An Essay on Sec-checking

[Div6]

Apparently you think I invalidated your third post on this thread. When I went back to read it more closely - rather than just scanning it quickly - it was deleted, so I guess I'll never know the extent of my overt.

At least, from your response, I can formulate some Sec Check questions which might help me, modified with the innovative "Why" question format (run solo):

"Why am I a pervert?"

"Why am I twisted?"

"Why do I delight in perverting?"

"Why do I delight in twisting?"

"Why do I misrepresent almost anything positive said about a Scio-related experience?"

"Why do I delight in misrepresenting almost anything positive said about a Scio-related experience?"

I'll post my Success Story in the 'Tech outside the CofS' Success Story section, after I complete my session.

I lol'ed.

Not going to hold my breath for the Success Story, tho...

 

[Auditor's Toad]

My response to " I'm not auditing you"


was always

" Then my sure I don't get billed at auditing rates for whatever time this is going to take! "

... and they never thought that was as funny as it really was.

Didn't I flat tell them they were stealing my money and I used to think it went over their heads - now I know they knew it and didn't care.

They have no idea how many people they drove out with needless HCO sec checks that would still be in an paying if they had not been needlessly HCO sec checked.

 

[Enthetan]

A good slave is a guilty (feeling) slave

'Sec Checking' is inevitably abusive in Scientology. Always was. Always will be.

Zinj

Exactly. Convincing somebody that he's guilty makes it easier for you to get him to submit to punishment, and means he has to cough up $$$ to make amends.

 

[Panda Termint]

Apparently you think I invalidated your third post on this thread. When I went back to read it more closely - rather than just scanning it quickly - it was deleted, so I guess I'll never know the extent of my overt.

At least, from your response, I can formulate some Sec Check questions which might help me, modified with the innovative "Why" question format (run solo):

"Why am I a pervert?"

"Why am I twisted?"

"Why do I delight in perverting?"

"Why do I delight in twisting?"

"Why do I misrepresent almost anything positive said about a Scio-related experience?"

"Why do I delight in misrepresenting almost anything positive said about a Scio-related experience?"

I'll post my Success Story in the 'Tech outside the CofS' Success Story section, after I complete my session.

These are NOT sec-check questions, they're half-assed Listing Questions.
My question, "Why is that?" was kinda rhetorical, the answer is in the sentence preceding the question.

 

[RogerB]

Well I learned some of the things you mentioned at various points in my journey, except that I never thought they were *all* crazy.

EP had it pretty well. I learned that I knew myself a whole lot better than anyone else knew me.
Obvious, I know, but not always a certainty when you're a scientologist.

My certainty of self trumps;
e-meters,
Auditors,
C/S's,
Hubbard,
Scientology's Tech, Ethics and Admin,
"Authorities" on the mind and spirit,
other people's perceptions, fixed ideas and opinions,
etc. (there's more but I'm sure you get the drift).

In other words, I know myself better than anyone else is ever going to know me.

It was a valuable lesson and well worth the price.

Yep, this in red above is spot on.

And it is also true that the client knows more about his case than any auditor or C/S . . . . if the practitioner is smart enough to listen, rather than tell.

The trap of the CofS is that it defaulted into working to convince clients its practitioners knew more about the client than the client . . . and this has been a very dumb move that has blown up in its face.

It not only attempted to usurp the sovereignty of the client, but it was used as an abusive mechanism . . . and decent folks eventually just wake up and refuse to tolerate it . . . and so, here we are, all out!

R