Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology From: dennis.l.erlich@support.com Subject: TRS Message-ID: <9602101720.0ODBP01@support.com> References: <311c9d87.17301155@news.snafu.de> Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150 X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.35 Distribution: world Date: Sat, 10 Feb 96 17:20:50 -0800 Lines: 241 Perry Scott > >It's been so long ago - I had not thought of the upper TRs in light > >of the PhatGuy's "the only way to control is to lie. The Me: > That's why I'm "that person" and you, well ... it is your job > to be impressed with my insight. (and clap loudly when the > applause sign lights. :) Perry: >(PC barks like a sea lion and flaps his flippers wildly. Ork! Ork! Ork!) > >TR5 Touch the wall, thank you. Kiss my ass, thank you. > > Rong. TR5 is not practiced much since the mid 60s. > > Upper Indoctrination TRs (that's their name) are TRs 6-9. > >So THAT's where I missed the number. The data had never been loaded. >OK, all my numbers are off plus they're out of order. I'll report to >ARSCC/Tahiti (or is it Bali in February?) for cramming. > >Extra credit question: what was TR5? Jeeze, you really are playing "Stump the Stars"! TR5 was first used as a CCH process. (CCH = Control, Communication and Havingness. Another of Tubby's famous triangles.) At that time (I believe it was early 1957 they first issued forth from the Phattman's Communications Orifice) the TRs were used as Processes. It was called "Hand Mimicry". If you had Objective Processing you remember: "PUT YOUR HANDS AGAINST MINE, FOLLOW THEM AND CONTRIBUTE TO THEIR MOTION." Auditor and victim seated closely enough for auditor's knees to be locked outside the hypnotic subject's. Later that year, Tubby changed TR5 to an obscure process that is rarely used any more. Only if the subject will not cooperate with the processing. "SEAT THAT BODY IN THAT CHAIR!". It was common for Tubby to point out the obvious. In order to process a person you must get them to sit still for it, he'd write over and over. In 1958 he got reissued TR5 with a bit of fine tuning: "YOU MAKE THAT BODY SIT IN THAT CHAIR!" was the new command. True fact! > >TR6 TR5, bull bait by the coach. > > Body control. Coach lets mark walk him around like a robot. > In constant physical contact. Physically making the coach's > body start, change direction and stop with the mark forcibly > controlling the coach's body into doing those things. Some > times called High School Indoc. > >Yep, I remember the drill, not the number. The sad thing is that I use >this on my three year old occasionally. One of the cogs is to use no >more force than necessary, otherwise the mark realizes he's being >controlled and blows. Right. One commands the *molecules* of the mark's body to obey. This is the essence of Tone 40 auditing. >Since all these TRs have the student coaching someone else, the mark >also gets led around. Don't know if this was out-tech, but I coached >with my eyes closed. Talk about being controlled! Precisely Watson! >I read your "Larking" followup about Capt Bill dragging you across the >ballroom floor to scream at you. Did Capt Bill have good TR6? Did >you have the proper conditioning? :) You could not imagine the consequences if I'd resisted. He has on a uniform and I had on white shorts! > >TR7 TR5, silent commands. I remember leading someone around > >the room for half an hour. Pretty weird. > > Bzzt. Sorry. Does this ring a bell? > > "LOOK AT THAT WALL!" "THANK YOU!" > "WALK OVER TO THAT WALL!" "THANK YOU!" > "TOUCH THAT WALL" "THANK YOU!" > "TURN AROUND!" "THANK YOU!" > > These exact commands and acknowledgements are given to the > coach with Tone 40 Intention (intention without reservation > or limit) The coach's body is then forced, by being physically > restrained and dragged, if necessary, to comply with the > command. Coach does not do more than physically thwart the > mark from forcing him to comply. But not too hard. Get's > the mark used to the idea of controlling and restraining > others, and thereby used to *being* cotrolled. > >Oh sh*t. Do I remember this one. I thought this was TR5, but that >wouldn't make sense - TR6 is too soon on the gradient to be subjected to >Tone 40. It was also weird coaching this one. Nobody should control >someone else this way. (Unless it's a three-year-old - even then in >moderation.) I believe you're on to something, Perry! >I guess this is good training for staff, eh? An absolute must. > >TR8 ? > > Trying to make the ashtray STAND UP. Much like the TM's > ability to fly. > >At this point, you're so deluded by the concept of Tone 40 that the fact >that you're LIFTING IT WITH YOUR HANDS is irrelevant. You give the >command, the ashtray lifts. After doing this for half an hour, you feel >like God. I was allowed to stop when I cog'ed on this. See. It works like a process because Tubby designed it as a process. > >TR9 Tone 40 on Ashtrays. I did this in a stairwell, far away > >from anyone. > > Nope. Tone 40 Control. TR7 with full bullbaiting and > physical enforcement. > >I assume this trains auditors for those troublesome PCs that want to >blow a session. You goddit. >Now what was that Cory said about being in control >when she's being audited? Nope. Not even. The auditor must NEVER allow the mark to control the session. NOT F*CKING EVER! It violates the Auditors' Code. True story. >[BTW, is Cory male or female?. (f) >These gender-neutral names are so >confusing. As a token of respect, I'd like to get it right. Where's >that ARSCC dossier...] > > > >How did I do, Mr Cram Officer? > > I'd retrain you from the bottom up if you were my recruit. > But nice try. You're better off not remembering it too well. > The more I remember of the tek, the stupider I feel. > >Now wait a minute! >I _know_ the drills. I just got the numbers wrong. Well, and the >cronology. And some of the details. In this man's navy that's cause for retrain. You know that you have MUs, don't you? Otherwise you wouldn't be nattering. So what the scienos would say is true, a retrain is what you need. >It's been 15 years and hasn't been used for a l-o-n-g time. No. The point I'm making is a difference in *standards*: what knowledge is required of those who actually run the processes. We had to know this sh*t COLD! I could still probably quote the Laws of Listing and Nulling verbatum today. Otto Roos wrote them. That's why they sound so stilted: "The definition of a complete list is a list which has only one reading item on list." >There was never a written exam for this - it's done before Student Hat. HQS course. Beginnig course after the Comm Course. >So, a written exam is out-tech. Yes, you got me. StarRated Checkouts are done verbally. >So retreading for flunking a written exam is out-tech. Yup. >Wanna come with me to Bali? Who's paying? >I think the proper cram would be: > >1) re-read the materials, using proper Student Hat. >2) TR8 [Tone 40 on ashtrays] to re-establish the delusion. >3) Writeup on how to use TR9 on a rhino. > >Besides, I don't want to do TR0 _again_. Too weird. It's even hard to think about it again. But too easily remembered. Too, f*cking easily. > >If you can fill in the titles and rework the numbers, I'll work up > >analysis of gradient mind control. > > Okay, you're hired. > >It should be done by the end of the month. Hot project at work right >now. > > [posted, hope I'm not outta line] > >Yikes. You like being harrassed or what?!? >"There are two classes of people: Those that put people into two >classes, and those that don't" - SpinTheCa. Those are two of the many. Sheech. Here's two more. Rev. Dennis L Erlich * * the inFormer * * "There are two classes of citizen in the US: those who can afford 'equal justice under the law' and the rest of us."