Section 9 of Part 5 – Some Things I Have to Say About All This
You say COB is an SP but what about the fact that he made all the books and lectures available? An SP would never allow the tech to be disseminated like that.
First of all I do say that I do think COB is an SP but that is just my opinion and really it is unnecessary to even try to determine whether he is or not. The real issue is whether or not he should be the leader of the church and the evidence is in the stats and I mean the real stats that I have gone over earlier. He is not fit to lead. His stats utterly suck and he is driving the church into the ground.
Regarding the releases of the books and lectures, well, it is a good thing that they are all available, especially with the clearness of the spoken voice of LRH on audio and I think that the glossaries with the newer materials are excellent. I also like the concept of having all of them in their proper sequence and categories as an aid to the understanding of the development of the subject.
I didn’t find most of the books particularly easier to understand than the older versions but I do like how they are printed and again I really think the glossaries are excellent.
It seemed like a heroic action by COB to get these materials out. Another viewpoint has been given to me by a former exec at Int Management. Again, you can disagree if you want to but the reason I trust his word over what was PR’d to me by COB is all the evidence that I’ve laid out before you that he and the church management deal in trying to make themselves look good without the actual evidence and stats to prove it.
And even if, after you read what this former Int exec has to say about it, you still think COB’s action in getting the books and lectures re-released was heroic, I don’t think it’s a good idea to use that to make it okay to refuse to look at all the other outnesses that are occurring.
So here is what this former exec had to say:
A PR line that COB uses is that there was “lost” tech now “recovered”. However, none of these lectures were lost, they were there and could have been released at any time in the previous thirty years. In fact, some of them had been released under different names (for example, “Perception of Truth”, “The Power of Simplicity” etc.) It was just that it wasn’t COB’s priority to release them until his proclaimed Golden Age of Knowledge. He was waiting for the right time to market them. Any lectures that had never been released up until the time of the Golden Age of Knowledge could have been released at any time. So he actually was withholding some of the tech for many years. The release of them in 2005, 2007, 2009, etc was a PR spin to make it look like he heroically recovered all this “previously lost tech”.
But much of this material could have been released for 30 years and was not.
But now also, look at the current audio technology that exists: CDs are still available in the audio industry but now we have iTunes, iPods, Kindles, etc. Why haven’t LRH’s books and lectures been released on those? It would be way cheaper and hardly take up any space, as opposed to the $3000 for the basics lectures and something like $6000 for the ACC’s which fill up a whole room at many times the cost of what it would cost to get lectures on an iPod.
This former Int exec also said that with the church owning their own facilities for making the CDs, each CD costs about $0.12 to make, but each CD costs about $7.50 to buy.
So what was the actual intention, to get LRH’s works put out and disseminated to as many people as possible or was it to make a lot of money?
Judging from the methods of getting these materials sold and delivered;
- public getting phone calls as many as fifty times a day
- staff having insane quotas where they are not allowed to go to sleep at night until they are made
- staff getting so desperate that they feel they have to resort to illegally debiting people’s accounts without the person’s permission
- Ethics Officers getting their quotas met by having people buy multiple sets of books and lectures (that they only need one copy of) to “buy” their way up the conditions
- public are not given breaks on the cost of Basics packages for library donations (why the need to make a profit?)
I would say the big emphasis is on making a lot of money.
If the purpose were to get as much of LRH’s works made available to as many people as possible, much less expensive and more modern modes of accessing them would be being used. You still can’t get LRH lectures on an iPod or similar medium and you can’t get the books on a Kindle to my knowledge. They would be more affordable if they were available on the more modern mediums.
But even worse than that is this (and this is me again, I’m no longer giving you that other person’s viewpoint):
There is a part of the PDC lectures that is missing! In other words, there were words spoken by LRH that came up on the earlier versions of the PDCs that are not now on the current version of those lectures.
The following is the transcription from the part of one of the lectures where data has been omitted in the current version. I am giving it here in the words of the earlier version and the part in bold face is the part that is omitted from the current version:
“You’ll find almost any preclear can be given Creative Processing. And you could get a hold of him and flip the PDH out. That’s interesting, isn’t it? In other words you can take them out as fast as they lay them down.
“Therefore, we really do have the remedy before the assault weapon is produced. Did you ever read poor old George Orwell’s 1984? Yes, yes, that’s wonderful. That would be – could be the palest imagined shadow of what a world would be like under the rule of the secret use of Scientology with no remedy in existence.
“It’s a very simple remedy. And that’s just make sure that the remedy is passed along. That’s all. Don’t hoard it and don’t hold it; and if you ever do use any Black Dianetics, use it on the guy who pulled Scientology out of sight and made it so it wasn’t available. Because he’s the boy who would be electing himself ‘The New Order’. And we don’t need any more new orders. All those orders, as far as I’m concerned, have been filled.” – LRH – Lecture 6 Dec 1952 Formative State of Scientology, Definition of Logic
Now, I ask you: what business does ANYBODY have removing those words from a lecture, no matter who that person is? Why are we subject to someone’s opinion as to what words should be kept in a lecture and which ones should be removed, by someone other than the author of that lecture?
Give me one good reason why David Miscavige or anyone else would have the authority to remove those words from a lecture.
In my opinion, based in no small part on these particular words that were removed, COB has yet another ulterior motive for removing those words. He is the kind of person LRH is talking about with those words.
What other alterations has COB made or ordered to be made from the works of LRH? Now I can’t read or listen to the current materials without wondering whether or not all the correct information is there.
Just another big piece of evidence laying bare the actions of David Miscavige the squirrel. So much for David Miscavige, the “savior of Scientology.”