Following is a discussion started by "tree toad", which I thought might be of interest to those scientologists reading here. Start of Tree toad's post:

Reg: Can I help you ?

Bill: I would like to get some auditing.

Reg: You came to the right place Bill.

We have a specil this week. You can go all the way to OT-8 for only $250.00 Bill: Wow, what a deal. Please sign me up right away.

Reg: OK Bill.

Reg: Bill, I forgot to tell you, We don't do "Sec. Checks"

anymore.

Bill: That's great, Here's my check.

Reg: OK Bill, follow me and we'll get you started.

Cheryl

I mean, have you ever noticed you don't hear alot of complains regarding Havingness processes as a Scientology technical subject? Something to think about.

Yours, ScnBear

Treetoad, if everything's clean, it shouldn't read. There have been times in session where I didn't think there was anything there, but it read. Upon further "looking", I would come up with the item that was reading. Sometimes it took a while, but never has there been a time where something, however long ago and however large or small, that wasnt there.

For all of our eternity, imagine all of the overts / withholds that must be there somewhere!

By your logic, if someone had the EP of objectives, then it "wouldn't hurt them to run some more" Or if someone was clear, then it "wouldn't hurt them" to check all their drug AESP's anyway. Or if someone was OT III, then it "wouldn't hurt them"

to run OT 1 again, or if someone is a Solo Not's pre-OT, it "wouldn't hurt them to get sec-checked-even if they aren't moving slowly or stalled".

This type of logic is why LRH wrote what HCOB's he did, telling when and when NOT to do various actions, including sec-checking.

Let's take the example of Solo Nots Pre-Ot's mid Solo Nots, and sec-checking.

In HCOB 23 Decmber 1971RB C/S Series 73RB THE NO-INTERFERENCE AREA CLARIFIED AND RE-ENFORCED.

p 250 C/S Series volume Section "THE AREA BETWEEN OT LEVELS FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF OT III"

Begin fair use quote:

"The only other restrictions that apply to Pre-OTs between any OT level following the completion of OT III are:

.........................b. Pre-Ots in the area between the beginning of New OT VI (Solo NOTs Auditing Course) and the completion of New OT VII (Solo NOTs) may not receive any other auditing, with the exception of those services allowed in the No-Interference Area (between the start of New OT I and the completion of OT III) for pre-OTs who are stalled or moving slowly.

End fair use quote Now, let's go see what the services are "for pre-OTs who are stalled or moving slowly", which is the qualifier LRH mentions here.

section " EXCEPTION" under "ClARIFICATION AND RE-ENFORCEMENT OF THE NO-INTERFERENCE AREA"

Begin fair use quote:

Pre-OTs progressing well in the No-Interference Area should not be interfered with by Sec Checking or anything else. However, when a pre-OT is stalled, or moving slowly, any of the actions listed below, as appropriate, can be ordered by a qualified C/S............

end fair use quote:

Now, that is pretty darn clear. Unless a Solo Nots pre-OT is moving slowly or stalled, he is "not to be interefered with by Sec-checking or anything else".

So, why does RTC not want to apply this LRH bulletin? And why did they invent their own procedure called the 6-month sec check, in direct violation of this HCOB?

Cheryl and Scn Bear, this is gross violation of KSW, and any Solo Nots auditor who participates in such an activity, is in Treason as a scientologist for not wearing their KSW hat.

By your logic, if a scientologist, or even a Solo NOTs pre-ot is "clean" than violating LRH's tech on the what is allowed or not in between OT levels "wouldn't hurt them".

I think you would have a very difficult time explaining this to LRH. It's called justification. Why are you justifiying these type of activities ie: unnecessary sec-checks, if there is nothing wrong with it?

Did you know that per HCOPl Orders, Illegal and Cross, as well as HCOPL Injustice, you are just as guilty for following an illegal order, as the person issuing it? (such as doing an out-tech sec check) You have no excuse such as "I didn't know"

per LRH, read these PL's for yourself and see.

In case you don't have the green volumes, here is an excerpt for you.

From HCOPL Orders, Illegal and Cross Begin Fair use quote:

"But how about the situation of this junior who stands up and says, "I can't do it. It's against policy." Or, I won't use that verbal tech as it's contrary to HCOBs." In his timid way, he could feel this was very adventurous. He could get personally harassed. The first thing he might hear is, "You are using policy to stop!" Well, if the order he is receiving is off-policy or out-tech, he very well better stop it! Otherwise, sooner or later. his own neck and those of the group will be in the noose from the pure pressure of the give and take of life.

But if one is too timid to outright refuse to comply, there are other ways. The easiest to say is "yes sir" and then just don't do it. ...........

The DANGEROUS thing to do is to comply with an off-policy or out-tech order."

If you are timid, there is even a solution for that. Just remember that per HCOPL Injustice section on recourse Begin fair use quote " A simple Knowledge Report to the Ethics Officer, "I have been given different orders in conflict with my post assignment and have made it known but am having to follow the illegal order,"

would have proofed them against severe action.

By NOT taking recourse the junior (following in italics) thereby made himself a party to the act.

The above is not very effective as it does not correct the order so some (italics) penalty would have leveled at the person."

End fair use quote LRH's technology is being altered, and it is your hat as well as mine to refuse to follow the illegal orders based on altered, or simply not even followed tech.

So apply the appropriate condition, and get busy wearing your hat as a scientologist and apply KSW.

Your progress up the bridge depends on it.

Regards, Virginia McClaughry

Go Back