L'ANTI - SCIENTOLOGIE antisectes.net

This is an explanation of possible reasons for which the orgs don not react the same way to similar situations

"Phil Scott" <philscott88@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message news: 391fe866.8723531@news.tdl.com...
> On Mon, 15 May 2000 11:36:30 GMT, catarina@pamnell.com (Catarina
> Pamnell) wrote:
> >On Sun, 14 May 2000 22:28:19 -0400, Beverly Rice <dbj1120@ao.net>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>It appears that Toronto org is the most covertly violent org,
> >>next to the Boston org.
> >>
> >>I wonder why that is?

Some of the reasons why could be:

A/Because in any org, you have some bulletins and policies which are "starrated*" by certain people, who have certain dictionaries and certain "usual references". These references are very often those having been supposed to give great "wins" or "cogs" to these terminals. [starrated* means a form of examination used in the scientology groups]

OSA/DSAs, Qual Secs, Cramm Officers and Ethics officers are the main terminals of an org having to deal with

a/ assigning crammings and
b/ getting these crammings starrated, drilled and so forth.

Now what happens is this: these terminals assign other students and staffs on some specific choosen policies/HCOBs, not the same ones from an org to another org.

Suppose that you've an ethics officer rather the sort of guy fanaticized by such policy as "The responsability of leaders" , leading to totalitarist viewpoints.

The students/staffs will be influenced in that direction. If the org had had the sort of rather gentle execs, the students would have had to study bulletins rather like ARC bulletins etc., instead of violent ones. Same for the drills choosen : some could choose the tone scale drills, insisting on
*higher tones*, while some other cold drill student on anger, fear or whatever *low tones*.

Therefore, when these staffs and students will go outside -or inside-, they'll have some sort of predetermined behaviour while facing outside people or new students,n dependinbg the org they were mostly formed.

This is far more evident in small orgs than in large ones, as small orgs have usually one or two main "terminals", far more competent than other staffs, and therefore, weighing much on the group's general behaviour. Exemple: my wife and me have rapidly lost any confidence in any sort of heavy ethics, like condition assignment, and become rather pushing toward the positive awards etc.

Therefore, our org was rather prone to discuss gently, to convince and use "tech" solutions rather than stupid nonsenses from heavy ethics. Result: we did not lose many staffs and had somewhat a satisfied public, with no PR problems, high stats, while the Paris org was doing all it could to get its public dissatisfied and blowing; its repute was terrible, and the fact that they had the OSA France inside added much to the terrible repute and low stats.

Observe also the various manias in an org: you'll see that almost every staff has some sort of jargon that is specific to that org. I remember Paris guys almost chanting such jargon circuits like "Oh c'est power, t'sais" or such ones. This is the same sort of **circuitry** as installed through specific policies used, specific HCOBs crammed, specific words "cleared", and specific definitions from specific dictionaries being much more used than others.

My opinion is that's why orgs like Toronto or Chicago or Boston are using much violence when others don't. People like the crazy Reverend asshole from Toronto have their part of responsability in this.

B/Another factor is the relative friendliness and confidence from Flag, OSA Int, toward the EOs COS, DSAs and LRH Comms from a specific org.

When you have a low confidence or understanding from the guys above toward the guys below, you'll have easily heavy ethics, strong orders, many adjustments of orders, making the local excutives more tensed, more "PTS" and terroized by upper echelons. So, that org - and scientology !- will tend to become rather frightful for everyone in that org.

If the execs of an org are mostly OTs above OT3 or so, the confidence from upper echelons will tend to be greater, as many upper echelons executive don't even know what is in OT levels, and could believe stupidly that an OT "knows better". Therefore, large errors will be ignored etc.

Back to english index


Retour index général

Retour index