On Exes Letting Go At Differing Rates

The following is an excerpt from an email to Arnie Lerma on why some exes have a harder time letting go of the concepts and practices in Scientology despite getting hard evidence Hubbard lied and it is a fraud.



Hubbard relied on misdirection and persistent confusion.  The success Jon Atack has in showing the hypnotic commands is something I have been looking at. What you wrote to me  about the subconscious can be relevant here.

In my mind Hubbard used rhetorical methods where he had paces - readily agreeable statements. Then he used ethos (claims of authority), pathos (emotional appeals) and logos (claims of logical methodology or arguments) and sublime writing (writing intended to direct emotional states) to get rapport, lower his victim's guard and distract them from his using other statements. The other statements -OS fill a role and fit a pattern as well.

The OS include contradictions to induce confusion for both hypnotic control and to obfuscate the subject matter in the commands in the future. Obviously loaded language - LL fills a major role in this. LL  uses logos, ethos and pathos to restructure reality subtly.

We believe concepts in terms we use if we are not aware they are or could be false. The ethos, logos and pathos hide the contradiction and repetition too. With much repetition the terms and phrases and slogans replace thought and direct it in turn.

Without those things that hide Hubbard's commands the commands are clear as contradictory IF - and this is vital - they are presented in combination with the ones that directly contradict each other.

This is worth giving more clarification. Bear with me as I am only giving exact relevant details. The other parts induce confusion and that prompts accepting the commands to misdirect attention off the confusion temporarily with lies. That pattern used via repetition conditions habitual increasing submission. The confusions are buried in the subconscious. The commands seem to clarify confusion as they give direction but in truth the mind is only being distracted by trances focusing attention off the confusion. That is sublime writing  using persuasion to guide attention and thereby thought, behavior and emotion and focus attention on and off mental phenomena. And to define the phenomena to fool the victim.

So what Jon Atack often does in his articles is strip off the layers of rhetorical cloaking and put the commands out directly with their immediate contradictory corresponding counterparts. In other words other statements that say clearly ideas that cannot be held logically at the same time  on the same topic. These ideas in the subconscious put out can inspire explosive cognitive dissonance that as Jon Atack has said "reaches critical mass" and then explodes into the confusion coming out.

Now what I am saying next is even more important - with some  victims showing the contradictory doctrine does not open the door to seeing the commands as commands or as odd statements or immoral or even more importantly as contradictory.  

This occurs because  in a hypnotic model the trance is being held in place by something. It can be other commands, other rhetorical content that has not been addressed. Or in cognitive dissonance theory it can be that the ego ( or identity ) of the victim is threatened too much by rejecting Hubbard and his tech as their identity and pride is wrapped up and bonded so much with the value of Hubbard and his tech via seeing their identity as a person rise or fall with Scientology's .

 They cannot see any independent identity as sustainable. They have been made "worthless" in their opinion if Scientology is debunked. So it cannot be fathomed. Ala Tommy Davis' remarks.

In the simplest terms Scientology uses a confusion to get cooperation - both are slight in the beginning. A lie misdirects attention off the confusion. This brings relief - even slight and always temporary. Then another confusion is made to bait the victim more and another misdirection to relieve the confusion via a lie. That these require greater cooperation and increasing submission to direction of action and belief is hidden intentionally. The confusions all remain hidden and the reliefs from them are the "proof" and "wins" and "gains" the deluded victim hangs onto.

If the truth of the contradictions in the doctrine is very clearly exposed and the truth about Hubbard's character and the activities of his followers and a victim STILL is unwilling to even consider the tech as fraudulent or unworkable their is theoretically another issue.

 It goes back to the indoctrination. The victim sees the relief from removing confusion as a real benefit. It feels genuine. Deep down. That is because the relief actually felt good and emotion generated over and over thousands of times in association with something can make the two seem linked in cause and effect. And not subject to contemplation.

The process of Scientology creating confusion then misdirecting attention off it to seem to resolve it with temporary suggested relief is done with lies.

The process is done over and over thousands and thousands of times and hides the confusions, how they are truly "relieved" and most importantly the process itself. The misdirection is lies but feels true. That is the fundamental trance holder.

So to be even more precise - find the confusions that Scientology SEEMED to resolve for a particular victim. Have the person talk in detail about what was confusing. And when I use the term confusions they can be ideas, theories, relationships, social or sexual identity, or emotions or really anything someone is uncertain, uncomfortable or overwhelmed concerning.

They can be quite minor, infinitesimal really or quite enormous or anywhere in between. Size is not entirely relevant though it may correspond to emotional impact for a victim so be aware of this.

 Relatively small confusions may hold tremendous significance as they are put in always in a unique sequence and the delusions that hold them take or set along with them uniquely as well.

So when a particular delusion is examined that carried great influence - regardless of content - the lifting of the influence is the source of the freed emotional content and corresponding reaction and freed critical and independent thinking. The freed thinking can be relative to how much of the delusional state ( or trance or trance states in a hypnotic model ) was held in by a particular "solution" to a confusion.

So when a command served to hold in much of the  delusion ( or trance ) it will release much of the mind to realize this and reevaluate the cult experience.

 Getting enough of the delusion or false beliefs examined - and not just used to trigger delusional interpretations of the events - to free up the mind to a point of doubting on a conscious level is a critical entry point for recovery to be possible.

By getting to that point actual examination of contradictory doctrine and hidden commands with undesirable content can be pursued. For some examining the cult's behavior can inspire some independence. But getting to examine Hubbard's character often helps far more to cast doubt on his authority and even more importantly his doctrine.

The confusion on the doctrine is often the most resistant to consideration as the victim cannot distinguish the "relief" and lies from genuine benefit.

 Plainly they think  that Hubbard despite poor character and fraudulent research and being a person with narcissistic and sociopathic character and a pathological liar and prolific plagiarist  and having dozens of other severe mental health issues  may have done something. They think he may have from theft or honest intent or accidentally combining ideas of others or somehow that is unknown achieved a true beneficial practice.

They have the hardest road - the exact hidden confusions to free them are so personal and often so well hidden to them great compassion, generosity and persistence may be required as they may lash out at any who push them toward the hidden confusions.

 The confusions are unpleasant to face to put it mildly. If they were not there would have been little reason to cooperate with the path away from them . The victim would not change things or try to avoid things that have no meaning for them.

There is more confusion to face when the lies are seen as such. It is a trap that grows to a no one situation. Face the truth and have the lies unravel and face the lies or refuse to face them ( and in the victim's defense they do not usually have a clear idea exactly what happened or what to look at ) and have no independence from a desperate - even frantic - need for Hubbard and his doctrine to be absolutely right always.

Facing the lies is no picnic either. When your identity, religious beliefs, philosophy and framing of and even definition of reality and yourself and everyone else is utterly annihilated all at one rapidly that itself is completely overwhelming and usually quite difficult.

Due to the extreme totalist ( controlling every aspect of thought, emotion, behavior, belief and identity ) nature of Scientology and extreme use of lies over and over to "relieve" confusions virtually every fundamental aspect of reality is thrown into question and doubted as part of fully facing the fraudulent nature for the most heavily indoctrinated and fanatical followers.

It is for some difficult but for others unbearable and so denied and dissociated from as an automatic defense of identity and remaining sanity and may trigger other psychological defense mechanisms.

This defense  is in fact an error but understandable.

Being driven to the brink of a breakdown is undesirable so a mind will resist it as it seems better and in many circumstances avoiding it is a good thing to do. Just not  this time, it is preserving delusion, and not just an eccentricity or neurosis. If the mind is this far gone it is severely compromised. Sorry. Hope this is of some use.

Mockingbird's Nest : http://mbnest.blogspot.com/search?up...08:00&max-resu


stuff at ESMB
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthrea...390#post989390

CREDIBILITY - The Reddest Of Herrings.

    

                                                                                         

   

I  want to start this post off by saying of the over 800 posts or comments I have written at ESMB and other places under various aliases I have usually found the vast majority of people who respond to be polite and respectful. I cannot stress that enough or that many of these people are consistently considerate and have afforded me a great deal of courtesy and even encouragement. I have to say well over 90-95% of the responses are of a nature I find acceptable if not often downright enjoyable. I cannot thank people enough for that and really need to find more ways to show my gratitude and relief and enjoyment of that experience as a contributor.

There is a very, very small other aspect I will address here but it should never be seen out of its proper proportion. It is like getting 800+ pizzas from a pizza place over a year and about one in every fifty or so has...something not quite right. It can have anchovies when I said " No anchovies" or hot peppers ( which I do not like ) instead of sweet peppers.

So, instead of changing pizza places I will try to gently encourage more of the good interactions and make perfectly clear what some of the problems are with the bad pies.

Simply put I have "guests" who I share my "pies" with and they may incorrectly judge me based on the "pies" that are served.

Other people read my posts so a post questioning or subtly attacking my credibility may take attention away from where I think it should go - my claims. I make very detailed and specific claims about the nature of Scientology and how it is a fraud and harms people and more importantly how to use education to overcome the lies it is made of. I will not pretend to know everything about it or to always be right. I can be incorrect at any time and will simply try my best to be accurate. I make claims about Ron Hubbard's conduct, character and "technology". I make claims about the terrorist mind control cult Scientology and their crimes. 

I do not want attention to be diverted from the claims as they can be verified with evidence from many, many other sources. I often refer folks to them and simply examining the basic ideas from longstanding subjects I reference will give a point of entry to start  deciding for oneself about my claims. It is like if you are in a house and a person who has been called a "fool" says it is raining bring an umbrella when you go out. My being called a "fool" is irrelevant and a red herring. Just find out for yourself as it is easy to give yourself a little time and look outside. If it is raining you can get the umbrella - if not don't .

Sometimes you have to trust sources as you have to use credibility as a tiebreaker when you are in a time crunch and equally valid claims in other regards but must pick one over another or others.  That is where credibility should come in - to settle ties that cannot be further investigated for some reason. It is not perfect but better than nothing. As a lazy and poor way of thinking a person may always trust a source they like or not believe any claim by a source they dislike. Either is bluntly illogical and very , very poor reason. It is emotional and biased and not critical thinking.

We all have done it many times over . We usually blindly trust our parents on everything when we are quite little and gradually change then by our teens go through a period of rebellion and disillusionment as we realize they in fact have lied and been wrong at times. We still may trust them far more than strangers, especially if they are generally good and decent people.

For many activities this makes more sense than constantly testing all their claims about things like taking out the garbage or picking up dinner . We extend trust . But for some claims that is very poor reason . A good mom may know very little about vaccines or international law . A poor father may know a lot about physics or theories on how to treat children - even if he never follows them .

So , I want to get more to the issue of my credibility that is vary rarely questioned or even attacked with subtle ad hominem , often disguised as "concern ".  Hmm, how should I put this ...I have not met the vast majority of people who read my posts and am quite likely to never do so. I use several aliases and will continue to for now.

 Plainly you cannot investigate me thoroughly and to use proper analysis of my claims you will never need to. They are very well chosen,  in the vast majority, to be ones that can be "run with".  In other words taken from any source or an anonymous one and completely independently investigated and either verified or refuted. It is like a "note" given to the police saying "Joe Blow robbed the big bank last month , he makes 10$ an hour at his crappy job and bought a 250,000$ sports car with cash . He lives at 300 Pinecrest in Kenmore New York. The cash is in his house . " A Concerned Citizen

The police would probably run some records and if they found Joe Blow indeed fit that exact description and just bought that car despite never having had more than five hundred bucks in his bank account then they would look real close at him and work on getting a warrant and picking up Joe for questioning. Which would not require scouring the city for A Concerned Citizen. The claim can be verified or refuted , no wondering and looking other places. Especially if the money is found at Joe's house and he caves and confesses and admits bragging about the robbery for several drunken nights at a local brothel to anyone who would listen . And a local bar , and his job he quit .

My claims are often intentionally worded in a manner intended to encourage being investigated very carefully . That means looking at subjects like hypnosis and elements from psychology and rhetoric in fine detail .  I try to zero in often on exact terms and theories to help folks greatly shorten any needed inquiry - not everyone will need to do this but most exes , especially when first coming out , know very little about these subjects .

Now I want to get to the heart of the matter -  credibility . It is to me for my writing a red herring and subtle ad hominem ( also called the genetic fallacy ). It takes attention off claims and irrationally puts them on people . I have told people if a claim is valid who presented it is irrelevant . Mike and Virginia McClaughry as I wrote before make many claims I personally do not believe in Mike's blog Scientology Roots.

I read almost all of it and decided it is not for me . I also said that my opinion should be irrelevant to others and they should decide for themselves in a post at ESMB . I went on to tell how when I first looked outside the cult in about January 2014 I rejected Arnie Lerma's site and Jon Atack's articles as I was biased ( foolishly ) against anyone who doubted Ron Hubbard or his "technology". I was lucky to make myself look enough to see that may have been in error and then more impartially force myself to look at both sides and I then concluded by my own investigation they were very much on the right track on Hubbard and his con , particularly regarding hypnotism .

They had claims that are easy to look at as they often use Hubbard's own words in quotes to expose him . They also use simple ideas from books and basic psychology to build strong claims.  Jon uses the ideas from psychology and studies on influence and Arnie uses many independent documents. Together they build a very , very strong case and after investigating it for several hundred hours I concur on many major points. If they ever worked together I believe they could produce truly groundbreaking work.

Much of what I write , particularly in this first year , is based largely on checking their claims. So I know using credibility to avoid or disregard claims is poor reason. The other side of the coin is the appeal to authority fallacy. It is believing someone is an authority then seeing their claims as true with little or no examination. It is essential to Scientology and without committing it routinely one is very unlikely to be much of a Scientologist. I do not want it committed with me either - test all my claims please. Look at one , kick the tires , compare it to others on the same subject , use critical analysis , read books by experts you value or articles online or watch videos on the subject. I have no fear of being exposed. I want you to use your mind regarding these subjects and not either accept or reject my claims as a habit.

Now whether you object or agree I do not want personal attacks, and the genetic fallacy is a personal attack. I have had conversations in groups with indies ( independent Scientologists) who religiously use the genetic fallacy on critics and the appeal to authority to validate and deify Hubbard.  Not much room for reason there. This has a distinct undesirable pattern : they ask what courses I have done, I make claims about Hubbard and his "tech". They say I have never done anything. I tell them I was a Scientologist for 25 years and did the staff statuses, the five EPF courses, the Student Hat, the FSM Specialist Hat, the HDA, used "study tech" to be indoctrinated with about thirty Hubbard books ( back before the basics program ), and most of if not all of the  OEC Vol 0 , I and several of the others and countless bulletins and PLs and tapes while on staff.  I also say I really have found the Affirmations of Ron Hubbard and the "skipper" letter to be my  favorites. ( Sometimes to recover me they ask what my favorite Hubbard reference is - so I tell them! ) And I think I have about five or six folders of auditing. But that is also  a red herring to me.

But the point is even inquiring about  what I did on the bridge to claim it is relevant to my credibility is incredibly poor reason for an individual and may steer others on a similar path via persuasion. If someone makes such a claim it is quite likely I may try to point this out as undesirable to me. If they persist it is quite likely I could choose to not engage that person in the future as I am not here to be personally attacked, even subtly.

Remember, this probably applies to a half dozen or so individuals so if you are not one of them I apologize but please, please do not let their mistake cloud your vision . 

• Blog Archive by Topic

Why Hubbard Never Claimed OT Feats And The Rock Bottom Basis Of Scientology

The pattern in Scientology is incredibly - almost idiotically simple - confuse a person by some method even slightly then offer a "stable datum" for that confusion that is accepted. Here is the important part I just now got this exactly - the stable data is ALWAYS meant to be two things a lie and a method to induce further confusion that leads to accepting another stable datum, over and over. That is the con. The details vary and their effects and deserve tremendous study and dissection but the formula has only a few basic parts always. Confuse, offer solution to confusion give "solution" it is a lie designed to bring more confusion immediately or later. Sometimes there is a delay or apparent relief for a time before the confusion is back. Why ? Because if it does not add up if the truth was not part of the equation - it is all lies. Always was always will be. No truth ever, no workable anything, no miracles. One formula one conman one con . And by confusion I mean the confusion and reelingness and mental blankness associated with cognitive dissonance - it is a distinct feeling of being baffled or beffudled or overwhwelmed and can be from contradictory or surprising info, behavior or emotions - ANYTHING that creates or brings back those phenomena even slightly.

This is why Hubbard wanted people to not be given one thing to solve a problem - he wanted the person baited then drawn in forever.

That is all Scientology is  - a big con made bit by bit from small ones built up into a total gradual surrender of identity and self .The ironic thing is that the surrender comes for one purpose - to relieve the confusion by submitting to Hubbard's will to escape the confusion.

Have you ever been with someone, and you are thoroughly confused in a situation and they tell you to do something to change or end the situation and you do not understand how it will help or why but you just do it to get away from the unpleasant situation and the unpleasant feeling that trying to figure it out brings ? You not just follow instructions but also surrender judgment to avoid the confusion.

It seems logical - I cannot figure it out but this guy seems to know what to do so let us get this over with. It can work out and you may figure things out by observation in more simple and honest relationships and activities but that is not the case here. Not one bit. Hubbard is the absolute last person you should trust EVER. With anything. It is moronically simple and clear once you see it - confuse then lie, confuse then lie - have the lie set up further cooperation and confusion which leads to surrender and enslaving. Then they die, game over. But we can end the game now that we know it. I hope this is not confusing.

To continue, I am often asked how after 25 years in and most of that as a very close minded and fanatical extremist, how did I within a couple months come to totally reject everything From Hubbard and all his methods without reservation ?

I was asked about intelligence and my family background and other things. Not to disappoint you but people far more intelligent than me have taken decades to get to my level of rejection of Hubbard. That is not the reason. Part of it is that I could instantly find certain information I have discussed before but even now with that widely available others still often take longer - some much much longer to reject Hubbard's fraud.

Let's go back to how it is applied - Fred, our cult victim - is brought in on a point of cooperating to some degree, even slightly with the cult even if just by walking in or listening or reading something. He is doing what Hubbard directs. He has some confusion - it could be miniscule. What is Scientology ? Is it a science or religion or something else ? Is Dianetics a psychotherapy or just talking about your problems ? Fred can have any tiny confusion or even just a curiosity and the cult can make him confused - via evaluating a personality test or showing him a film with odd ideas and words. Just a little confusion is all it takes - and new ideas and words are inherently confusing. Fred gets directed to do something to alleviate the confusion, read a book, take a course, meet a staff member watch a video - SOMETHING.

The important thing is the person in confusion follows direction to handle it and it seems to be handled, but it often is not. Scientology is a confusing term as it sounds like science and technology combined but is promoted as an applied religious philosophy but that is a confusing way to say a religion as all religions in fact fit that definition if you break it down. And Hubbard goes to great lengths to add to that initial confusion and never clear it up. He gives long ambiguous and circular vague definitions and in his stories claims to tell you something and never gets around to telling you. That is to make a mystery but more than that to confuse you and then direct your attention and action within that confusion.

That is the con, that is why Hubbard never gave claims of OT feats ( aside from some rare ones in person ). That is why he would say "Ron, People ask where are you on the bridge ?" and he would NEVER answer. Certainly not as an idea in the doctrine that is disseminated at entry level. He wanted confusion via mystery to stir in an unresolvable way in his victim's mind to help control them. Mysteries require confusion - what is this ? Why is it this way ? How Ot is he ? What OT powers does he have ? What OT powers will I get ? These mysteries serve to direct and tie up attention and prevent examination of clear claims. Even a slight claim in Scientology doctrine would lead to - is this real and verifiable coming up . And the answer to that is not confusing-NO. No OT feats , no OTs no clears no workable technology EVER. That is the truth about Scientology. He confuses by talking about OT powers from way back down the track but promotes regaining abilities in vague language on the grade chart and in promotional materials intentionally so the victim wonders at it all in a directed manner - how OT can these courses make me ? When do I get telekinesis and to go exterior and heal people at will ? NOT do I get this but when and how much. Mysteries without answers are the opposite of critical thinking. And scientific methodology.

That is his method. In my mind whether it is from his love of hypnosis and it having confusion and repetition in it or rhetoric or somewhere else he arrived at 1) get attention 2) create confusion 3) lie to direct attention while pretending to resolve the confusion( without resolving the confusion as it is his basis for an entry point for exploitation - so he will never give it up ) 4) create another confusion requiring more attention and controlled action to pursue a claimed resolution that never comes 5) get more compliance from the victim and gradual increase via the first four steps over and over in confusion and compliance. And by compliance increasing I mean getting greater and greater degree of how willing and unthinking the victim is. How willing to do more and more extreme things and give more money and adulation and trust and even the victim's life and blind loyalty are they ? Never enough for Hubbard - he wanted gradual building to absolute devotion. With no other priorities even left at all. And the confusion is to grow too as he saw it holding this all in place. Some will look at his study of hypnosis and say the growing confusion acts hypnotically and some would say it creates a condition of hiding the cognitive dissonance and discomfort in the subconscious via trance logic so it gets directed via projection or other psychological defense mechanisms at any who bring the confusion back to the surface but that is not the main point and that is for those who pursue the finest details on this to consider. And the growth of confusion is vital as it leaves those who do realize something is not true or right to often take forever to unstick the lies one by one as they feel odd about the ideas and unsure what is untrue or not. They do not see the pattern and so are emotionally still prey to it and emotion influences thought and behavior.


Okay, so back to why I rejected Hubbard totally within a couple months : Scientology uses thousands of accumulated confusions to hold it in place, the auditing that is euphoria from hypnosis and the trances in course are all confused with genuine mystical experiences and many events are confused for others and the conditions are confused with laws for life when they are fallacies, as is the tone scale. These are to control thought and behavior and claimed as discoveries instead of fabrications and so confound and confuse. This is why Scientology has thousands - perhaps millions of contradictions in it.

I detail some in the Secret Of Scientology Part 1 :http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?37580-THE-SECRET-OF-SCIENTOLOGY-PART-1

I realized in about January 2014 that there are no current OTs in the Sea Org and so can be none anywhere and so no clears and so no true technology as it all relied on the authority Hubbard is afforded as the clear and OT maker. All his credibility rests on those claims. I knew no matter how odd it felt or what doubts I had or trouble in reframing reality in a way that explained all my ideas and experiences that were there or came up - Hubbard was a pathological liar and from my experience dealing with unrepentent criminals, predators, narcissists and other devious manipulators before the cult life that you can never believe anything they say. So I resolved all confusions by being sure they were from being deceived somehow and pursued that course with great zeal.

The people who take so long or never recover despite any evidence do not see the confusions are what he used to bind the lies and forge the prison of belief. You can be confused by things - that is genuine so using a fake answer makes the directing of your attention off the confusion feel real if you do not look closely and see they are different. That is the mortar to make the certainty that Scientology has something real in it - your confusion hidden away is real but your being directed away is only momentary partial relief. That is sold as real but fake. That is why lies are always needed.

And to be even more exact on this. I recently came across material on narcissists and sociopaths and was stunned at how exactly accurate some of it is in describing Hubbard. Some descriptions have twelve or twenty traits and Hubbard was one for one on all of them. That warranted more examination and I found no matter what their education some of these models and theories show these people using confusing language and lies and contradictory stories to bewilder people and make them vulnerable to exploitation. Regardless of knowing hypnotism or mind control or even being able to read. It is first nature for a very, very small percent of people. So I considered Hubbard's use of confusion as having a possible deeper root than his study of hypnotism - though that provided many methods to attempt and combine. That prompted looking at Scientology anew and seeing all my experiences as fitting a pattern that is even simpler than earlier ones.

A narcissist or sociopath in some models gets victims to accept lies to confuse and control them and when clarity can come from truth they refuse to give it. I knew a person called Pat who would enthusiastically say "other people say this about you and that" and "everyone knows you do this wrong and have this to learn". I realized he was using gaslighting as revealing the hidden thoughts of others always involves a confusion as the thoughts might be truly what someone said or might not. They might have been changed in being passed on to be more harsh or less. The person might hate you or not really mean it and just have been angry about something else. So I told Pat to have the courage to say what was in his heart. He was stunned. He would come back in the days after and say "Do you want to know what is being said about you !?" and be agitated. I would calmly look right at him and say "As long as it comes from your heart". He always walked away deflated and dejected. He could only confuse with other people's claims as he had so little status all his complaints were laughed at openly. Everyone knew he lied and was selfish and cruel and so showed him no support, or his complaints either. He needed to be able to confuse to have power.

To help a Scientologist get them to look at what their ruin was when they came in. Many upon close examination realize this was never handled. The ruin is something Scientology somehow convinces you is ruining your life. And that Scientology can handle it. Scientology can do two things : make it appear something is ruining your life when it is not or find something you are unhappy about and pretend it can handle it. Either way there is a confusion as Scientology cannot improve you or your life but it can distract you from that as you are entrapped in a web of lies. It can confuse you about how or with what it can improve you as it is so big and contradictory always with hidden parts to reach for more and more. Always a more confusing subject as you get deeper into it and not less. I have met OT VIIIs and BC students who when being asked about their gains with the exact same terms used to describe their courses in Scientology doctrine pause, look stunned into anxiety, look around subtly and then relax and say "yes" in a monotone flat way.

They were not prepared for the question but could not outright reject it as it was in fact Hubbard doctrine. At the upper levels the promotional claims are avoided as a kind of mutual tacit consent that the gains never really occur and you accept less and less as you move up the bridge and compromise with your expectations more and more and finally just do courses out of habit after a while or to stay in the trances they provide to avoid unpleasant reality. I  was a person at the bottom of the bridge but so good at stating the non-confidential parts of their courses it stunned them.

The cognitive dissonance of the contrast between reality which I reminded them of and the claims they avoided as uncomfortable caused confusion to surface. that was where the anxiety came from. Their trance was threatened and they searched frantically in their mind for a stable datum - found one and reentered the trance and became calm and almost dead to me. I could almost see them thinking " How can this be ? I am supposed to be a demigod and cannot get my kids to listen or learn how to use a VCR ?", then they would find some Hubbard quote that justified their lack of abilities promised and go "Oh, yeah things are on a gradient so it is okay I have trouble with that "or "I need more training to be cause over that or word clearing or FPRD or..."

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit

― W.C. Fields

They muddy the water, to make it seem deep.

– Friedrich Nietzsche

Getting rid of a delusion makes us wiser than getting hold of a truth.

Ludwig Borne

For those that see the confusions as hidden in the mind :

Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life, and you will call it fate.

– Carl Jung

Watch your thoughts; they become words.
Watch your words; they become actions.
Watch your actions; they become habits.
Watch your habits; they become character.
Watch your character; it becomes your destiny.

Lao Tzu

The spell can be broken just by asking yourself, "Is what I'm believing true?"

—Byron Katie

Please let me know if this is adequate for you. I think he simply wanted to use mysteries as confusions to make people susceptible to influence and knew clear answers that did not lead to more confusion would kill the con. This also why he used contradiction - he wanted people to never know where they stood on anything and lean on him more and more as they became more unsure as the contradictions made the double bind utterly obscure all ideas and reach out to him to think, and decide for them. When we are little  children we trust our parents usually on many,  many matters and are at their mercy. He wanted that intensified and never lessened and clear unchanging answers - even false ones - would eventually provide clarity ( even temporarily ) and that could lead to critical thinking if the answer blew up. So he had to make it so none of the answers are clear and subject to strong direct examination. OT feats would be clear and subject to examination and comparison with other Scientologists and they would come up very short.

Also I think the greater and greater lies as one progresses are to induce confusion more and more as the earlier lies can build up a kind of level of acceptance like tolerance in alcoholics. So for the lie to  to work you need to up the incredulity and that is why the OT levels are so absurd - they have to be or people would wake up as they said "Okay I am on OT blah - I should be a lot better than this !"

For further reading I will list several references and the areas they elaborate on.

• Blog Archive by Topic

Regarding mind control in Scientology:

Insidious Enslavement: Study Technology
http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/01/i...ology.html?m=0

Basic Introduction To Hypnosis In  Scientology

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/01/b...is-in.html?m=0

Pissed It's Not Your Fault !!!

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/01/p...fault.html?m=0

The Critical Factor

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/201...

The Secret Of Scientology Part 1 Control Via Contradiction

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/01/t...art-1.html?m=0

Burning Down Hell - How Commands Are Hidden, Varied And Repeated To Control You As Hypnotic Implants

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/02/m...-hell.html?m=0

Humbling Simplicity
http://mbnest.blogspot.com/201...

The Empty Well

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/201...

Why Hubbard Never Claimed OT Feats And The Rock Bottom Basis Of Scientology

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/02/m...never.html?m=0

Regarding Hubbard's uses of loaded language with reversals of truth

Propaganda By Reversal Of Meaning In Scientology

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/03/p...ng-in.html?m=0

Regarding the narcissism and sociopathic tendencies in Ron Hubbard and his cult

Scientology's Parallel In Nature - Malignant Narcissism

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/05/s...ure_3.html?m=0

Regarding Dissociation

Exteriorization Versus Dissociation

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/201...

ARC And KRC

ARC And KRC

The following is an excerpt from an email I recently sent Jon Atack discussing my routine answer when an indie says "I like ARC and KRC they are good tools " . I hope it may help inspire consideration on the other view of these things .

I recently have been telling how he took in my opinion complexes (which I simplify even further as associations - l see emotions , ideas and behavior as linked to each other . In other words a man may think of say his mom and feel love, and do a behavior linked to her - perhaps call her . A woman may think of her baby and feel anticipation of seeing the child , and hurry up to get to see the tot .)
So it is obvious what Hubbard did here he made ARC by making emotion affinity , ideas reality and behavior communication . He knew by changing any one - even slightly- he could via repetition both normalize the new aspect of a person - say a behavior - from cognitive dissonance theory we get the other two being nudged over to resolve the dissonance . The change is always by the victim to comply with Hubbard , never accepted the other way . This is his working the corners of the triangle to raise one to raise the others .


It is a kind of conditioning as Hubbard studied Pavlov . By redefining affinity as physical closeness he makes a semantic destruction of love . It is lost in truth by this trick . Reality of course with his "agreement "instead of actuality makes delusion of "agreed on" strongly supplant the physical existence we are actually experiencing ( in my opinion ) .
It predisposes delusion as opposed to say observing nature ( the most basic root of science - observe nature to study it ) . And his communication is a way to remake behavior via a covert terminology . The drills and TRs and theories are all to make precisely controlled and submissive unthinking slaves . Who are willing to control others , as they are not aware of what they are truly doing .


He has "understanding "composed of faking liking people and hiding your true emotions , with a fixed unblinking stare ( ideal for a covert hypnotist who uses a stare to establish dominance and fake affinity for rapport ) , from" reality "hiding most of Scientology and working points of agreement ( similar to a hypnotist's method of using agreeable statements as paces to disarm judgment ) . And communication has drills and theories and methods to make a victim without hesitation control others with strong confidence . And emphasis on using intention with no doubt and perfect ability to repeat commands endlessly and control every aspect of a conversation and without upsetting someone steer attention . A very good model of a thought reformer or hypnotist .


And not to be too cheeky, but I think Hubbard took this another step - he made a method of using the cultist own mind to influence them . KRC has ( again by redefinition of terms ) knowledge as ideas , reality as emotions and control as behavior . It is subtle so bear with me . By making knowledge replace ideas he plays another trick - he has certainty replace wisdom or well tested or developed ideas . In other words he shifts from ideas to knowledge then to certainty which is not well tested and verified conclusions but unthinking deep strong delusion with no doubt . A complete reversal by redefinition - Orwell might shudder at this . And responsibility is a particularly cruel trick . He says it is "nonrecognition and denial of the right of intervention between oneself and any being..." He is making the rights of others irrelevant in the face of Scientology .He makes Scientology trump laws , authority , family , traditions , decency , equality and compassion . By a corollary of his oddly complex phrase he denies rights - which ? ALL.

He also makes all failures in Scientology a method to use shame , blame and regret to make a Scientologist just see themself as the source of all failures in Scientology as if you fail - you must take more responsibility . This is used over and over to induce guilt and that creates anxiety and a weakening of identity or ego and confusion . All confusions in Scientology are solved with "stable data " hypnotic commands given in times of vulnerability . By taking more responsibility it always means more submission to Scientology . Whether by spending more time on course or auditing or joining staff or working more or joining the SO . Or if a wealthy public giving ever increasing mountains of money . All Hubbard references on taking responsibility equal more complete surrender to the cult . In ethics this translates to a more complete submission via confession , OW write-ups , conditions etc. giving greater submission of your identity and inner secrets to the cult and its methodology .And control has by its humorous " the only way to control people is to lie to them " an odd implication . And by saying all three are linked a Scientologist is taught to take more responsibility if failing at control or to take control if failing at knowledge or responsibility . A circular idea that demands fanatical zeal with no doubt ( or critical or independent thought ), ruthless action denying all rights or outside authority or independence , and actions that require in training overriding others very will . And submission to Scientology's control as well .

Anyway , that is just an example of what I routinely dash off as an answer to an indie who may say "I love ARC and KRC - there is nothing bad about them " .
They are obviously not harmless to me .

• Blog Archive by Topic

 

Burning Down Hell - How Commands Are Hidden , Varied And Repeated In Scientology To Control You As Hypnotic Implants

BURNING DOWN HELL

Allright , I was talking to a veteran ex and critic the other day and wrote that I was shocked no one has prior to now has analyzed Hubbard's doctrine and spotted the rhetorical techniques and then seen what they are there for then categorized them , made that a routine part of thought and remembering and reading them ( or just recalling a few hundred basic doctrine from memory ) then swept them away and seen what statements remain and by recalling them verbatim simply looked at and memorized a few hundred quotes from Marcus Aurelius , Lao Tzu , Confucius , Crowley and others to see what the enticing bait parts of the doctrine were and the other parts then zeroed in on the others and seen what they do and where they were stolen from as it really is all stolen and repackaged .

He said the figuring it out and then recognizing and sweeping it away part is the hard part . Many are still part Freezoner or indie for many decades and confused what worked and did not . Well I assumed many like me have within a couple months figured none of it worked in truth and all is a fraud - then learned through hundreds of hours what was hypnotism , how it worked and what was rhetoric as classic ethos , pathos , logos and sublime writing and unusual turns of phrases , contradictions , repetition and other basic techniques . and how the unconscious is manipulated and psychological defense mechanisms are manipulated to have them help the mind control . And cognitive dissonance and the fundamental attribution error etc. etc.

I was spoiled in having Lermanet.com and Jon Atack having done decades of research to cut the con down to a far more manageable size for me to start at .So I will always have profound appreciation for that and knowing they have helped thousands more escape the con by their efforts . Not to mention the wonderful and lovable Tory Magoo with her great friendly heartwarming videos to help us all through a dark and horrifying time in coming out of the cult and the truly heroic Gerry Armstrong for all his efforts including revealing the affirmations which are key to my research and the Rosetta stone of Scientology and his deep exposure of the SP doctrine as repackaged Nazism . These heroes and others saved me decades of work and let my exit counseling move at light speed compared to many others .

I was lucky that my mentors introduced me to varying and compelling ideas on some points which required rehabilitating my own critical thinking to find answers and that led me to dive into logical fallacies and that is key to see how Hubbard implants them in his doctrine to control thought habitually covertly as conditioning for life .

I realized in talking online to hundreds of people I keep telling the same " the celebs are all attacking the attacker because of the ad hominem group of implants and the cult has to do this because of this embedded command and ... " and what I really need to do is show YOU guys what the tools to recognize and spot this stuff routinely and effortlessly are and let you look at them and see if they are correct and have all the right parts laid out or not .

Simple , right ?

Actually , with the right tools it is . Give me a chance and bear with me - I promise anything I give you will be shorter and more true than GAT I and II .

Okay first I want to refer to some very short videos for you to watch they have key ideas very simply explained . Do not just take any of this on faith and remember I do not endorse everything in these videos just use them to get basic concepts for comparison .

And I will be telling where Hubbard stole some ideas from as seeing how others used them gives clues what he intended too . You should at least read Basic Introduction to Hypnotic Induction before this starts :http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?37148-BASIC-INTRODUCTION-TO-HYPNOTIC-INDUCTION

But first a video for consideration :How To Use Embedded Commands by Dantalion Jones https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ch5GLJd6aDE
and to compliment it NLP Embedded Commands and suggestions : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWqjUQrxCKo


They explain in simple language that embedded commands are hidden covert statements in theory placed in the subconscious of the victim and they require a delivery mechanism - a speech or writing to be placed in and they are in need of repetition to establish a pattern in the victim's mind and they use variation stating the command or idea in slightly different ways to have it click in the victim's mind and change behavior . The subconscious is in truth a metaphor and not an actual physical structure but it works for describing hypnotic and behavioral phenomena .

Milton Erickson saw the repetition as needed and the variation also as helping get the technique to set the command and Hubbard uses both tremendously and far beyond what most could conceive of . Note :I NEVER recommend NLP as a practice or therapy as it is a fraud and unethical . It is a cult on training wheels as it tells the trainers at least that they are covertly influencing and manipulating where Scientology has many more layers of lies to penetrate and so helps through the commonalities see what Hubbard was doing under the surface . It is still a school for sociopaths but they know it where Scientology makes sociopaths covertly .

More in the next installment .

Yeah , I have said NLP is a fraud and the subconscious is a metaphor . It is to help explain- like if someone said my heart says yes but my head says no -we know it is not literal but still can understand . My honesty is meant to make it so you just listen and do not fall for pseudo science . Some hypnotism deniers fight tooth and claw to NOT listen EVER . Hmm , got bias ?

The important thing is that Hubbard's persuasion did in fact work to some degree on some people and if you listen to me you may agree but if you do not you are rejecting the idea you dare not learn to understand . The ideas he used came to some degree from hypnotism as well documented in his own writings ( see Never Believe a Hypnotist by Jon Atack for many examples ) and they are repackaged in NLP into a pseudo science to covertly influence ( sound familiar ) but the language is more up front in that persuasion by deception is the intent . Look they try like Hubbard to do the same thing but are willing to come out and say it so you can look at them and more easily understand him . They are more honest liars .

Yeah , I was confused at first but quickly figured out their game so just check out what they TRY and see how Hubbard TRIED the exact sane tactics on YOU .

So any way , the important things to get on embedded commands are that they are statements in Hubbard's doctrine intended to by repetition and variation achieve behavioral changes covertly in cult members . That is it - in theory your mind forms patterns of similar information on themes and topics and by giving over and over the same or varied ideas and statements they become a conditioned part of your behavior and you do not even think about them - you just do them .

This to some fits the slogans and long repeated stable data Scientologists turn to over and over time after time . They are habitual on purpose by Hubbard .
Hubbard had number of times over equals certainty - that is repetition which cult members get loads of for the study " tech" and KSW and tons of other basic ideas . This includes OW write ups and many other things . Remember" results in the students own case..." that is the behavioral change that indicates sufficient repetition for the embedded command to be successful.

See , Hubbard got the idea from hypnosis and it is simple - hide statements in a delivery mechanism - in this case a written reference or tape , then repeat them and vary them and keep doing it until you get a behavioral response you desire .That is embedded commands . You can call it conditioning or thought reform or anything - I do not care as long as you understand the idea and consider it thoroughly in looking at what Hubbard's "technology" did to us .

It is a fundamental he used over and over : he loved repetition and this is where it fits in .Next I will take on a couple more simple ideas on persuasion .

I also strongly suggest learning anything even basic about logical fallacies and the most basic rhetoric you can and critical thinking and skepticism and scientific method . Gib posted some very simple sites that detail that rhetoric - classic style - consists of ethos ( authority) , logos ( logic or logical seeming ideas ) and pathos ( emotional influence ) . These are also names of fallacy calsses . Some fallacies are these being used to influence thought . The ideas overlap and compliment each other - a speech can have pathos and I can fall for an unseen appeal to emotion as they are two names for the same phenomena and error in reason .

Here is a quote from an earlier post at ESMB on rhetoric :Here is a small collection of quotes from a very simple site Gib was kind enough to find and share :

Defining rhetoric :

• The art of persuasion, and the study of the art of persuasion, and An individual act of persuasion.
• In the work we'll do in our rhetorical analysis, there are 2 parties to be concerned with:The rhetor: the party that is attempting to persuade, andThe audience: the party that is the target of persuasion.
  "Of the [modes of persuasion] provided through speech there are three species: for some are in the character of the speaker, and some are in disposing the listener in some way, and some in the argument itself, by showing or seeming to show something" --Aristotle, On Rhetoric, 1356b (trans. George A. Kennedy)
  In other words, Aristotle argues that there are three elements to the art of persuasion:
• ethos: The rhetor is perceived by the audience as credible (or not).
• pathos: The rhetor attempts to persuade the audience by making them feel certain emotions.
• logos: The rhetor attempts to persuade the audience by the use of arguments that they will perceive as logical.

We call these three elements rhetorical appeals. It's not necessary for every act of persuasion to make use of all three appeals. Often, however, there is some element of each. In academic writing, ethos and logos are given more respect than pathos. An essay that relies primarily on pathos, with little use of ethos or logos, is unlikely to be perceived by an academic audience as persuasive.

Page history last edited by George H. Williams 2 years ago

"Part 1" of the Norton Field Guide to Writing covers the concept of "Rhetorical Situations" (1-17).

Whenever we write, whether it's an email to a friend or a toast for a wedding, an English essay or a résumé, we face some kind of rhetorical situation. We have a purpose, a certain audience, a particular stance, a genre, and a medium to consider--and often as not a design. All are important elements that we need to think about carefully. (1)

This concept is usually covered in English 101, and you can review "Part 1" if you need to refresh your understanding. In what follows below, we're going to cover what are called the "three rhetorical appeals."
What is Rhetoric? Before we can understand the ways in which the rhetorical appeals work, we must first understand what rhetoric is.
Definition There are many commonly-used definitions, but for our purposes "rhetoric" refers to all of the following:

• The art of persuasion, and
• The study of the art of persuasion, and
• An individual act of persuasion.

In the work we'll do in our rhetorical analysis, there are 2 parties to be concerned with:

1. The rhetor: the party that is attempting to persuade, and
2. The audience: the party that is the target of persuasion.

We will consider ourselves to be a 3rd party: the observer. We're not being persuaded. We're not persuading. We're just observing the interaction between the rhetor and the audience.
Three Rhetorical Appeals

"Of the [modes of persuasion] provided through speech there are three species: for some are in the character of the speaker, and some are in disposing the listener in some way, and some in the argument itself, by showing or seeming to show something" --Aristotle, On Rhetoric, 1356b (trans. George A. Kennedy)

In other words, Aristotle argues that there are three elements to the art of persuasion:

• ethos: The rhetor is perceived by the audience as credible (or not).
• pathos: The rhetor attempts to persuade the audience by making them feel certain emotions.
• logos: The rhetor attempts to persuade the audience by the use of arguments that they will perceive as logical.

We call these three elements rhetorical appeals. It's not necessary for every act of persuasion to make use of all three appeals. Often, however, there is some element of each. In academic writing, ethos and logos are given more respect than pathos. An essay that relies primarily on pathos, with little use of ethos or logos, is unlikely to be perceived by an academic audience as persuasive. Below, each of these appeals is explained in more detail.

---

Seldom is any one statement an example of only one appeal.
"I have to tell you that if you don't stop smoking, you're going to die, " said the doctor to her patient.

This statement combines all three appeals: End quote

The full link is :http://georgehwilliams.pbworks.com/w/page/14266873/Ethos-Pathos-Logos-The-3-Rhetorical-Appeals

I also need to mention sublime writing which is intended to influence the audience into ecstasy and that is a trance state . Hubbard studied all this under Dean Wilbur and it is well documented he intended to use these methods . Hubbard stole many ideas and statements knowing what they had done to earlier audiences and then used them repackaged to influence his victims. He knew we mistakenly lower our guard mentally and are not skeptical or critical and independent when we are in certain states that can be encouraged by sublime writing . All the things he wrote in the art series on audiences and achieving an emotional impact and art not being able to be too original are from his study of sublime writing . They are all stolen ideas on influence . I would not be too shocked if they were all on the Dean's course . Here is Hubbard's letter to the Dean :http://education.lronhubbard.org/page16.htm

Okay , now for another element of influence : pacing and leading . In influence pacing is saying things that are easily agreeable - that means we can see them or both already believe them and leading is saying things you do not already believe . It is a method of influence Hubbard used extensively and in many works .

Paces are to get you to relax and let your guard down and build trust . You can accept things from some one if you can see they tell the truth and you can relax more as they keep telling the truth . It is human nature . They can add in other things and keep telling easily agreed on things and your guard may not spring back up if they do not jump too far too fast as your general attitude may stay accepting and not have you zero in on anything to doubt and examine closely . Studying rhetoric or critical thinking or skepticism or logical fallacies very deeply and integrating any or all of them in your routine thinking can to some degree counter this but I always caution against overconfidence on resisting influence .

Working in leads slowly gets you to gradually change beliefs , ideas and behavior when this works . Here is a video on this : Okay , now for another element of influence : pacing and leading . In influence pacing is saying things that are easily agreeable - that means we can see them or both already believe them and leading is saying things you do not already believe . It is a method of influence Hubbard used extensively and in many works .

Paces are to get you to relax and let your guard down and build trust . You can accept things from some one if you can see they tell the truth and you can relax more as they keep telling the truth . It is human nature . They can add in other things and keep telling easily agreed on things and your guard may not spring back up if they do not jump too far too fast as your general attitude may stay accepting and not have you zero in on anything to doubt and examine closely . Studying rhetoric or critical thinking or skepticism or logical fallacies very deeply and integrating any or all of them in your routine thinking can to some degree counter this but I always caution against overconfidence on resisting influence .

Working in leads slowly gets you to gradually change beliefs , ideas and behavior when this works . Here is a video on this : Mind Control How to Use Pacing and Leading by Dantaloin Jones on Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdEhctNh5tc

I need to include one of the most important ideas on how Hubbard tried to influence people , he used multiple methods constantly simultaneously . In some schools this is called stacking . You can use a fallacy to influence and an embedded command and repetition . He often combined from rhetoric ethos , pathos and logos in the same reference . And there is far more but I will first show building blocks and describe them before we get deep into that .Trust me if you get the basic ideas well they make the combined and more complex ones a breeze especially if you did a lot in Scientology .

I need to include one of the most important ideas on how Hubbard tried to influence people , he used multiple methods constantly simultaneously . In some schools this is called stacking . You can use a fallacy to influence and an embedded command and repetition . He often combined from rhetoric ethos , pathos and logos in the same reference . And there is far more but I will first show building blocks and describe them before we get deep into that .Trust me if you get the basic ideas well they make the combined and more complex ones a breeze especially if you did a lot in Scientology .

Next I will introduce a video by Dantalion Jones on Youtube : What is a Confusion Pattern ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dc_aQ1D1omA

This video covers some ideas on ways that people are confused and what that does to their minds . It has some similarity to my own ideas on confusion and I invite you to watch the video and compare Hubbard's methods for yourself . In particular it has an explanation of how related to cognitive dissonance theory a confusion from contradiction can cause discomfort and blankness and to escape this a person can be more suggestible for a short time . Hubbard in my opinion used this extensively in many forms and applications - from basic study tech and word clearing to auditing and ethics and even parts of admin . Hubbard used contradiction or paradox over and over to create wonder and awe- they helped him enthrall victims .

I suggest any who want to and do not already know about confusion as hypnotic study hypnosis on your own or check out some threads :http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?36369-INSIDIOUS-ENSLAVEMENT-STUDY-TECHNOLOGY

Next I recommend a video on something I think Hubbard used very effectively in almost every reference as a method of rhetoric .The video is Using Negative Emotions to Influence and Persuade . I see him as using them far more than the video details and he used fear , shame , blame and regret to control and break down and remake his victims . Margaret Singer studied and got a PhD on Chinese brainwashing and reportedly studied four thousand ex cultists . She has been quoted as saying Hubbard's OW "tech" used the same basic principles but is far more refined than the Chinese method . OWs are false - former ED Int for life Bill Franks in an interview stated Hubbard told him that but to tell people would cost him all his followers as 80% of the fraud relies on OWS and the "tech" to "handle" them . This covers far more than OWs but they are a big part of the fraud . They do not exist as Hubbard said at all . Evil acts and secrets do but he lied about them and should never be trusted or believed .


Next is gaslighting a method Hubbard put his own spin on and you can compare it to what happens in Scientology . It is often subtle in Scientology as Hubbard made claims in his doctrine that make agreeing with him to be seen as sane and not agreeing to be seen as not sane or correct . The truth rundown and other actions are more openly very similar to gaslighting . You may know others .  Gaslighting by Dantalion Jones YouTube video . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ul7lLUwnI6w

This has info on repetitive questioning - a fundamental in all Dianetics and Scientology and very subtle method of mind control .

A link to MY new blog Mockingbird's Nest : http://mbnest.blogspot.com/search?up...08:00&max-resu


A NEW page listing most of my posts and threads at ESMB
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthrea...390#post989390
David Miscavige is NOT a Scientologist BUT he is a MURDERER !

 Mockingbird's Greatest Hits
I have reached nearly two hundred posts online and thousands of comments as well. In looking back at all that I realized a very small number of posts have been consistently the most viewed and likely most helpful for people seeking to understand Scientology.

I certainly hope they are helping people. Here I will try to present the short list of the posts that best explain my ideas and can introduce you to information that I hope will help begin beneficial examination of Scientology.

1)Insidious Enslavement: Study Technology
http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/01/i...ology.html?m=0

2)Basic Introduction To Hypnosis in Scientology

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/01/b...is-in.html?m=0

3)Pissed It's Not Your Fault !!!

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/01/p...fault.html?m=0


4)The Secret Of Scientology Part 1 Control Via Contradiction

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/01/t...art-1.html?m=0

5)Burning Down Hell - How Commands Are Hidden, Varied And Repeated To Control You As Hypnotic Implants

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/02/m...-hell.html?m=0

6)Why Hubbard Never Claimed OT Feats And The Rock Bottom Basis Of Scientology

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/02/m...never.html?m=0

7)A Million Years In Hell

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/02/a...-hell.html?m=0

8-10)OT III And Beyond: Sources Plagiarized From Part 1, 2 and 3
Part 1
http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/03/o...rized.html?m=0

Part 2
http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/03/o...ed_14.html?m=0

Part 3
http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/03/o...ed_17.html?m=0

11)Propaganda By Reversal Of Meaning In Scientology

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/03/p...ng-in.html?m=0

12)Scientology's Parallel In Nature - Malignant Narcissism

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/05/s...ure_3.html?m=0

13)OT VIII Delusion Fulfilled

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/05/o...ed_30.html?m=0.

14)There Is No Irony In Scientology

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/08/t...ology.html?m=0

15 - 16)Why Lying And Murder Are Justified In Scientology part 1 and 2

Part 1
http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/10/w...ed-in.html?m=0

Part 2

http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/10/w...in_26.html?m=0.


17)Unraveling Scientology - A Missing Vital Ingredient


http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/11/u...vital.html?m=0.

18)Loving A Lie


http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/12/loving-lie.html?m=0.

19)Two Roads


http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/12/two-roads.html?m=0.

20)Orders Of Magnitude Part 1


http://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/11/o...art-1.html?m=0.

These twenty posts have been both popular and give a very good grounding in many of my ideas on Scientology.

Obviously series on particular issues like the Building The Prison Of The Mind series as an example address specific topics in depth. That serves to equal a book in length over several posts. That example takes on Leon Festinger's essential book A Theory Of Cognitive Dissonance and takes on Scientology in reference to that book. Another series as an example is Pulling Back The Curtain which took on the excellent social psychology text Age Of Propaganda and Scientology.

For fans of social psychology and cognitive dissonance theory I sincerely hope those series are helpful and do justice to the books I consulted. I really recommend those books for education on Scientology and cults.

But this top twenty is meant to give the most essential posts to know what I have to say and who I am. It has my past, detailed information on my observations and hypotheses regarding Scientology and what it is, attempts to dissect it and identify the methods Ron Hubbard used, and ideas on recovery from Scientology.

• Blog Archive by Topic