I'll let that go for now.

It seems to me it would be rare and difficult to consider imprisonment of the innocent and denial of human rights a "Good" thing under any circumstances. And I am shocked and incredibly disappointed that some of you think it is "good" to deny others their human rights and this can be a way to "win" and that others would apparently boast about it not affecting them, when they saw others - like me, like Nancy Many - who had our families dessimated by it and any previous auditing "gains" destroyed with the constant pounding of FPRD and Int R/Ds and being put under guard most of our time there and abused. Because if certain people did not personally experience that abuse, they saw others who did at the same time.

Is it just easier to deny how abusive and oppressive the RPF program is than to work to end the abuses? There is no comparison of the RPF with even one day of staff life - even under Comm Ev or Emergency Conditions.

Is this how the cognitive dissonance is resolved - by convincing yourselves that the RPF is not really so abusive?

I thought ESMB and the ex's cared about human rights abuses. And I am just gobsmacked to see so many who have never been on the RPF going on and on about how it could be "good for some people".

It's like watching people being brainwashed all over again.

Emma
31st December 2010, 01:28 AM
Sheila, are you sure you are reading the same thread as everyone else?

Seriously, no one here is justifying the RPF.

You have to understand that some people's experiences in the RPF were not as horrific as others and that they'd be lying to say otherwise.

This doesn't change the fact that overall the RPF is an evil thought reform torture camp designed to enslave. I guess some had "kinder" slave masters than others.

Is there an overreaction virus in the air lately? It seems to have infected a few people.

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 01:36 AM
Perhaps the view that I am not getting across is that I was FORCED ONTO THE RPF AGAINST MY WILL.

That may not be true of others. That is the big difference.

I was FORCED TO STAY ON THE RPF AGAINST MY WILL. Others may have wanted to be there, but my son was illegally given to my ex-husband and I believed at the time that I would not get him back if I did not cooperate. The RPF MAA (Kurt Hahn) even alluded to challenging my custody and told me that by being on the RPF, they believed I was not as good of a parent.

Physical force was used, coercion, illegally using my son as leverage, was used. Custodial laws were broken. Mental force was used on me, group coercion, punishments, etc. All to get me to WANT to be on the RPF willingly.

All of it was done to break my will.

Anyone who didn't find it horrible must have been there willingly. For those that didn't, there was little or no choice about it and a constant stream of coercions, abuse, threats and punishments for trying to stand against it. Those with children and other obligations that could not be fulfilled because of the RPF had it the worst.

ADDED NOTE TO EMMA: Thanks, Emma. I agree it was worse at some periods than others, worse for some people than others. But it was never, ever a "good" program. Even Ken Urquhart said the RPFs RPF was started within DAYS of the original program. There were always excessive coercive, controlling and punishment methods available.

I would like to see Mick, Paul and Dart clarify their views and experiences of the RPF on this thread, since as yet there are no links to their statements (perhaps they revised or deleted previous statements?!)

Sheila Huber

Div6
31st December 2010, 01:42 AM
:stir:


Who or what would want to cast ESMB in an "extremist" light?

And WHY?


And for the record, the RPF in its current form in the Sea Organization IS evil.
Just look at how many "List One Rockslammers" were "found" all of a sudden just after the Cedars complex was purchased and needed renos?

Alanzo
31st December 2010, 01:42 AM
Perhaps the view that I am not getting across is that I was FORCED ONTO THE RPF AGAINST MY WILL.

That may not be true of others. That is the big difference.

I was FORCED TO STAY ON THE RPF AGAINST MY WILL. Others may have wanted to be there, but my son was illegally given to my ex-husband and I believed at the time that I would not get him back if I did not cooperate. The RPF MAA (Kurt Hahn) even alluded to challenging my custody and told me that by being on the RPF, they believed I was not as good of a parent.

Physical force was used, coercion, illegally using my son as leverage, was used. Custodial laws were broken. Mental force was used on me, group coercion, punishments, etc. All to get me to WANT to be on the RPF willingly.

All of it was done to break my will.

Anyone who didn't find it horrible must have been there willingly. For those that didn't, there was little or no choice about it and a constant stream of coercions, abuse, threats and punishments for trying to stand against it. Those with children and other obligations that could not be fulfilled because of the RPF had it the worst.

Sheila Huber

This is absolutely criminal.

And it is why law enforcement must come down on the Church of Scientology and it is why the criminals responsible for these and other crimes must be prosecuted.

Why they are not being prosecuted right now is beyond me, and it is a daily source of personal distress for me that the Church of Scientology has the ability to do this to people without consequence.

It is absolutely wrong and must be abolished.

Any government that allows this kind of activity to go on within their borders, and does nothing to stop it, is criminal itself.

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 01:48 AM
^^Thank you, Alanzo. :rose:

That's how I see it. It infuriates me that this is still continuing - and the RPF prison sentences for these people just get longer and longer. Some have been on the RPF 7 years or more now.

Alanzo
31st December 2010, 02:01 AM
^^Thank you, Alanzo. :rose:

That's how I see it. It infuriates me that this is still continuing - and the RPF prison sentences for these people just get longer and longer. Some have been on the RPF 7 years or more now.

That's how I see it. It's always how I've seen it.

It's one of the reasons I have tens of thousands of posts on ESMB, a blog, and tens of thousands of posts elsewhere - THE FUCKING RPF STILL EXISTS!

It drives me nuts!

Something has to be done. I was never in the Sea Org. I have no legal standing to report any crimes that have been done to me or that I have personally witnessed. But others do have standing, and I just hope that one day they will be able to get a prosecutor with enough courage to do what it is going to take to take down this evil fucking cult. And if they would need my help with anything, I would be there in a second.

I will not quit until this is done, I assure you.

Terril park
31st December 2010, 02:01 AM
It is my opinion that the RPF is one of the most suppressive and horrific,blood curdling institutions going on in the church of Scientology.I do not condone it in any way.
Regarding Ken URquhart:He was LRH communicator at the time and LRH told him to devise some kind of rehabilitation programme.Please read all that he wrote in his blog and not just part of it.He by the way has not read the latest books and doesn't know to what extent of absolute evil and torture and dehumanization this program has now been taken.His program meant to last a few weeks,people were supposed to get 7 hours of sleep and 5 hours of study and auditing.I don't even say i agree with that because i don't,but it is so far from what the RPF became.Ken himself also went to the RPF in 1980.
Now,i have never posted here before.But due to the attacks on ken i have decided to say a few things here.
I have worked with Ken at Flag for a few years and i know him as a human being and as a scientologist.Ken is a very hinorable man who has always cared about others and has a high level of integrity.He is a shy person and that has been misread as aloof by some who don't know him closely.But he has love and compassion and he cares very much about helping others.That is who Ken is.We have all evolved and we are all trying to heal from the damages of being in the cult.He is also always evolving.Ken is 72 years old,a gentelman and a man of honor.Like all of us i am sure he has many mixed feelings about his part in the Sea org.I know him and i know how kind he is and that he cares tremendously.
I just wanted to express my view point here.

I concur eaglewoman. :)

Terril park
31st December 2010, 02:11 AM
People aren't lying when they tell you what they truly believe, even if its 100% opposite to what you believe.

For instance, I'll now tell you that I benefitted from my time on staff and it wouldn't be a lie. That's not how I felt when I left or even for years later, but it is my viewpoint now. And they aren't the same "benefits" that Scientology would say I'd get for being on staff.

I benefitted by being exposed to thought police and learning how vulnerable I can be. I benefitted by being mentally & spiritually manipulated and learning from it etc. There are quite a lot of benefits actually, but there has to be enough time and healing go on first before you can see it. But it's not a lie to see it when you do.

What can't destroy you makes you stronger. True for me.

Terril park
31st December 2010, 02:15 AM
Terril -

When was this written and as a response to what, exactly?

Ken is being severely attacked by Diana on an FZ forum. As for that matter
am I.

This was one of his responses.

Alanzo
31st December 2010, 02:16 AM
Ken is being severely attacked by Diana on an FZ forum. As for that matter
am I.

This was one of his responses.

All right, thank you.

(Yay Diana)

Terril park
31st December 2010, 02:23 AM
Perhaps the view that I am not getting across is that I was FORCED ONTO THE RPF AGAINST MY WILL.

That may not be true of others. That is the big difference.

I was FORCED TO STAY ON THE RPF AGAINST MY WILL. Others may have wanted to be there, but my son was illegally given to my ex-husband and I believed at the time that I would not get him back if I did not cooperate. The RPF MAA (Kurt Hahn) even alluded to challenging my custody and told me that by being on the RPF, they believed I was not as good of a parent.

Physical force was used, coercion, illegally using my son as leverage, was used. Custodial laws were broken. Mental force was used on me, group coercion, punishments, etc. All to get me to WANT to be on the RPF willingly.

All of it was done to break my will.

Anyone who didn't find it horrible must have been there willingly. For those that didn't, there was little or no choice about it and a constant stream of coercions, abuse, threats and punishments for trying to stand against it. Those with children and other obligations that could not be fulfilled because of the RPF had it the worst.

ADDED NOTE TO EMMA: Thanks, Emma. I agree it was worse at some periods than others, worse for some people than others. But it was never, ever a "good" program. Even Ken Urquhart said the RPFs RPF was started within DAYS of the original program. There were always excessive coercive, controlling and punishment methods available.

I would like to see Mick, Paul and Dart clarify their views and experiences of the RPF on this thread, since as yet there are no links to their statements (perhaps they revised or deleted previous statements?!)

Sheila Huber

In your time the RPF was plain abuse. Good that you state that.

I told you I was trouble
31st December 2010, 02:28 AM
Posted by I told you I was trouble

I have seen posts (I think Dart was one and maybe Paul and/or Freewill were the others) stating that after being a part of the insanity of the org, the RPF was almost a relief and that they ate better and got more sleep!

It's all about comparative viewpoint ... and it does not make it right (because it is very wrong).

It was Hubbard that created the RPF but it seems that he tasked someone else with the initial creation of it.

Nothing new there then.





Posted by Gottabrain

NO, Trouble. NO NO NO NO NO.

There are NOT any REAL testimonies here on ESMB or elsewhere that the RPF was "good" for anyone. I have challenged everyone on three threads to find these supposed "testimonies", ones who have left the C of S so they can speak freely, with their actual names and approx. dates the person was on the RPF and where, who supposedly said these things.


er, yes, Gottabrain.

I didn't say it was good for anyone and I didn't say there were any Success stories/testimonials (here) ... why would there be?






I would like to see Mick, Paul and Dart clarify their views and experiences of the RPF on this thread, since as yet there are no links to their statements (perhaps they revised or deleted previous statements?!)

Sheila Huber

Well PM them and ask them about it then.

BTW Freewill has even posted photographs of his time on the RPF if you need/want proof that he was there, hunt around in his early posts.

Many have said it was an improvement on being in the org (I recall Fishdaddy may have said that too) and I think it was Dart that said the crew used to often run out of basics (sugar coffee etc) and went straight to the RPF to do a deal as they always had these things, check the PDF that DOF did on Dart.


Originally Posted by eaglewoman


It is my opinion that the RPF is one of the most suppressive and horrific,blood curdling institutions going on in the church of Scientology.I do not condone it in any way.
Regarding Ken URquhart:He was LRH communicator at the time and LRH told him to devise some kind of rehabilitation programme.Please read all that he wrote in his blog and not just part of it.He by the way has not read the latest books and doesn't know to what extent of absolute evil and torture and dehumanization this program has now been taken.His program meant to last a few weeks,people were supposed to get 7 hours of sleep and 5 hours of study and auditing.I don't even say i agree with that because i don't,but it is so far from what the RPF became.Ken himself also went to the RPF in 1980.
Now,i have never posted here before.But due to the attacks on ken i have decided to say a few things here.
I have worked with Ken at Flag for a few years and i know him as a human being and as a scientologist.Ken is a very hinorable man who has always cared about others and has a high level of integrity.He is a shy person and that has been misread as aloof by some who don't know him closely.But he has love and compassion and he cares very much about helping others.That is who Ken is.We have all evolved and we are all trying to heal from the damages of being in the cult.He is also always evolving.Ken is 72 years old,a gentelman and a man of honor.Like all of us i am sure he has many mixed feelings about his part in the Sea org.I know him and i know how kind he is and that he cares tremendously.
I just wanted to express my view point here.

Thank-you eaglewoman for taking the time to post.

Welcome (even though you may not be planning on staying!).

:)

For goodness sake scientology is one huge abuse of human rights (including the RPF) ... that is why most left and why many are opposing it in different ways and doing a fantastic job.

When we were in and if Tubs had ordered us to do something, most would have done it!

Please settle down and cease the judgmental bullshit, if one person hadn't created the RPF someone else would have done so, lets get people out and leave the accusation's for another day (if it is needed at all).

Am I missing something?

Panda Termint
31st December 2010, 02:42 AM
Nope!

Sindy
31st December 2010, 02:43 AM
Nope!

Emma
31st December 2010, 02:49 AM
Nope.

eaglewoman
31st December 2010, 03:16 AM
Ken is misguided in defending the dictator LRH was. He may be a gentlemen but is not and will never be free if he can not confront the fact LRH was an abusive man.

I hear you. knowing Ken and having quite a bit of communication with him regarding related matters,i know that like many of us he has been confronting his views of LRH and constantly evolving and striving to heal as a being.I have only known him to be a very caring person.

Alanzo
31st December 2010, 03:28 AM
I hear you. knowing Ken and having quite a bit of communication with him regarding related matters,i know that like many of us he has been confronting his views of LRH and constantly evolving and striving to heal as a being.I have only known him to be a very caring person.

Welcome to ESMB, eaglewoman.

Your viewpoint and your experience is appreciated.

Zinjifar
31st December 2010, 03:37 AM
And for the record, the RPF in its current form in the Sea Organization IS evil.

The RPF was always evil. The mind that conceived it and implemented it was evil. Given 'Scientology', it should be obvious to even the most naive that it would *always* become evil, even granting 'best intentions' as a kickoff.

The authority to incarcerate and 'rehabilitate' when entrusted to L. Ron Hubbard or any organization based on His intentions would always be evil.

There was never another possible outcome.

Zinj

Sindy
31st December 2010, 04:12 AM
Welcome to ESMB, eaglewoman.

Your viewpoint and your experience is appreciated.

:thumbsup: Agreed.

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 04:54 AM
er, yes, Gottabrain.

I didn't say it was good for anyone and I didn't say there were any Success stories/testimonials (here) ... why would there be?

Fair enough.


Well PM them and ask them about it then.?

I will. Meanwhile, suggest that it is a bit odd that some who have never been on the RPF to experience it are so adamant about defending it and so quick to add 2nd or 3rd hand comments to support it when the people themselves will not post stating this and the threads or comments they supposedly made cannot be found (which means the individuals may have since deleted them).


BTW Freewill has even posted photographs of his time on the RPF if you need/want proof that he was there, hunt around in his early posts.

Many have said it was an improvement on being in the org (I recall Fishdaddy may have said that too) and I think it was Dart that said the crew used to often run out of basics (sugar coffee etc) and went straight to the RPF to do a deal as they always had these things, check the PDF that DOF did on Dart..?

Who is "MANY"? Why are you so defensive of the RPF program and how good it is? That is not usually like you. I don't get that. What is the point you are trying to make, and why are you including so many 2nd and 3rd hand comments? Let them comment for themselves. I am not interested in hearsay. HEARSAY is what made Indies and FZers believe that at any time the RPF Program was "Good". Please - no more hearsay.

Who is "Fishdaddy"? Does anyone know him/her and what are the details (if they exist) of this person's RPF experience?

Re Freewill having pics...???? Sorry, allowing RPFers to bring cameras is not part of the program. Sounds quite suspicious, to say the least. The FOs are explicit on what a person is allowed to have on the RPF and cameras are not one of the items. It was never in any of the versions of the FOs. I can't imagine any RPF where cameras are allowed.

Dart's RPF was also very different from the FOs. We were never allowed a "personal stock" of foods and this is against the FOs, which specifically say the RPF eat leftovers and this has always been the rule. When/where was his RPF? Sounds more like the EPF or DPF and I'll bet he had a brief stint on a DPF or EPF and confused it with the RPF.

It comes down to this, Trouble - if the program was followed, then the only people that weren't damaged by it were the ones that had nothing to lose by going there and were willing and did it of their own free will. This is certainly a minority.

The program's purpose and intention is to BREAK one's will, PUNISH and DEGRADE a person, IMPRISON a person and REINDOCTRINATE them.

Sure, a 3 week program would not have been any big deal. Has anyone ever actually completed an RPF program in 3 weeks? When/where?

There was no "good" time for the RPF, unless it was the first two days of it. The RPF's RPF was started THREE DAYS into the program's implementation so that there would always be an extreme punishment for anyone who disobeyed.

The RPFers are also often taken off the required FPRD co-audits to do long stints of hard labour as needed (without the 7 hrs sleep) and this also always extends the program.

So, if a person is willing and goes along with it, it's not so painful and they are not treated as badly. In fact, if they really believe in the program and enjoy abusing others (as Kurt Hahn did) they easily rise to ranks of power like RPF MAA - just as in the rest of the SO. For the people who did not enter it willingly, which is the majority - those who wish to leave staff or who have the guts to go against management - or those who have children, spouses or family to care for that they are cut off from - it is a truly horrible experience to be forcibly imprisoned, and the more one resists, the more those in charge work to hurt, destroy, degrade, coerce, break and force a person to become a "good SO Member" again.


TO EAGLEWOMAN - Thank you for your post, and WELCOME. I will read all of Ken's postings more thoroughly. One important point is that he personally states that unless he was on it and supervising personally, the program became abusive. Therefore, the abuses of the program were always inherent in the program itself. In other words, it DIDN'T WORK. Except to keep critics and potential dissidents away from the rest and to punish and hurt them. For that, it was just awesome, wasn't it?

Mark A. Baker
31st December 2010, 05:09 AM
Ken is being severely attacked by Diana on an FZ forum. As for that matter
am I.

This was one of his responses.

Ooooh! Ooooh! Too bad, BB. You both have been a right couple of ninnys in regards to your treatment of Aida lately, both in public as well as in private. :eyeroll:

Only in the case of Ken I'm somewhat surprised.


Mark A. Baker

I told you I was trouble
31st December 2010, 05:12 AM
Posted by Gottabrain

snipped

Who is "MANY"? Why are you so defensive of the RPF program and how good it is? That is not usually like you. I don't get that. What is the point you are trying to make, and why are you including so many 2nd and 3rd hand comments? Let them comment for themselves. I am not interested in hearsay. HEARSAY is what made Indies and FZers believe that at any time the RPF Program was "Good". Please - no more hearsay.



Show me where I defended the RPF.

I have commented ... as is my right.

I don't like your attitude (on this) and have now said so ... if you don't like that, tough.

I am very sorry you had a hard time in the RPF.

:yes:

PS Search Fishdaddy 0n ESMB (or Jeff Hawkins).

Zinjifar
31st December 2010, 05:13 AM
Ooooh! Ooooh! Too bad, BB. You both have been a right couple of ninnys in regards to your treatment of Aida lately, both in public as well as in private.

Only in the case of Ken I'm somewhat surprised.

So much for the wonders of 'Scientology Communication' tech.

Zinj

eaglewoman
31st December 2010, 05:15 AM
Welcome to ESMB, eaglewoman.

Your viewpoint and your experience is appreciated.

Thank you Alanzo:)


Fair enough.

Thank you Gottabrain.
I appreciate that.:thumbsup:As far as the RPF goes,i feel it is the most horrific institution with all the endless abuses connected with it .It is outrageously evil and there is no justification for it whatsoever.And those are weak words considering my feelings about it and about all the other human right abuses...



TO EAGLEWOMAN - Thank you for your post, and WELCOME. I will read all of Ken's postings more thoroughly. One important point is that he personally states that unless he was on it and supervising personally, the program became abusive. Therefore, the abuses of the program were always inherent in the program itself. In other words, it DIDN'T WORK. Except to keep critics and potential dissidents away from the rest and to punish and hurt them. For that, it was just awesome, wasn't it?

Mark A. Baker
31st December 2010, 05:23 AM
So much for the wonders of 'Scientology Communication' tech.

Zinj

They have to USE it for it to work. :eyeroll:


Mark A. Baker

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 05:34 AM
Show me where I defended the RPF.

I have commented ... as is my right.

I don't like your attitude (on this) and have now said so ... if you don't like that, tough.

I am very sorry you had a hard time in the RPF.

:yes:

PS Search Fishdaddy 0n ESMB (or Jeff Hawkins).

Trouble, it is a rare occasion when you and I don't agree on something. I think highly of you and respect you.

I really don't understand why you would write so many posts defending the RPF with hearsay.

The ONE point I am trying to make here is that the RPF program was NEVER good, NEVER workable, NEVER anything but a brainwashing reindoctrination for dissidents, critics, and those who disagree with management. And those are mild words compared to my earlier words.

IF you want a bit of background on this, I have had a couple of people (Sharon Sigmund and her husband/man friend) who were once on my FB (and are no longer) attack me for stating the truth about the RPF and also spread hearsay and rumors about how great the program is. They've even taken it a few steps further and accused anyone who was ever RPFed as being a "criminal" and quoted Tommy Davis' description of the RPF. These two spread these malicious lies throughout the FZ and Indies with NO evidence of any kind, but with statements of a "friend" who had "big wins on the RPF program", refusing to give even the most minor details. Oh, BULLSHIT! This was nothing more than an effort to discredit the hundreds of testimonies about the RPF abuses throughout all periods of the SO. I have yet to see anyone state the RPF program is "good" or was ever like a "work camp holiday" and I would really like these destructive rumors in the FZ and amongst the Indies to STOP!

Now are you going to help me stop these rumors or just spread them? Because if there are actual testimonies, they need to be attached HERE or written HERE. Otherwise, people with cameras and other personal possessions and extra food stocks and claiming that was part of the RPF - No.
Where/when? No. That's not the RPF described in any version of the FOs.

I really believe Dart got confused between the RPF and DPF or EPF, btw.

HelluvaHoax!
31st December 2010, 05:41 AM
They have to USE it for it to work. :eyeroll:
Mark A. Baker

What deceitful mythology you promote...

If it worked people would be *able* to use it.

The fact that people spent a half million dollars and decades and STILL cannot use the tech is evidence that it is unworkable tech.

And the notion that they *choose* not to use it is really retarded.

People digging holes use shovels. People painting walls use brushes. People traveling use automobiles and airplanes.

What kind of fantasy are you trying to sell that people refuse to use tools that work?

Amazing that you peddle such nonsense and expect people to buy it.

I told you I was trouble
31st December 2010, 05:41 AM
Posted by Gottabrain

Now are you going to help me stop these rumors or just spread them?

I am going to do whatever I like Gottabrain (whenever I like).

You still haven't shown me where I defended the RPF, but don't worry about it, I've lost interest.

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 05:46 AM
I am going to do whatever I like Gottabrain (whenever I like).

and that is freedom. Enjoy it. It is precious. Something the RPF cannot do.


You still haven't shown me where I defended the RPF, but don't worry about it, I've lost interest.

Trouble, if you come across any of their posts on this, please post them or the links. You are entitled to your opinion and to state anything you wish on any subject. It is refreshing to be able to disagree, even when it is uncomfortable to do so. There are no repercussions here in the free world. :happydance:

Panda Termint
31st December 2010, 05:58 AM
Sheila, I really think you have misunderstood the intent and content of the posts where myself and others have commented on some few people expressing having a somewhat different experience in the RPF. None of it is meant to condone the existence of the RPF nor lessen the crimes comitted therein (as far as I can see). I understand that you have frustration and anger concerning this issue but I doubt very much that any of the posters here on this thread are deserving targets of that anger. In your post above you speak of a disagreement with ITYIWT (and possibly others) which doesn't actually exist except as a form of misunderstood communication.

I wish you well and support your call for an end to the RPF and all forms of abuse.

I told you I was trouble
31st December 2010, 06:15 AM
and that is freedom. Enjoy it. It is precious. Something the RPF cannot do.



Trouble, if you come across any of their posts on this, please post them or the links. You are entitled to your opinion and to state anything you wish on any subject. It is refreshing to be able to disagree, even when it is uncomfortable to do so. There are no repercussions here in the free world. :happydance:

Free will photos
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=93433&postcount=28

Dart
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?p=514913#post514913

Fishdaddy
http://leavingscientology.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/the-rpf-what-are-the-facts/


I have never said it is good, I have said that some people say it was not much worse (and some even say better) than the normal org situation ... which (to me) clearly means the whole cult is an appalling abuse of human rights.

I have found a few links but the rest you will need to look for yourself.

:)

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 06:27 AM
Sheila, I really think you have misunderstood the intent and content of the posts where myself and others have commented on some few people expressing having a somewhat different experience in the RPF. None of it is meant to condone the existence of the RPF nor lessen the crimes comitted therein (as far as I can see). I understand that you have frustration and anger concerning this issue but I doubt very much that any of the posters here on this thread are deserving targets of that anger. In your post above you speak of a disagreement with ITYIWT (and possibly others) which doesn't actually exist except as a form of misunderstood communication.

I wish you well and support your call for an end to the RPF and all forms of abuse.

Perhaps you are right, Panda. I'll give it some thought.

As a note, I'm not angry at any of the posters here. I just wish they would post the actual quotes from the threads. It would be more informative and useful to me than general opinions of what may have been read in the past. There may be misunderstandings on both sides and only the actual statements by the individuals will clear this up.

Would you and the other posters kindly also give some thought to the unfounded rumors that have been spreading in the FZ and amongst the Indies. You may have not personally heard or read them, but it has been quite a battle for me to convince a few others afterward of the human rights abuses that actually go on in the RPF.

It is difficult when I give facts and am countered with second hand knowledge or second hand opinions rather than the actual statements of the individuals. The statements others made from memory are missing important details - length of TIME and time PERIOD on the RPF, where on the RPF and things like that. Some of the statements made describe a program different from any RPF program ever in existence (i.e., the extra food stocked for RPF, cameras, etc.). So there are good reasons for some of my skepticism. These are contrary facts. The "RPFs" described by at least two individuals are nothing like the programs described by Hubbard or others in any version of the RPF program FOs of any time period.

When others have presented me with actual statements, I have read them and responded fairly.

So in fairness to me, please provide actual statements. I am not angry at any of the posters here. Honestly. None of the posters here believe the current RPF program is "good", and some have been extremely supportive of efforts to abolish it. But in fairness to me, if you are going to say others say it is good, post the link or the quote, please. Thanks.

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 06:47 AM
Free will photos
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=93433&postcount=28

Dart
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?p=514913#post514913

Fishdaddy
http://leavingscientology.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/the-rpf-what-are-the-facts/

Thanks, Trouble. :) I replied about the same moment you posted this.

Just read it. Yes, I believe they were both on the RPF.

Freewill was at AOSHUK RPF, 77-78 (not very long. Funny how different and abusive the PAC RPF was from AOSHUK at exactly the same time) He says, "Oh what a joy it was whenever someone was routed on the RPF who just last week had been despising us, or gloating at our degradation. This happened routinely. To use terminology I haven't used for years, in many cases RPF assignment seemed to knock a person back into valence so you you'd find a likeable person under the false image they'd been presenting for years.
The RPF was a dawdle for people who had come into the SO with family fortunes or savings, since they could send out for cigarettes, food, etc (through their 2D partner).
I understand it just went consistently downhill after my time, though."


Sad that he would be glad to see others sent there. That they felt the RPF broke through the SO valences shows how awful the SO identity is, and was.

None of the RPF at PAC had money of their own. And time with 2D or family was a passing thing - it was occasional for a few years. FOs changed back & forth on that. All depended on being upstat, etc.

RE DART:

He was the RPF BOSUN. Per his own statement.

That is the person who runs the RPF. So yeh, it would be a sweet run for him, not necessarily for those under him. But perhaps he ran it in a humane way.

Both of these individuals went there willingly, continued willingly.

Those who don't want to be there are treated differently. I'd be very interested to hear from Dart how they treated the RPF who didn't "go with the program" (RPF's RPF?), and also would like to know how long he was actually on and if he graduated. Did he ever allow anyone to route out? How long did it take? Were people who wanted to leave punished?

And did Freewill graduate or get reprieved? Did Dart graduate or was he reprieved? What was the total time they both spent on there? In 77-78, PAC RPF took about 2-3 years to graduation due to RPF being pulled off to do renovations. Otherwise the program would be about a year if not interrupted. When FPRD entered in, it became 3 years long, now - hard to say. Seems to have no end at all, no graduates at all. And 2D time was always only for upstats even in the time it was allowed. Not allowed any more. Hasn't been allowed for years.

Anyway, thanks again. It helps me see the whole picture better. I hope my comments help you see this a bit differently, too. Those who agreed to go along with the program became very good at it and were promoted within the RPF, etc., ready to be returned as productive, reindoctrinated SO members again. And these two did not have relatives or kids or anyone to worry about, judging from their statements, nor any health problems. It appears they both got off the RPF other ways - neither mentions actually graduating, both appear to be rather short stints, too. Left? Reprieved? I'd love to know more details.

Thanks again.

ADDED NOTE RE FISHDADDY: That last link has several personal testimonies in the comments. None are positive in any way. Jim Logan and the poster named "RPF Escapee" give their own personal accounts as far, far worse than what was originally posted on the website - similar accounts to mine. The website does not appear to be a firsthand account. Good link, that last one.

I told you I was trouble
31st December 2010, 07:05 AM
Posted by Gottabrain
snipped

I hope my comments help you see this a bit differently, too.


I still see it as I did prior to reading (some) of your comments ... it is an appalling abuse system set up by Hubbard and it is Hubbard that needs to be held responsible for it.

My opinion only.

:yes:

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 07:09 AM
I still see it as I did prior to reading (some) of your comments ... it is an appalling abuse system set up by Hubbard and it is Hubbard that needs to be held responsible for it.

My opinion only.

:yes:

I AGREE. :)

dianaclass8
31st December 2010, 07:57 AM
Originally Posted by Terril park
Ken is being severely attacked by Diana on an FZ forum. As for that matter
am I.

This was one of his responses


Ooooh! Ooooh! Too bad, BB. You both have been a right couple of ninnys in regards to your treatment of Aida lately, both in public as well as in private. :eyeroll:

Only in the case of Ken I'm somewhat surprised.


Mark A. Baker

Mark, Ken and BB act like OSA they think that they can do onto others and one must be quiet and take the punishment with out a bit of complaint.

Ken Urquhart was a very evil man when he created the RPF and he has not changed in the past 40 years.

To tell you the truth I hate these flame wars. I have been putting up with these sociopaths for the last year. One has a limit.

Diana

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 09:34 AM
I suggest:

Aida and I lay off of Ken,
Ken and Terril lay off of Aida,
Mark and I lay off each other

and that we all start fresh and have a HAPPY NEW YEAR and DESTROY THE RPF in 2011 because that is where the REAL human rights violations occur!

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!!!

http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2008/Dec/Week4/15195890.jpg

Emma
31st December 2010, 09:54 AM
I suggest:

Aida and I lay off of Ken,
Ken and Terril lay off of Aida,
Mark and I lay off each other

and that we all start fresh and have a HAPPY NEW YEAR and DESTROY THE RPF in 2011 because that is where the REAL human rights violations occur!

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!!!

http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2008/Dec/Week4/15195890.jpg

Now that I can drink to!

http://www.liesangeles.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/cheers.jpg

dianaclass8
31st December 2010, 10:17 AM
Now that I can drink to!

http://www.liesangeles.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/cheers.jpg

Thank you! I agree!

Happy New Year and may everyone's wishes come true!

:party:

Aida

anonomog
31st December 2010, 10:23 AM
What matters more who originated it or who perpetuated and enforced it?
Only those in positions of power could have kept it going. And they have kept it going for 40 odd years.

If Ken U and the execs at the top all approached Hubbard and made it clear that the system was abusive or potentially abusive and they would not be part of it, would not enforce it, what would have happened?

Similarly if Rathbun and Rinder and all the top execs of the near present, had refused to enforce and condone the RPF what would have happened.


It doesn't seem that its not a case of if you get sent to the RPF but rather when.
Surely they would know that stopping it they would be removing the threat of it for themselves as well.

The system of knowledge reports, cult indoctrination, the need for self preservation in a hostile environment and sycophantish obedience to either Hubbard or Miscavige would make a top exec mutiny of this sort very difficult but not impossible.

I'm inclined to think that power to deprive someone of their freedom, the power to instill fear in others is so seductive and addictive that it over rode the understanding that the system was morally wrong. Its also easier to go with the flow.

I'm too far out, never experienced the fear to have any answer. I have read the brainwashing studies, understood the learned helplessness and the battered wife syndrome.
I just cannot believe that every single one of the top execs present or past believes deep down, in their un-cult selves, that removing someones liberty and abusing that person is a good thing and didn't do something.

Just my 2c.

Hatshepsut
31st December 2010, 10:40 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdU-YUSzkUI

Ogsonofgroo
31st December 2010, 11:03 AM
I still see it as I did prior to reading (some) of your comments ... it is an appalling abuse system set up by Hubbard and it is Hubbard that needs to be held responsible for it.

My opinion only.

:yes:

You could be a giant, wart coverd, vertically challenged, variety of some potato out in grampa's field, and.... I'd still love ya.

It is so simple it is become invisible?

Hope not.

Remember, hair wide back and eyes wide open!

And, that was nicely put imho ^^^ Trouble.

DartSmohen
31st December 2010, 11:23 AM
Does anyone here KNOW Dart or Freewill personally? Ever met them? Have either of them even stated when/where they were RPFed or for how long? Because I don't believe that either of them was on the RPF.

LINKS PLEASE. Because Nobody who has done the RPF would just brush it off as a "great way to catch up on your sleep" and have nothing more to say about it, and funny thing is, neither said WHEN or WHERE they were on the RPF either. That is such bullshit. I'd like to hear from them now.

And if that's ALL the FZers and Indies have as "testimony that the RPF program was good", you all need to take a hard look at this. Think VERY hard about it. Because it is just one more aspect of the brainwashing. A huge one - because the RPF is the absolute worst example of human rights abuses that exists in the Cult of Scientology. HOW can you justify it? HOW can you take a stupid statement like, "the RPF is great for catching up on sleep" by someone who has never been on it and cannot or will not provide any details of their supposed assignment when there are hundreds of detailed, signed testimonies from those of us who really DID do the program? And I'm not talking about people who were there temporarily for a few weeks and then had their assignments canceled!

Well, whilst some of us have been asleep the "chattering Classes" have been hard at work frothing at the mouth and trying to express their perceived "outrage".

As you have called my earlier statements into question I thought I would illuminate the events for you.

In early November 1974 Hubbard sent a telex to St Hill (UK - England, you know, the country who just thumped the Ozzies at cricket). He ordered me to the RPF because several GO staff had been swindled in a commodity options scheme and I had "encouraged" a couple of public to get involved (So I could reg them for their profits, which I did).

We were based at Stonelands and at first we lived in the boathouse, which was very cold and damp. We were not going to put up with that, so we took over a small storage building and made it very snug and warm.

After the crew had breakfast we were told we had to wash up. Robin Scott was the cook and we told him ; no breakfast = no washing up. So, we had a leasurely breakfast, did the washing up and decided what we would do that day. Sometimes we would clear the drive in, litter, undergrowth etc.

After evening meal we retired to the basement where we studied and processed. As the senior tech party I c/s'ed the auditing. If the weather was poor or cold we worked on projects indoors.

Sopmetimes there was no crew bus to take us to St Hill to work, so we would hitch lifts from passing public and congregate at the Stables barn where the Estates I/C worked. We would discuss what was urgent and what wasn't. He may have thought he was in charge of us, but that was simply an illusion. One of the more physical jobs we had was to dig the trenches for the new auditing block. After this we had to put the "flashing" down. (Concrete, for the uninitiated). I remember we had this lunatic called Martin Huber on the RPF. He was Swiss and we called him "Huberoid". (One time he was told to sit on the branch of a tree which streched across the St Hill garages. If anyone asked why he was there he had to tell them it was because he was a robot).

Anyway, we used to wheel the concrete to the edge of the trench and tip it in. Then it would be spread out. Huber, without looking, simply tipped his wheelbarrow into the trench - all over this firey red headed Scottish lad who picked up a shovel and chased Martin down the hill, both of them weaving through staff who were coming to and from the canteen.

When it was not so cold we went down to the lake and pulled weeds. That is, I sat in a deckchair and supervised the crew rowing about in a small boat pulling pout weeds and loading up the front of the boat.

Roger Buckeridge acted as the crew butcher. He had experience in Oz. So we would purchase prime steak from him - paying him and getting a written receipt.

This led to an outrage from the regular crew one night. We held a graduation party and had steak, chips, mushrooms etc, all paid for by ourselves. The crew had eaten macaroni cheese! I remember Bruce Gluchachow trying to demand we got an extra three months for this outrage. We somply produced our receipts to the GO and the matter was squashed. (yes, we did have a quiet word with Bruce as well).

Certain foods were allocated, particularly butter and sugar. As the RPF we had our allocation. Somehow, quite magically, we seemed to receive more than our allocation. Toward the end of the week the crew had run out of these items. Robin, the cook, used to come to us to bargain for some of our allocation. In exchange we got greater portions of meat, bread, deserts etc.

All in all we ensured we got through our completion program properly. We were never short of female company. Some of the ladies in the SO living at Stonelands used to quietly pop down and see us ( Anyone remember Amy Young?).

In order to graduate we had to take our CSW to each staff member and ask them to sign their approval. I had one scumbag who refused to sign - Pedro Doria. Karma happens. Within a few months I was chairman of his com ev. Guess what? He was found guilty and declared SP.

All in all I was on the RPF for about 4 months. I graduated in about March 1975. The day I graduated, one of our public, Peter Paynter, a good friend, took me to London to the Playboy Club to celebrate. In December 1975 I left the SO along with my wife and new baby. The living conditions at Stonelands were un suitable and the nursery conditions squalid.

I trust this dispels any doubts you may harbour as to whether or not I was on the RPF. As you can see, we did not succumb to the concept that we were less than we were. When we moved about regular staff got out of our way.

Mick Parkee, Tony Marsh, Mike Phillips. Norman Wade, Martin Huber, The Scottish lad whose name I forget (he married a multimillionairess), these were some of those who shared the trip.

Dart

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 12:08 PM
I suggest:

Aida and I lay off of Ken,
Ken and Terril lay off of Aida,
Mark and I lay off each other

and that we all start fresh and have a HAPPY NEW YEAR and DESTROY THE RPF in 2011 because that is where the REAL human rights violations occur!

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!!!

http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2008/Dec/Week4/15195890.jpg


What is the archetype underlying all that laying?

:unsure:

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 12:10 PM
Thank you! I agree!

Happy New Year and may everyone's wishes come true!

:party:

Aida


Especially Gottabrain's!

.

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 12:12 PM
...

If Ken U and the execs at the top all approached Hubbard and made it clear that the system was abusive or potentially abusive and they would not be part of it, would not enforce it, what would have happened?

Similarly if Rathbun and Rinder and all the top execs of the near present, had refused to enforce and condone the RPF what would have happened.

...


They all would have been declared much earlier...

.

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 12:45 PM
Well, whilst some of us have been asleep the "chattering Classes" have been hard at work frothing at the mouth and trying to express their perceived "outrage".

As yoiu have called my earlier statements into question I thought I would illuminate the events for you.

In early November 1973 Hubbard sent a telex to St Hill (UK - England, you know, the country who just thumped the Ozzies at cricket). He ordered me to the RPF because several GO staff had been swindled in a commodity options scheme and I had "encouraged" a couple of public to get involved (So I could reg them for their profits, which I did).

We were based at Stonelands and at first we lived in the boathouse, which was very cold and damp. We were not going to put up with that, so we took over a small storage building and made it very snug and warm.

After the crew had breakfast we were told we had to wash up. Robin Scott was the cook and we told him ; no breakfast = no washing up. So, we had a leasurely breakfast, did the washing up and decided what we would do that day. Sometimes we would clear the drive in, litter, undergrowth etc.

After evening meal we retired to the basement where we studied and processed. As the senior tech party I c/s'ed the auditing. If the weather was poor or cold we worked on projects indoors.

Sopmetimes there was no crew bus to take us to St Hill to work, so we would hitch lifts from passing public and congregate at the Stables barn where the Estates I/C worked. We would discuss what was urgent and what wasn't. He may have thought he was in charge of us, but that was simply an illusion. One of the more physical jobs we had was to dig the trenches for the new auditing block. After this we had to put the "flashing" down. (Concrete, for the uninitiated). I remember we had this lunatic called Martin Huber on the RPF. He was Swiss and we called him "Huberoid". (One time he was told to sit on the branch of a tree which streched across the St Hill garages. If anyone asked why he was there he had to tell them it was because he was a robot).

Anyway, we used to wheel the concrete to the edge of the trench and tip it in. Then it would be spread out. Huber, without looking, simply tipped his wheelbarrow into the trench - all over this firey red headed Scottish lad who picked up a shovel and chased Martin down the hill, both of them weaving through staff who were coming to and from the canteen.

When it was not so cold we went down to the lake and pulled weeds. That is, I sat in a deckchair and supervised the crew rowing about in a small boat pulling pout weeds and loading up the front of the boat.

Roger Buckeridge acted as the crew butcher. He had experience in Oz. So we would purchase prime steak from him - paying him and getting a written receipt.

This led to an outrage from the regular crew one night. We held a graduation party and had steak, chips, mushrooms etc, all paid for by ourselves. The crew had eaten macaroni cheese! I remember Bruce Gluchachow trying to demand we got an extra three months for this outrage. We somply produced our receipts to the GO and the matter was squashed. (yes, we did have a quiet word with Bruce as well).

Certain foods were allocated, particularly butter and sugar. As the RPF we had our allocation. Somehow, quite magically, we seemed to receive more than our allocation. Toward the end of the week the crew had run out of these items. Robin, the cook, used to come to us to bargain for some of our allocation. In exchange we got greater portions of meat, bread, deserts etc.

All in all we ensured we got through our completion program properly. We were never short of female company. Some of the ladies in the SO living at Stonelands used to quietly pop down and see us ( Anyone remember Amy Young?).

In order to graduate we had to take our CSW to each staff member and ask them to sign their approval. I had one scumbag who refused to sign - Pedro Doria. Karma happens. Within a few months I was chairman of his com ev. Guess what? He was found guilty and declared SP.

All in all I was on the RPF for about 4 months. I graduated in about March 1973. The day I graduated, one of our public, Peter Paynter, a good friend, took me to London to the Playboy Club to celebrate.

I trust this dispels any doubts you may harbour as to whether or not I was on the RPF. As you can see, we did not succumb to the concept that we were less than we were. When we moved about regular staff got out of our way.

Mick Parkee, Tony Marsh, Mike Phillips. Norman Wade, Martin Huber, The Scottish lad whose name I forget (he married a multimillionairess), these were some of those who shared the trip.

Dart

This sure is quite entertaining, but it seems like an "RPF" far away from Hubbard.

Bless your stars that Hubbard did not find out about all the details while you were on it.

.

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 01:05 PM
Hi Dart,

Thank you for your answer, that was very considerate.

It is clear why the RPF rules did not apply to you. The RPF did not exist at the time that you claimed to do the RPF. FO3434R "The Rehabilitation Project Force" came out on 7 January 1974. You were put on the DPF or EPF (either the Deck Project Force or Estates Project Force) in 1973. The RPF did not even exist at the time you stated you were on it.
I believe this was not an intentional error on your part, but you have led many to misunderstand the program from your comments and led some to believe that FO 3434R was applied differently in different areas. It was not even in existence when you were sent to the decks in 1973.

Here is a copy of FO 3434R, originally written 7 Jan 1974 (Please note, it has been revised a couple of times since 1977, each revision stricter than the last):

SEA ORGANIZATION
FLAG ORDER 3434RB

7 January 1974
Revised
21 August 1976
Re-Revised 30 May 1977

(modifies Flag Order 3183 in regard to qualifications for the Deck Project Force - which remains in being.) Only revisions on page 9 and 10 in italics.

The Rehabilitation Project Force (RPF) is hereby brought into being in Div 4 Area Estates Org.

To it are assigned:

1. R/Sers

2. Low OCA non-producers

3. Repeated stat crashers

4. Overt Product makers.

The Estates Project Force remains for Recruits, Products 0, 1, etc.

New Recruits and those Veterans who are not Prod 0 or who are TIPed for Prod 1 are posted to the EPF for Products 0 and 1 as required.

IF anybody while in the EPF is found to be in one of the categories 1-4 above, he is at ONCE routed to the RPF.

If a new arrival is found to be in one of the categories 1-4 above when he arrives and he is not returned whence he came, he is routed straight to the RPF.

The EPF, hitherto used for the retreading of those persons who suffer from robotism or who produce overt products or who need continual supervision and are a liability on lines, is now to be permitted and made to be an UPSTAT unit with high standards, high production and high morale unhindered by those who do not belong in such a unit but require special handling on their own without distracting others who are doing well.

UNIFORMS

The RPF members wear a BLACK boilersuit, or ethnically acceptable cleaning outfit in very dark blue.

ORGANIZATION

The basic organization is as follows:


RPF Bosun
RPF MAA
RPF Section Leaders
RPF Section Members
The sections are made up of the leader plus 6-7 members,, depending on the overall total. Each section is identified by a letter - 'A' Section, 'B' Section, etc. The leader is responsible for his section, The members of one section answer to their section leader, to the RPF MAA or RPF Bosun, or any other on-line senior.

When working on specific cycles of action, members of one section may be seconded by RPF Bosun to another section for that specific cycle. This would be done if a cycle required 2 more members than were in the section assigned to that cycle, but did not require two whole sections.

The RPF Bosun's directions in these temporary assignments are final and may be contested only by a Job Endangerment Chit by the Protesting section leader.

Any stats obtained by the seconded members are credited to the section to which they belong.

The section leaders are responsible for the productions ethics, job-training, mustering, study attendance, study progress, berthing, messing, appearance, personal hygiene, etiquette, discipline, moral, general progress and behavior of the members in their own sections.

They see that their members are applying on-the-job basic Sea Org cleaning, maintenance and hygiene tech such as in FSO 674 SPOTLESS, SHINY SHIP MAINTENANCE MINI HAT issues.

The RPF Bosun is responsible for these factors with regard to the section leaders.

The RPF MAA is responsible to the RPF Bosun for the Ethics of the section leaders and of the RPF as a unit. He forces the section leaders to keep Ethics in on their sections, and if he has to take Ethics action on a section member that member's leader suffers the same penalty also. He has the section leaders muster their sections before breakfast, after meals and before studys before securing for the day, and at any other times required by the Bosun within reason and without distracting from production. If the Bosun has to bypass the RPF MAA to get in Ethics, the same penalty applies to the RPF MAA.

RESTRICTION OF RPF FROM FLAG CREW

On assignment to the RPF, petition or no, the person forfeits any position held in any other activity than post, in a watch, Troupe, Team or anything else, or any non-Scientology or community activity, etc. Where the RPF person has taken part in a non-Scientology activity and would be expected to attend, meet payments, dues, or contribute in any way but won't be able to because of RPF regulations a detailed report is to be made by the person as part of his routing into the RPF with copies sent to the AG Flag copy for Ethics folder and copies to any other Execs who should be informed to ensure proper handling.

A member of the RPF is a member of the RPF and of nothing outside of it, till released.

UTILIZATION

The sections of the RPF either singly or combined are put to work on:


1. Building cleaning, exterior (including grounds) and interior.
2. Heads cleaning.

3. Painting requiring no extra skill.

4. Internal renovation.

5. Storage, passageway and stairway cleaning.

6. Large scale CSP actions but NOT in any berthing,, messing or galley areas.

7. Garage cleaning.

8. Elevator and elevator shaft cleaning.

9. E/R cleanings especially upper and lower boiler rooms

10. Party, etc. set-ups, but only MEST work (moving furniture, etc.).

11. Garbage disposal.

12. Other actions as may be approved (and not otherwise) by LRH Pers Comm via LRH Comm Area Estates (or as delegated by LRH Pers Comm.


The RPF do NOT:

a. Clean FCCI Rooms.
[deleted] e. Do any clerical work of any kind.

f. Clean, re-arrange or otherwise handle the berthing and personal property of any crew member.

g. Do any fine paint, carpets, woodwork, plaster, wallpaper, varnish or window replacement work.

h. Do any security guard, watch or WQSB duties.

i. Hold any post on any org lines-outside the unit as "Expeditor" or "Temporary" or anything else.

j. Go on any kind of Mission or Errand whatever.

k. Do any crew's normal cleaning station for him.

1. Work with the EPF.

m. Handle any Motor Pool vehicle in any way,


The Stable Datum for the Unit and for its individual sections is ONE JOB, ONE PLACE, ONE TIME.
[deleted]

Its sub-products are COMPLETED CYCLES OF ACTION.

The optimum utilization of the whole RPF and its sections is the responsibility of the RPF Bosun.

This requires that he has a large board on which the authorized work cycles can be shown and which indicates which are not started, not complete, and DONE.

He must have a list of daily and weekly tasks that the RPF is authorized to do, and a programme or programmes for the cleaning and upgrade of specified areas of the base. The routine lists and programmes must be okayed by the Area Estates Bosuns First Mate and CO Area Estates, no matter who originates them.

He must resist all efforts to break the 1 job, 1 place, 1 time stable datum.

When a cycle is reported-complete he must-verify the fact by personal inspection (which can at times be delegated to the RPF MAA) and is to then either got the job properly completed by those who failed to do it, or to acknowledge,the completion directly with an okay, good, very good, well done, very well done, as the case may be.

A half-done or overt product of course merits Ethics penalties in addition to enforcement of the original order.

The Area Estates Bosun coordinates the assigments of EPF and RPF.

[deleted]

CONTINENTAL AREA RPF AUTHORIZATIONS

The Cont LRH Comm or a valid deputy will authorize or not all applications for actions referred to in this FO and the FO 3434R Series as requiring LRH Pers Comm approval.

MOTTO


The Motto of the RPF is:
THE RPF IS WHAT WE MAKE IT.

THE RPF IS WHERE WE MAKE IT.


PERSONAL RIGHTS
The personal rights of an RPF member are:


1. Full Scientology Justice at the hands of his Seniors and peers in the RPF.
2. The right to insist on being allowed to complete a cycle of action he has started providing it is an authorized cycle for his section and he is not making an overt product.

3. Pay as allowed unless withheld or fined by a justice action.

4. Mormal meals, providing no crew member is in any way deprived thereby.

5. Standard tech as delivered or deliverable by his fellows in the RPF.

6. The opportunity to voice genuine grievances and to be heards and to make constructive efforts to make things right.

7. Five hours study/co-audit per day.

8. Thirty minutes undisturbed time for each meal, and 30 minutes for personal hygiene each day.

9. To make adequate progress as determined by his own impulses to get fully cleaned up and released.


10. To receive as much respect from-others as he himself makes possible for himself.
PERSONAL RESTRICTIONS AND PENALTIES

1.
[deleted]

His last action in the RPF is the last step of his Liability Formula on the 3rd Dynamic and when completed he rejoins the crew in non-Existence.

2. Has no Liberties.

3. Is restricted to FH at all times except when on authorized work cycles in other Flag Buildings. Any travel between buildings is accompanied by a Security Guard. Additionally each week ons RPF member as authorized by RPF MAA and Security Force MAA, may make necessary purchases for RPF members (a.g. toothpaste, deodorants etc.)accompanied on foot by a Security Guard at the convenience of the Security Guard.

4. Receives 1/4 pay until released, then 1/2 pay.

5. Is berthed only in a space which is isolated from the rest and is only for RPF. RPF berthings messing and Tech area must conform with local regulations such as birthing, fire, health and safety regulations, etc., but without violating other restrictions or the intention of the RPF.

6. May not speak to or approach Flag staff or public or outside public unless spoken to or as per further communication rules authorized by LRH Pers Comm or where an impoliteness to the raw public would be incurred.


In order to allow time for creation of the 2D of a married RPF member that is upstat he/she may spend one night a week with his/her spouse in a space authorized by Barthing I/C and as scheduled by RPF MAA. If both are in the RPF both must be upstat and get RPF MAA OK.
Some contact with a spouse or child is permitted during the RPFer's meal time or securing time once daily if the RPFer is upstat. All the above is providing no discussion of case or condition occurs and providing there is NO enturbulation whatsoever from or between either. In the case of a pre-school child contact is allowed more than-once daily during mealtimes and the schedule is to be worked out with the RPF MAA.

Penalties for upset or violations of these allowances are as per points 15 and 16 below. All RPF DOs and DON'TS apply during time sent with child or spouse (ie. uniform is worns, schedules kept, no comm rules with spouse's friends, etc.) Note: The spouse or child of the RPFer must originate to the RPF MAA the wish to speak or have time with the RPFer.


7. Has rank or rating suspended and lowered two ranks or ratings automatically on assignment to RPF.
8. Has meals available after Flag crew have been served.

9. Is part of the RPF mess to be in a special section on the 2nd floor of the garage.


RPF messes must be organized per Messing FOs, but RPF Mess Presidents are not part of the Mess Presidents' Meetings. RPF Mess Presidents may form a meeting but the Chief Steward is not obliged to act on their requests, but is expected to perform all reasonable actions to provide adequate nutrition.

10. May not attend crew parties or hold their own, May not attend othor drew or public events except by arrangement.
11. Is denied Canteen privileges, but may use vending machines on ground floor breezeway.

12. Receives Mimeo's OODs and such FCCs EOs. FOs. HCOBs. EDs, etc. as may directly apply to the RPF and its Tech Unit.

13. Has no uniforms except for boiler suit or approved cleaning uniform.

14. May not enter staff or public areas, or elevator except when on assigned cleaning duties in those areas$ under a Section Leader. MAY NOT USE THE SWIMMING POOL AT ANY TIME. Service elevator is used only.

15. Must suffer additional time in RPF if sentenced to it for violations of regulations, failure to producer excessive natter, refusal to come clean or any other offense, as assigned by the RPF Bosun or MAA or by duly convened Court or Comm Ev.

16. In case of refusal to abide by the policies of tht RPF or to accept the authority and directions of seniors, it is to be handled by Comm Ev in which the person if found guilty is given the choice to make it on his-own determinism or to be dismissed from the Sea Org.

17. And if dismissed from the Sea Org is to sign a confession of his crimes before leaving the Base.

18. Has no laundry service and the RPF must do its own laundry once issued.

19. Has to use bath or W/C facilities only as designatedby CO Area Estates.

20. May not have with them in the RPF ANY drugs or alcoholic beverages, radios, TV, taped music, musical instruments, chess games or any such entertainment or luxury, or consume such when on authorized visits to spouse or child.


[deleted]
These policies and regulations may only be put aside or amended or cancelled with the approval of the Commodore or of LRH Pers Comm.

NB: In the revision of 21 August 1976, the definitions of "Fully Cleaned-Up" and "Released" have been revised by LRH Pers Comm.

Revised by
FMO 1672
Ens. Susan Walker,
I/C
Lt. (jg) Art Webb, 2nd

Re-Revised by
Commodore's
Messenger

Approved by
L. RON HUBBARD
COMMODORE

for the
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS

of the

CHURCHES OF
SCIENTOLOGY

-------------------------

What you did was not in accordance with the requirements and restrictions of the RPF beyond doing estates work and co-audit. What you did was a very good description of the DPF or EPF. That is why none of the RPF rules applied to you - the RPF had not been created yet, so of course, you were not subject to any of the RPF regulations.

Specifically: You were not required to eat leftovers. You had a separate allocation. This was against RPF policy.
You were not required to dress differently or separately.
You were able to choose your own housing/berthing.
You were not only able to speak with other staff, but you gave orders to the cook and he had to comply with your orders (???)
You regularly socialized with the opposite sex.
You were not required to run at all times.
You had time off to socialize with others.
You had time off to wash up.
You not only were allowed to speak to whomever you wished, whenever you wished, but you "hitched rides with public".
You spoke directly to the Estates I/C (no RPF I/C)
You were given far more than 1/4 pay, as you were able to buy steaks directly from the butcher. Also against RPF Rules and regulations.

These restrictions have always been in place, in all versions of FO3434, establishing the RPF. And you had no RPFs RPF either, which according to Ken Urquhart, began only a few days after the RPF was created.

Sorry, Dart, but whatever you did - it wasn't the RPF. It was something, but not the RPF. The RPF had not even been created then.

Sheila


Well, whilst some of us have been asleep the "chattering Classes" have been hard at work frothing at the mouth and trying to express their perceived "outrage".

As yoiu have called my earlier statements into question I thought I would illuminate the events for you.

In early November 1973 Hubbard sent a telex to St Hill (UK - England, you know, the country who just thumped the Ozzies at cricket). He ordered me to the RPF because several GO staff had been swindled in a commodity options scheme and I had "encouraged" a couple of public to get involved (So I could reg them for their profits, which I did).

We were based at Stonelands and at first we lived in the boathouse, which was very cold and damp. We were not going to put up with that, so we took over a small storage building and made it very snug and warm.

After the crew had breakfast we were told we had to wash up. Robin Scott was the cook and we told him ; no breakfast = no washing up. So, we had a leasurely breakfast, did the washing up and decided what we would do that day. Sometimes we would clear the drive in, litter, undergrowth etc.

After evening meal we retired to the basement where we studied and processed. As the senior tech party I c/s'ed the auditing. If the weather was poor or cold we worked on projects indoors.

Sopmetimes there was no crew bus to take us to St Hill to work, so we would hitch lifts from passing public and congregate at the Stables barn where the Estates I/C worked. We would discuss what was urgent and what wasn't. He may have thought he was in charge of us, but that was simply an illusion. One of the more physical jobs we had was to dig the trenches for the new auditing block. After this we had to put the "flashing" down. (Concrete, for the uninitiated). I remember we had this lunatic called Martin Huber on the RPF. He was Swiss and we called him "Huberoid". (One time he was told to sit on the branch of a tree which streched across the St Hill garages. If anyone asked why he was there he had to tell them it was because he was a robot).

Anyway, we used to wheel the concrete to the edge of the trench and tip it in. Then it would be spread out. Huber, without looking, simply tipped his wheelbarrow into the trench - all over this firey red headed Scottish lad who picked up a shovel and chased Martin down the hill, both of them weaving through staff who were coming to and from the canteen.

When it was not so cold we went down to the lake and pulled weeds. That is, I sat in a deckchair and supervised the crew rowing about in a small boat pulling pout weeds and loading up the front of the boat.

Roger Buckeridge acted as the crew butcher. He had experience in Oz. So we would purchase prime steak from him - paying him and getting a written receipt.

This led to an outrage from the regular crew one night. We held a graduation party and had steak, chips, mushrooms etc, all paid for by ourselves. The crew had eaten macaroni cheese! I remember Bruce Gluchachow trying to demand we got an extra three months for this outrage. We somply produced our receipts to the GO and the matter was squashed. (yes, we did have a quiet word with Bruce as well).

Certain foods were allocated, particularly butter and sugar. As the RPF we had our allocation. Somehow, quite magically, we seemed to receive more than our allocation. Toward the end of the week the crew had run out of these items. Robin, the cook, used to come to us to bargain for some of our allocation. In exchange we got greater portions of meat, bread, deserts etc.

All in all we ensured we got through our completion program properly. We were never short of female company. Some of the ladies in the SO living at Stonelands used to quietly pop down and see us ( Anyone remember Amy Young?).

In order to graduate we had to take our CSW to each staff member and ask them to sign their approval. I had one scumbag who refused to sign - Pedro Doria. Karma happens. Within a few months I was chairman of his com ev. Guess what? He was found guilty and declared SP.

All in all I was on the RPF for about 4 months. I graduated in about March 1973. The day I graduated, one of our public, Peter Paynter, a good friend, took me to London to the Playboy Club to celebrate.

I trust this dispels any doubts you may harbour as to whether or not I was on the RPF. As you can see, we did not succumb to the concept that we were less than we were. When we moved about regular staff got out of our way.

Mick Parkee, Tony Marsh, Mike Phillips. Norman Wade, Martin Huber, The Scottish lad whose name I forget (he married a multimillionairess), these were some of those who shared the trip.

Dart

There are many other FOs about the RPF, detailing the restrictions, etc. Other versions did not allow any sort of time with family under any conditions, but all references of any kind to the RPF were after your time spent on the decks in 1973. It definitely started in 1974. Perhaps you want to discuss this with Ken Urquhart, but in this case, I will take Ken's word over yours as he was an administrative person working direclty for L Ron at that time and the dates he gives correspond with the date of the FO establishing the RPF and with the SO history as I have read it, both when in and out. And by the way, the EPF or DPF were 3 month programs that were nearly identical to what you described as the RPF.

DartSmohen
31st December 2010, 01:33 PM
Hi Dart,

Thank you for your answer, that was very considerate.

.

GB, I have amended my posting with correct dates.

Dart

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 01:39 PM
Dart, thanks for your note about changing the dates.

You didn't do the RPF. However you managed to pretend to follow it, or whether you mixed up the dates, or whatever happened there, you were not subjected to any of the rules and regulations that constitute the RPF program. That's great, but since you were in charge of it and had nobody to check up on you and nobody to report to and nobody to abuse you, then I guess you were pretty much free to do whatever you wished.

But it sure sounds identical to the EPF Or DPF.

Mate, you lucked out big time. Maybe they hadn't read the policy. Whatever happened, it just proves when there is nobody to enforce the coercion and oppression, it doesn't have to happen.

AngeloV
31st December 2010, 01:45 PM
8. Has meals available after Flag crew have been served.

9. Is part of the RPF mess to be in a special section on the 2nd floor of the garage.

RPF messes must be organized per Messing FOs, but RPF Mess Presidents are not part of the Mess Presidents' Meetings. RPF Mess Presidents may form a meeting but the Chief Steward is not obliged to act on their requests, but is expected to perform all reasonable actions to provide adequate nutrition.

10. May not attend crew parties or hold their own, May not attend othor drew or public events except by arrangement.
11. Is denied Canteen privileges, but may use vending machines on ground floor breezeway.

12. Receives Mimeo's OODs and such FCCs EOs. FOs. HCOBs. EDs, etc. as may directly apply to the RPF and its Tech Unit.

13. Has no uniforms except for boiler suit or approved cleaning uniform.


The RPF is an abomination.

I have never been in the RPF but was in the EPF at the Flag Land Base circa 1980. In regards to the quoted items above, I witnessed RPFers living at flag. I saw the "RPF mess" mentioned in #9 above. It was in a cinder block walled off section of the parking garage. It appeared to me to not only as a mess hall but a birthing area too. I saw mattresses in the room. It was lighted but had no windows, in essence an unheated, un-air conditioned concrete room. The 'door' was a large piece of plywood. The RPFers wore grayish boiler suits. I don't remember them wearing arm bands.

They did not eat meals with the rest of the staff which were served in the ballroom. At one time I saw then scrounging food in the kitchen late in the evening. The EPF often worked at night killing roaches and plugging rat holes in the kitchen walls (see my story). They said nothing to us and looked downcast and miserable.

If anyone got 'wins' from this form of the RPF then maybe they liked being degraded and looking like prisoners.

The RPF is cruel and perpetuated by SO staff blindly sticking to policy created by lrh.

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 01:49 PM
Dart, thanks for your note about changing the dates.

You didn't do the RPF. However you managed to pretend to follow it, or whether you mixed up the dates, or whatever happened there, you were not subjected to any of the rules and regulations that constitute the RPF program. That's great, but since you were in charge of it and had nobody to check up on you and nobody to report to and nobody to abuse you, then I guess you were pretty much free to do whatever you wished.

But it sure sounds identical to the EPF Or DPF.

Mate, you lucked out big time. Maybe they hadn't read the policy. Whatever happened, it just proves when there is nobody to enforce the coercion and oppression, it doesn't have to happen.

RPF is a state of mind that is manifested as a result of agreement. Dart didn't happen to agree with it.

Hubbard created a system, which brought about that agreement, but Dart seemed to have escaped it.

.

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 01:53 PM
RPF is a state of mind that is manifested as a result of agreement. Dart didn't happen to agree with it.

Hubbard created a system, which brought about that agreement, but Dart seemed to have escaped it.

.

Vinaire, Dart admits he had nobody checking up on him, nobody enforcing it.

I did. Others did. It wasn't in my mind that 6 men circled me and physically forced me there, or that I spent three days sitting in the bottom of the tunnels, physically guarded and kept from leaving because I refused to sign the release for the RPF. It was not my imagination when I was put on the RPF's RPF twice and slept on the concrete without showers for over two weeks in the sump room where all the shit goes through and all the smells and noise and I had a 24 hr guard there and couldn't even go to the bathroom alone. (no sneaking out middle of the night too - I tried that and was caught and had MORE time for it)

It was not my imagination when my son's nanny grabbed her phone and told me to leave when she saw me arrive in an RPF uniform and she threatened to report me and have the RPF there in minutes if I didn't leave immediately (thanks to my exhusband and the RPF I/C)

Not a state of mind. A horrible reality.

AnonKat
31st December 2010, 01:54 PM
I hear you. knowing Ken and having quite a bit of communication with him regarding related matters,i know that like many of us he has been confronting his views of LRH and constantly evolving and striving to heal as a being.I have only known him to be a very caring person.

I understand that there has been a rift into the freezone about this.

COMMUNICATE with your friends.

DO not let this destroy old friendships.

Welcome to the turmoil eaglewoman, what tribe are you from may I ask ?

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 02:12 PM
Vinaire, Dart admits he had nobody checking up on him, nobody enforcing it.

I did. Others did. It wasn't in my mind that 6 men circled me and physically forced me there, or that I spent three days sitting in the bottom of the tunnels, physically guarded and kept from leaving because I refused to sign the release for the RPF. It was not my imagination when I was put on the RPF's RPF twice and slept on the concrete without showers for over two weeks in the sump room where all the shit goes through and all the smells and noise and I had a 24 hr guard there and couldn't even go to the bathroom alone. (no sneaking out middle of the night too - I tried that and was caught and had MORE time for it)

It was not my imagination when my son's nanny grabbed her phone and told me to leave when she saw me arrive in an RPF uniform and she threatened to report me and have the RPF there in minutes if I didn't leave immediately (thanks to my exhusband and the RPF I/C)

Not a state of mind. A horrible reality.

Were you prepared to be declared? Did you communicate this to them?

Did you tell them that you were being kept against your will and that you will to go to the police?

Weren't you afraid of getting declared? That would be a state of mind.

.

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 02:16 PM
PDC Lecture #4 talks about automaticity. Automaticity comes about because too many things are happening too fast and one does not have time to stop and think.

Well, this is the mechanism that has been used in Sea Org and RPF to condition people.

.

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 02:25 PM
In PDC Lecture #4, Hubbard talks about a hypnotists, saying that a hypnotist is committing overts of controlling others. He has agreed so often with "people can be hypnotized" that he can himself be hypnotized quite easily.

It appears to me that in the end, Hubbard seem to have gotten himself hypnotized quite easily.

The same is going to happen to David Miscabbage once he crosses the threshhold like Hubbard did.

The time is near. It will happen faster to David than it happened to Hubbard. David would not make it to the age of 76.

.

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 02:42 PM
An incident, or a time period, that may simply be unravelled without any fireworks through KHTK approach of gradually peeling the mind, may, otherwise, appear as an engram when the handling is rushed through as with Scientology approach of digging into the mind.

The point I am making it is that ENGRAM is a relative concept. It appears as an engram because unravelling of the mind is rushed by digging into it instead of peeling it layer by layer.

There is a similarity here with the mechanism of installing automaticity. This is the idea of rushing to get things done. I doubt that there are engrams. The Scientology approach of rushing into a solution actually conditions people into believing that there are engrams.

People who are desperate to handle their condition, agree with this rushing into a solution and allow themselves to be conditioned. Thus, they allow themselves to be pushed into an "RPF" type scenario too.

The basic is a lack of patience and not being thorough in one's looking.

.

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 02:49 PM
Were you prepared to be declared? Did you communicate this to them?

Did you tell them that you were being kept against your will and that you will to go to the police?

Weren't you afraid of getting declared? That would be a state of mind.


Vinaire, let me explain something to you, and to anyone else who doesn’t understand how this can happen, or can’t accept that this not only happened, it happens regularly in the RPF and has happened regularly for many years now.

The reason why this doesn’t stop is because people DON’T BELIEVE IT. So they question the person that went through it. Over and over and over. It’s interrogation time – over and over and over, any time I bring it up.

I will keep bringing it up and keep telling the truth until the truth is believed and everyone is willing to do something about it.

Now let me make this clear - I don’t like talking about this. Not at all. Nobody who has been through a real RPF program, especially anyone with a child or spouse on the outside, or a physical condition – none of us like to talk about it.

People do evil things, Vinaire. It is a fact of life. Especially religious zealots and those acting on “orders” without questioning them.

To answer your questions – YES, I said I was being kept against my will. I said it was illegal. Many times. I was sneered at. The Church of Scientology considers itself a law of its own and above “wog” laws. As long as they prevented me from communicating to anyone else, my threats were empty. They knew it, I knew it.

I didn’t threaten the police because I was threatened that they would challenge custody of my son. That was California – mothers do not have automatic custody. I had full custody, but it was presented to me that they would make a case, making up whatever they wished, to try to prove me a poor mother to give my ex custody. In retrospect, I should never have believed that, but I was young and knew very little about law except that the C of S smashed anyone who took them to court. To that degree, my fear controlled me. I was more afraid of my son being raised in that horrible Sea Org than anything else, and I didn’t have the law knowledge or know anyone in LA or even Calif to help me. I had always been a wonderful mother, they had nothing on me. But I was all alone and I believed if I left without my son then, I might never be able to get him back.

I was willing to be declared to leave with my son, but not to be declared to risk leaving without him. Sure, I was afraid. That’s what coercion is about. But there was plenty of physical restraint as well.




PDC Lecture #4 talks about automaticity. Automaticity comes about because too many things are happening too fast and one does not have time to stop and think.

Well, this is the mechanism that has been used in Sea Org and RPF to condition people.

Yes, the automaticity thing happens. It is part of conditioning and part of brainwashing. But there are deeper aspects of brainwashing at work on those who enforce the RPF. And coercion is about losing the things or people that are most important to you in life. It may be in the mind, but it is also real. It has happened to many people, many times. Disconnection is real, and the force that Scientologists are in the Cult are willing to use against perceived enemies is very, very real.

That's all I want to say about this for now. It's New Year's Eve. Good night, Vinaire. And have a Happy New Year.

Let's work together against these abuses and get the RPFers OUT this year. :)

I told you I was trouble
31st December 2010, 02:54 PM
Posted by Gottabrain


Dart, thanks for your note about changing the dates.

You didn't do the RPF. However you managed to pretend to follow it, or whether you mixed up the dates, or whatever happened there, you were not subjected to any of the rules and regulations that constitute the RPF program. That's great, but since you were in charge of it and had nobody to check up on you and nobody to report to and nobody to abuse you, then I guess you were pretty much free to do whatever you wished.

But it sure sounds identical to the EPF Or DPF.

Mate, you lucked out big time. Maybe they hadn't read the policy. Whatever happened, it just proves when there is nobody to enforce the coercion and oppression, it doesn't have to happen.





Gottabrain,

Some people do the RPF in a very intense (and earnest) way ... and some don't.

A young woman/girl would do the RPF in a very different mindset to an imposing (physically and mentally) man ... like Dart.

I have seen the boatshed and the other buildings Dart mentions and I have seen how the RPF were treated and it was NOT pretty ... he is being a wee bit flippant about it perhaps and he clearly did a different RPF to you and I would imagine he did it in a very different mindset too ... but he still did it!

Every country and time period (re the RPF) differs as do the 'participants' ... a mission could arrive and change everything at the drop of a hat (in orgs and the RPF) and you know that, nothing stays the same for long in scientology and the only thing you could rely on was the chaos and insanity masquerading as order and sanity!

Dart did the RPF, as did the others I mentioned to you, it wasn't the same as the one you did but you can't nullify it just because you feel they had an easier experience.

Happy New Year!

:happydance:

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 02:57 PM
Vinaire, let me explain something to you, and to anyone else who doesn’t understand how this can happen, or can’t accept that this not only happened, it happens regularly in the RPF and has happened regularly for many years now.

The reason why this doesn’t stop is because people DON’T BELIEVE IT. So they question the person that went through it. Over and over and over. It’s interrogation time – over and over and over, any time I bring it up.

I will keep bringing it up and keep telling the truth until the truth is believed and everyone is willing to do something about it.

Now let me make this clear - I don’t like talking about this. Not at all. Nobody who has been through a real RPF program, especially anyone with a child or spouse on the outside, or a physical condition – none of us like to talk about it.

People do evil things, Vinaire. It is a fact of life. Especially religious zealots and those acting on “orders” without questioning them.

To answer your questions – YES, I said I was being kept against my will. I said it was illegal. Many times. I was sneered at. The Church of Scientology considers itself a law of its own and above “wog” laws. As long as they prevented me from communicating to anyone else, my threats were empty. They knew it, I knew it.

I didn’t threaten the police because I was threatened that they would challenge custody of my son. That was California – mothers do not have automatic custody. I had full custody, but it was presented to me that they would make a case, making up whatever they wished, to try to prove me a poor mother to give my ex custody. In retrospect, I should never have believed that, but I was young and knew very little about law except that the C of S smashed anyone who took them to court. To that degree, my fear controlled me. I was more afraid of my son being raised in that horrible Sea Org than anything else, and I didn’t have the law knowledge or know anyone in LA or even Calif to help me. I had always been a wonderful mother, they had nothing on me. But I was all alone and I believed if I left without my son then, I might never be able to get him back.

I was willing to be declared to leave with my son, but not to be declared to risk leaving without him. Sure, I was afraid. That’s what coercion is about. But there was plenty of physical restraint as well.





Yes, the automaticity thing happens. It is part of conditioning and part of brainwashing. But there are deeper aspects of brainwashing at work on those who enforce the RPF. And coercion is about losing the things or people that are most important to you in life. It may be in the mind, but it is also real. It has happened to many people, many times. Disconnection is real, and the force that Scientologists are in the Cult are willing to use against perceived enemies is very, very real.

That's all I want to say about this for now. It's New Year's Eve. Good night, Vinaire. And have a Happy New Year.

Let's work together against these abuses and get the RPFers OUT this year. :)

Yes, Happy New Year!

But let me end with this thought. What traps one is one's idea of survival and one's attachments. That is also is a state of mind.

Nobody can trap a free being. Only a being already trapped can be trapped further.

.

Alanzo
31st December 2010, 03:06 PM
Yes, Happy New Year!

But let me end with this thought. What traps one is one's idea of survival and one's attachments. That is also is a state of mind.

Nobody can trap a free being. Only a being already trapped can be trapped further.

.

Perhaps in some mystical heaven that does not exist here on Earth, crimes like false imprisonment, kidnapping and torture are just states of mind.

But here on Earth, crimes exist. To dismiss them as states of mind allows criminals to run free and destroy the lives of everyone.

That's not very spiritual, is it?

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 03:06 PM
Gottabrain,

Some people do the RPF in a very intense (and earnest) way ... and some don't.

A young woman/girl would do the RPF in a very different mindset to an imposing (physically and mentally) man ... like Dart.

I have seen the boatshed and the other buildings Dart mentions and I have seen how the RPF were treated and it was NOT pretty ... he is being a wee bit flippant about it perhaps and he clearly did a different RPF to you and I would imagine he did it in a very different mindset too ... but he still did it!

Every country and time period (re the RPF) differs as do the 'participants' ... a mission could arrive and change everything at the drop of a hat (in orgs and the RPF) and you know that, nothing stays the same for long in scientology and the only thing you could rely on was the chaos and insanity masquerading as order and sanity!

Dart did the RPF, as did the others I mentioned to you, it wasn't the same as the one you did but you can't nullify it just because you feel they had an easier experience.

Happy New Year!

:happydance:

?????

He had nobody to enforce it. In fact, Dart seemed to be unaware of any policy in existence about the RPF. The original year he gave was the year BEFORE the RPF was in existence. So - nobody around him knew that they weren't supposed to talk to him, or give him full pay, or to report him, and nobody knew they were in charge of him. The policy was either not issued yet or not even known. I wish I could run a section of the SO my way. I don't think he was being flippant. I think he was completely on his own running the "RPF" with nobody overseeing him. And what he ran was the DPF.

HE didn't have 6 men tackle him to the RPF. HE didn't have a circle of people around him that physically restrained him.

Bloody hell, are you even reading any of these details?

WTF does it take for you to ACCEPT the FACT that SOME people were PHYSICALLY FORCED TO THE RPF AND PHYSICALLY FORCED TO REMAIN THERE OR PHYSICALLY RETURNED THERE AND PHYSICALLY FORCED TO DO THINGS AGAINST THEIR WILL?

Then add coercion to it.

Yes, evil is hard to confront. People do evil things. Sometimes murders occur. That isn't the victims fault. Sometimes rapes occur. That isn't the victim's fault, either. It isn't because "they didn't believe better".

People do bad things. WHY is it that you don't believe the stories of me and other people of what actually happened?!??! Why does your mind automatically reject that many of us - MOST of us - who did the RPF did not have any sort of CHOICE about it? Do you really think we were all free and able to do as we pleased without anyone supervising us? Are you bloody kidding? What about the concept of FORCE USED ON OTHERS AGAINST THEIR WILL do you not understand?!?!

Dart was either lucky or did his program the year before the RPF was even established. Believe me, if I was able to run around doing whatever I wanted, I wouldn't be following the RPF rules.

Neither would anyone else. You're bloody kidding if you think we would.

I told you I was trouble
31st December 2010, 03:24 PM
?????

He had nobody to enforce it. In fact, Dart seemed to be unaware of any policy in existence about the RPF. The original year he gave was the year BEFORE the RPF was in existence. So - nobody around him knew that they weren't supposed to talk to him, or give him full pay, or to report him, and nobody knew they were in charge of him. The policy was either not issued yet or not even known. I wish I could run a section of the SO my way. I don't think he was being flippant. I think he was completely on his own running the "RPF" with nobody overseeing him. And what he ran was the DPF.

HE didn't have 6 men tackle him to the RPF. HE didn't have a circle of people around him that physically restrained him.

Bloody hell, are you even reading any of these details?

WTF does it take for you to ACCEPT the FACT that SOME people were PHYSICALLY FORCED TO THE RPF AND PHYSICALLY FORCED TO REMAIN THERE OR PHYSICALLY RETURNED THERE AND PHYSICALLY FORCED TO DO THINGS AGAINST THEIR WILL?

Then add coercion to it.

Yes, evil is hard to confront. People do evil things. Sometimes murders occur. That isn't the victims fault. Sometimes rapes occur. That isn't the victim's fault, either. It isn't because "they didn't believe better".

People do bad things. WHY is it that you don't believe the stories of me and other people of what actually happened?!??! Why does your mind automatically reject that many of us - MOST of us - who did the RPF did not have any sort of CHOICE about it? Do you really think we were all free and able to do as we pleased without anyone supervising us? Are you bloody kidding? What about the concept of FORCE USED ON OTHERS AGAINST THEIR WILL do you not understand?!?!

Dart was either lucky or did his program the year before the RPF was even established. Believe me, if I was able to run around doing whatever I wanted, I wouldn't be following the RPF rules.

Neither would anyone else. You're bloody kidding if you think we would.


You read things in (my) posts that are NOT there.

Goodbye.

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 03:26 PM
Perhaps in some mystical heaven that does not exist here on Earth, crimes like false imprisonment, kidnapping and torture are just states of mind.

But here on Earth, crimes exist. To dismiss them as states of mind allows criminals to run free and destroy the lives of everyone.

That's not very spiritual, is it?

Alanzo, you need to live in some third world countries to get a better perspective.

You have been coddled in luxury up till now. And that produces a different state of mind.

.

Gottabrain
31st December 2010, 03:36 PM
Alanzo, you need to live in some third world countries to get a better perspective.

You have been coddled in luxury up till now. And that produces a different state of mind.

.

You don't know that, Vinaire.

And if you've been to the slums of Chicago, NY or any big city, it's got plenty of violence, crime, fear, death and injury in plain site. I'm sure Alanzo has seen quite a bit of that. Calcutta may be one of the saddest places for human misery in the world. but 3rd world countries aren't the only places that have seen misery.

State of mind helps, but it does not remedy social problems. I'm with Alanzo on this one.

I hope we don't have any fights. Please.

Saying other places have MORE misery doesn't make it right for anyone to intentionally cause anyone else hardships.

Vinaire, You may have seen more misery than Alanzo, but I doubt if you have experienced more than he has, and you've both been through plenty.

Haven't we all?

Can we please not fight about this anymore. Can you and Trouble both please stop invalidating and questioning my personal testimony. I don't need or want sympathy. It is long over. What is needed is a bit of OUTRAGE that these atrocities still go on, because this is not a 3rd world country. There is no excuse for it happening in LA, in Australia, in Europe.

The RPF program has got to be abolished for the evil tool of enslavement, oppression and human degradation that it is.

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 03:57 PM
You don't know that, Vinaire.

And if you've been to the slums of Chicago, NY or any big city, it's got plenty of violence, crime, fear, death and injury in plain site. I'm sure Alanzo has seen quite a bit of that. Calcutta may be one of the saddest places for human misery in the world. but 3rd world countries aren't the only places that have seen misery.

State of mind helps, but it does not remedy social problems. I'm with Alanzo on this one.

I hope we don't have any fights. Please.

Saying other places have MORE misery doesn't make it right for anyone to intentionally cause anyone else hardships.

Vinaire, You may have seen more misery than Alanzo, but I doubt if you have experienced more than he has, and you've both been through plenty.

Haven't we all?

Can we please not fight about this anymore. Can you and Trouble both please stop invalidating and questioning my personal testimony. I don't need or want sympathy. It is long over. What is needed is a bit of OUTRAGE that these atrocities still go on, because this is not a 3rd world country. There is no excuse for it happening in LA, in Australia, in Europe.

The RPF program has got to be abolished for the evil tool of enslavement, oppression and human degradation that it is.


Do you think I haven't seen any hardships and that is why I seem to be taking it all so lightly? Alanzo always complains about my infinitizations, but what is he really accomplishing with all his non-infinitizations? I have at least KHTK to show for some accomplishment. What has Alanzo accomplished?

Lighten up and only then you'll be able to handle the abuses out there. KHTK is a big help.

PS: By the way, I was one of the first RPFers on Apollo when it was established. I had interchanges with Ken Urquardt.

.

SchwimmelPuckel
31st December 2010, 04:09 PM
Well, I like Dart's version of the RPF! - A refreashing and encouraging tale of complete failure to 'implement' the, at the time, new breakthrough RPF technology.. Mewhahaa! - Trying to bring that gang of incorrible rabblerousers in effect..

I've no idea what Dart looks like.. So I'm free to imagine him looking like John Wayne and cracking jokes like Peter Sellers.

That was NOT what the RPF was supposed to be!

So.. It's a state of mind eh? - Ok, could the current RPF'ers maybe adobt this kind of Dart Smohen'esque irreverency and transfrom their RPF?

Possibly.. They'd be fighting the regular staff for it though. The cook won't give them any food. He can't be made to by any persuation would be my guess.. But hell, they could raid the kitchen and steal it!

'State of mind' has a lot to say of course.. If one is not 'effect' of the RPF experience it can be all fun and games.. Rough and tumble..

But! - When I read the policies that introduces the RPF and explains the rules and reasons.. I get the impression that you are definitly MEANT to be total effect and be knuckled under good.. That's the purpose really.. Am I right?

:unsure:

HelluvaHoax!
31st December 2010, 04:12 PM
Do you think I haven't seen any hardships and that is why I seem to be taking it all so lightly? Alanzo always complains about my infinitizations, but what is he really accomplishing with all his non-infinitizations? I have at least KHTK to show for some accomplishment. What has Alanzo accomplished?

Lighten up and only then you'll be able to handle the abuses out there. KHTK is a big help.

PS: By the way, I was one of the first RPFers on Apollo when it was established. I had interchanges with Ken Urquardt.

.

OMG! A blatant, self-infatuated, chest-thumping infomercial from the self-proclaimed "selfless" guru?!!

eaglewoman
31st December 2010, 04:24 PM
Yeahhhhh to that!!:thumbsup:

I suggest:

Aida and I lay off of Ken,
Ken and Terril lay off of Aida,
Mark and I lay off each other

and that we all start fresh and have a HAPPY NEW YEAR and DESTROY THE RPF in 2011 because that is where the REAL human rights violations occur!

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!!!

http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2008/Dec/Week4/15195890.jpg

DartSmohen
31st December 2010, 04:26 PM
Vinaire, Dart admits he had nobody checking up on him, nobody enforcing it.

.

GB,

It is a state of mind. Before I entered the RPF it was run rather more sternly. The Estates Chief was the RPF I/C. When I got there I asked the rest of the RPF if they were going to put up with this DB bullshit, or were they going to stand up and be counted. Every one of them said the DB "victim" shit was over and we would set our own course.:happydance:

When I was public at Flag in 1980, I saw the RPF in action. I was shocked at the servile way they kow-towed to all and sundry. They looked like whipped slaves. There was NO WAY IN THE WORLD I WOULD HAVE PUT UP WITH THAT, EVEN FOR ONE SECOND.:no:

Remember, I had been on the Sea Project, then the (real) Sea Org. I was 1st Mate and D/Captain. I have had Hubbard sitting in front of me crying his eyes out. I have stood up to him and have been his confidante.:ohmy:

Unfortunately, you had the rough end of it. You had men who physically grabbed you and imprisoned you. You also had the blackmail of being denied seeing your own child.:angry::angry:

Yes, you have unresolved issues. But they can be addressed.:angry:

Do you remember the Scale of Motion? At cause level you take the flow and turn it to your advantage.:clap:

Right now there are hundreds of enslaved RPF'ers around the world. Some have been on it for years. There is the "hope" of getting back into good standing with the cult.:duh:

All it takes is for ONE person to stand up and say NO. The question is whether or not they have the moral fibre and resolve to do so, or have they been so enslaved that they are incapable of doing so.:confused2:

Public pressure must be brought to bear on the cult to expose this horrific practice. I suggest we make 2011 the year of freedom for them.:yes:

Dart

nexus100
31st December 2010, 04:31 PM
Do you remember the scale of motion?

Now let it fly away like a little birdie. :fly2:

Sindy
31st December 2010, 04:33 PM
Hey, can we go back to where everybody was laying each other, the champagne and the fireworks? :dancer:

I told you I was trouble
31st December 2010, 04:40 PM
Hey, can we go back to where everybody was laying each other, the champagne and the fireworks? :dancer:


:omg:

I think I must have missed that!


:p


One little missed word ... makes such a difference to the meaning!



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVajCeocis4

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 04:43 PM
OMG! A blatant, self-infatuated, chest-thumping infomercial from the self-proclaimed "selfless" guru?!!

Do you have a problem with that? :D

Mr. Hoaxie, you have a lot to handle about yourself.

.

Auditor's Toad
31st December 2010, 05:01 PM
Vinaire sez :
"Do you think I haven't seen any hardships and that is why I seem to be taking it all so lightly? Alanzo always complains about my infinitizations, but what is he really accomplishing with all his non-infinitizations? I have at least KHTK to show for some accomplishment. What has Alanzo accomplished?

Lighten up and only then you'll be able to handle the abuses out there. KHTK is a big help.

PS: By the way, I was one of the first RPFers on Apollo when it was established. I had interchanges with Ken Urquardt."

Up until now I hadn't realized what a sense of humor he had until he said I have at least KHTK to show for some accomplishment. !

Auditor's Toad
31st December 2010, 05:05 PM
"OMG! A blatant, self-infatuated, chest-thumping infomercial from the self-proclaimed "selfless" guru?!! "__________________

HH you do have a way with words that is so very loveable!

And so peceptive and accurate !

You send me into the New Year chuckling:happydance::happydance:

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 05:40 PM
It's a PR world! Most people are brainwashed by PR, and then some further contribute to it and are brainwashed by their own PR.

.

Auditor's Toad
31st December 2010, 06:28 PM
It's a PR world! Most people are brainwashed by PR, and then some further contribute to it and are brainwashed by their own PR.

.

And I appreciate your being honest enough to admit you have fallen for - and been taken over by - your own self generated PR.

You are making progress! I knew you could ! I just knew it !

Bravo !

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 06:32 PM
And I appreciate your being honest enough to admit you have fallen for - and been taken over by - your own self generated PR.

You are making progress! I knew you could ! I just knew it !

Bravo !


At least I know my condition but you don't.

What are you resisting?

.

HelluvaHoax!
31st December 2010, 06:34 PM
Do you have a problem with that? :D

Mr. Hoaxie, you have a lot to handle about yourself.

.


Ooops, you revealed too much about yourself with that comment.

Aren't you embarrassed to be making such pronouncements about people you have never met?

Is this the EP of the therapy that you invented?

Vinaire
31st December 2010, 06:39 PM
Ooops, you revealed too much about yourself with that comment.

Aren't you embarrassed to be making such pronouncements about people you have never met?

I have nothing to hide.

I have met you on ESMB. What makes you say we have not met?

.

Sindy
31st December 2010, 06:41 PM
:omg:

I think I must have missed that!


:p


One little missed word ... makes such a difference to the meaning!



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVajCeocis4

Happy New Year Trouble!!! :party::cheerleader::cheers2::cheers::dance2: :heartflower: :rose: