Scientology - Through the Door

Interviews

Thursday, 29th December, 2005 01:30:40am

Name or Alias: minireel
Training and/or processing level: OT V/Class 4 and NED
Org or location: Pac area Orgs
Time involved in the Church of Scientology: Since 1970
Recommended Website - robert dam.com
1. How did you first become acquainted with the Church of Scientology?
An acquaintance at a party recommended an intro lecture. I had been seeking answers to life and the intro lecture 'blew my mind' and really connected with me. It was given by Seton Thomas who was really a great guy and outstanding lecturer.

2. What initially appealed to you about scientology?
Having dabbled in Buddhism and having enjoyed gains meditating, I was looking for a 'Western' approach to obtaining spiritual gains. The concept of a graduated bridge of spiritual gains plus the possiblity of being able to give gains to others seemed incredible to me. Also, many people and organizations which I was running into in life seemed shallow and phony to me, whereas, a high percentage of people I met at the Orgs seemed genuine,and really wanted to help people.

3. Were there problems in your life that you thought scientology would address?
I was shy and had trouble finding and keeping a stable girlfriend. Also, I was not getting along with a small cliche of fellow employees at my work and I wanted to find out how to handle them. The first course, HAS, quickly handled these areas for me. I used TR 2 extensively and found that if I asked people about themselves and just listened and acknowledged them they would go on and on talking about themselves and would tell me many intimate details of their lives. I applied this at work and suddenly became popular. It became easy to meet girls and be successfull with them, etc..

4. Did you see, experience, or hear about things that didn't seem right while you were in the Church of Scientology? What were they, and what convinced you to set aside your feelings?
At first, as a public person, I noticed a few things I did not like such as the Org's buildings being shabby, the bathrooms being filthy,etc. plus most of the parishoners being either hippy or ex hippy types while I was well groomed and wore a coat and tie working in computers and aerospace. Also, the staff was usually not up to 'WOG' world standards as regards making sure appointments were kept, phone calls were returned, etc. When I joined staff, I really began to see some outpoints such as staff not being properly fed if the week's income was low and only receiving 1/2 pay or even no pay if income was low. I saw a 6 bedroom, 2 bath home being used to house over 60 staff members so that many staff were sleeping on a cot on the floor and were going days and days on end with no showers. Once in a while a staff member would be mistreated by being upbraided or severly yelled at when, in my opinion, they were not the responsible party for the upset which had occurred.

5. Why did you choose to stay in the Church of Scientology?
When weighing the plusses against the minuses, it was about 90% to 10% for the good versus the bad in my early days from 1970 to 1973. It was made mandatory for all staff to study the Ethics policies and there was a concerted effort to have Ethics fairly applied. From 1970 to 72 I experienced standard Ethics fairly applied. In 1973 came the first serious abuses, two in number, where I was attacked unfairly and did not receive justice but by this time, Scientology was my entire life, I was making incredible gains in my personality and my spiritual awaremeness, almost all my friend were Scientologiests and I wanted very much to stay. I worked under Yvonne Jentzch who was a remarkable woman - she had the most charisma of any person I have ever met and she took a personal interest in every person in the Org, Staff or Public, and she would really try hard to see that things were made right for you if you were wronged. I believed 100% in the technologies.

6. Were you staff or public? If staff, was it at a mission or an org? Were you ever in the Sea Org or OSA? Which unit? If not on staff, did you ever volunteer to 'help out'?
I was public the first 1 1/2 years then Sea Org for two years then public again. I was Sea Org at two Orgs, mostly at Celebrity Centre in Los Angeles.

7. Why did you leave the Church of Scientology? Was there a "final straw"?
I began easing out about 5 years ago due to some seriouse medical conditions. I began to develop a 'bad taste in my mouth' in 1999 arising from some services not being delivered to me which were promised. Also, my wife and I wanted our two children to become Scientologists and to do the Student Hat Course before they did their high school classes and went on to college, and despite the fact that we paid for the courses and purchased an E Meter for them and drove the kids to the Org on a daily basis, these services were never delivered. Instead, both kids were heavily pressured to join Staff on a continuous basis, even though one of them was only age 14. The older child actually did join Staff and was doing well and yet he was quickly recruited for the Sea Org. Something happened while he was doing his basic training and he wanted to route out after completing it. Since then, he has quit Scientology and does not want anything to do with it and the younger child does not want anything to do with it either. My wife and I made a tremendous effort to get them into the Org and to have them be Scientologists. We really wanted them to do the Student Hat at a young age and felt that it would be of great use to them in their studies and future careers. The fact that my kids were not handled properly, never got their Student Hat Courses and now want nothing to do with Scientology was a huge loss for me.

In a nutshell, I think the Church of Scientology, as it is currently constituted, puts too much emphasis on going for high statistics and for focusing on obtaining money. Whether or not the parishoners achieve any personal gains or achieve their goals as spiritual beings is totally incidental. In fact, in some recent Org mailings and promo pieces, going for personal gains considered valuable by the society at large, such as saving a marriange or booming a business or having fun in life are being knocked as irresponsible and the case is made that one must either join staff or donate all his time and effort to the Church. Force is used to drive home this point of view. I get the feeling that most staff, with a few notable exceptions, don't really care if their publics win. Of course, they have to pay lip service to such wins since they realize that if these wins do not occur, their stats and income will go down but really wanting the public to win and achieve personal goals does not really seem to be part of the what the Orgs are about anymore. If I took my child to the Org to study and went to the vending machine to get a cup of coffee, I would immediately be approached by someone at the coffee machine to have a survey done on me or to donate money, usually large sums, for the IAS, the Building fund or one of the many groups for which the Church is seeking donations. When I would come back to pick my child up from class, they would usually be in a room talking to a recruiter for either the Org or the Sea Org. My wife objected to the recruiters, themselves only 18 or 19 years old, stating that our daughter was there to be on course and, at 14, was to young to be recruited. The recruiters would accuse my wife of a suppressive act and threaten to report her if she interfered with the recruitment cycle. We would write reports up and were actually able to lessen the amount of recruitment occuring. I just did not feel safe setting foot on Org property after a while.


8. Do you think the Church of Scientology needs to change some of its practices? If so, what should be changed? How did those practices affect your life?
Yes, they need to change. I think that if a guy wants to come in and improve his ability to succeed at work, do better with his Second Dynamic and achieve greater spiritual awareness and gain some OT abilities, the Org should say, 'Fine, we can help you with that. Let's get started.' If this was their primary goal and they really helped the guy achieve these goals, he would want to contribute to the Orgs in return. In the HCOB 'The Ideal Org' LRH listed the attributes of an ideal Org and if one was in such a place, he would recognized that he was in an island of sanity and that this was THE place where a new techology was forming a better civilization on Earth. More and more people would go into agreement with this reality and Scientology would grow as it did when LRH was running the show. I think the Org must help the parishoner achieve his goals first and as the parishoner expands as a being he will WANT to pitch in and give his all to the Orgs. Trying to enforce the parishoner giving up his children, his money, his toil, etc. when he is not ready to do so leads to a lot of defections from the ranks. This is a proven fact. In my opinion, they are putting the cart before the horse.

Another thing that really bothers me is all the suppressive declares on a lot of the oldtimers who worked closely with LRH and were extremely vital and active in the 50's, 60's and 70's in establishing Scientology. I can not buy the line that so and so worked closely with LRH in some senior level post for 7 years helping to develop the tech and then turned out to be a Suppressive Person. First of all, I knew some of these people or attended events where they spoke and there is no way that they are all suppressives. Second, if someone worked closely with LRH for years in an extremely high level position and he was a suppressive person who went undetected by LRH, it makes LRH look like a fool or an easy mark. How could such an extremely OT being as LRH, who wrote all the tone scale, obnosis and PTS/SP Tech not be able to quickly spot an SP working in his immediate area. This is so implausable as to be a joke. If it were true, it would invalidate LRH as a Manager and as an OT and cast doubt upon all of his technology. I believe that many fine former Scientologists have been declared suppressive and have been off loaded from the Church and that this has hurt the Church.


9. If the items you listed in the previous question were changed, would you consider rejoining or staying in the Church of Scientology? If so, why?
I owe more to L. Ron Hubbard and the Churches of Scientology than I could ever repay, financially or otherwise. As I look back at myself, prior to joining the Church in 1970, I was a nice guy, fairly well educated and with a good, well paying, white collar job but I was lost. I did not have the tools or knowledge to live in this world. I would have upsets with people not being truthful and these were sticking to me and accumulating on me. Scientology gave me stable and powerful tools to use in dealing with life and with helping others. Therefore, if the items listed in #9 were changed back to how they used to be, when I first joined and earlier than that, I would become as active again as my health would allow.

10. Any additional comments you would like to make?
I only began reading about Scientology on the Internet about 4 months ago. In Celebrity Centre's 30 year Anniversary and again in its 35 year anniversary issue, the name Yvonne Jentzsch or Yvonne Gilham is not mentioned. This is a huge ouptpoint because she virtually single handedly started Celebrity Centre out of a filing cabinet in AOLA in 1969. I heard a tape by LRH in 1972 where he tells about a briefing he gave to some senior staff at Flag, including Yvonne, where he laid out the need for a CC and what it should consist of and that Yvonne just 'ran with the ball' and created CCLA in 1969 out of a filing cabinet and by 1970 it was a large Class 4 Org with over 100 staff. I wanted to find out on the internet if Yvonne had been declared or why she was not mentioned in the CC anniversary magazines.
That innocent interest in why she is not mentioned led me to the entire internet scenario on Scientology which I have spent a lot of time studying.


Entry: 110
Total Entries: 326
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] [72] [73] [74] [75] [76] [77] [78] [79] [80] [81] [82] [83] [84] [85] [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] [98] [99] [100] [101] [102] [103] [104] [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] 110 [111] [112] [113] [114] [115] [116] [117] [118] [119] [120] [121] [122] [123] [124] [125] [126] [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] [138] [139] [140] [141] [142] [143] [144] [145] [146] [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] [152] [153] [154] [155] [156] [157] [158] [159] [160] [161] [162] [163] [164] [165] [166] [167] [168] [169] [170] [171] [172] [173] [174] [175] [176] [177] [178] [179] [180] [181] [182] [183] [184] [185] [186] [187] [188] [189] [190] [191] [192] [193] [194] [195] [196] [197] [198] [199] [200] [201] [202] [203] [204] [205] [206] [207] [208] [209] [210] [211] [212] [213] [214] [215] [216] [217] [218] [219] [220] [221] [222] [223] [224] [225] [226] [227] [228] [229] [230] [231] [232] [233] [234] [235] [236] [237] [238] [239] [240] [241] [242] [243] [244] [245] [246] [247] [248] [249] [250] [251] [252] [253] [254] [255] [256] [257] [258] [259] [260] [261] [262] [263] [264] [265] [266] [267] [268] [269] [270] [271] [272] [273] [274] [275] [276] [277] [278] [279] [280] [281] [282] [283] [284] [285] [286] [287] [288] [289] [290] [291] [292] [293] [294] [295] [296] [297] [298] [299] [300] [301] [302] [303] [304] [305] [306] [307] [308] [309] [310] [311] [312] [313] [314] [315] [316] [317] [318] [319] [320] [321] [322] [323] [324] [325] [326]

Home
Be interviewed
Privacy Policy, Disclaimer, and Thanks