This is hard to confront. Not for the wogs (non-Scientologists), but for dedicated Scientologists.
You could ask any Scientologist to explain their High Crime rules. In case you would really get any answer, you surely only hear justifications where the answers must comply with the facts. Don’t expect anyone to think freely.
Simply understand that admitting evil would imply admitting to be wrong … which is highly contra-survival.
You’d better admit correctness than ruining your future. Truth does end the past. You cannot spiritually advance by sticking to falsehood for the sake of being right.
If you are a Scientologist. Stop reading now.
You won’t be able to confront Hubbard’s words as they are. Look, don’t listen!
Let’s start with some citations today:
Blackmail of Scientologists or Scientology organizations threatened or accomplished-in which case the crime being used for blackmail purposes becomes fully outside the reach of Ethics and is absolved by the fact of blackmail unless repeated.
“of a Scientologist or Scientology”
Do you realise that it does not say blackmailing anyone is bad? Have you read the blackmailing stories against members and wogs?
Organizing a splinter group to use Scientology data or any part of it to distract people from standard Scientology.
This one is interesting. The cult alters technology on a daily basis. The freezone accuses the cult of doing so. At the same time the freezone commits high crimes according to Hubbard.
Demanding the return of any or all donations made for standard training or processing actually received or received in part and still available but undelivered only because of departure of the person demanding (the donations must be refunded but this policy applies).
Meaning, they will never repay anything no matter what other policies are telling.
Continued adherence to a person or group pronounced a suppressive person or group by HCO.
If you fall from grace and the cult declares you SP, your family has to disconnect. And all your false Scientologist friends will also disconnect from you.
Failure to handle or disavow and disconnect from a person demonstrably guilty of suppressive acts.
Phew, this makes it even more clear.
Seeking to splinter off an area of Scientology and deny it properly constituted authority far personal profit, personal power or “to save the organization from the higher officers of Scientology. “
Higher officers are always right. You are wrong. And the Sea Org does not officially exist, the same way that David Miscavige is not involved in anything.
Severe breach of ecclesiastical and/or fiduciary duty as an executive or corporate official of any Scientology or Dianetics organization which has resulted in severe harm, loss or disrepute for Scientology or the organization.
You mean David Miscavige’s beatings are not ok?
8. Boasting as to speed of delivery in a session, such as “I put in Grade 0 in three minutes. ” Etc.
We all know this from various presentations: Flag is faster.
Informing fellow staff members and others that one is leaving staff. Where a person is secretly planning to leave and making private preparations to do so without informing the proper terminals in an organization and does leave (blow) and does not return within a reasonable length of time, an automatic declare is to be issued. Should any monies or organizational property be found to be missing in consequence, action is to be taken on criminal charges.
Deep in your heart, don’t you think this is crazy?
Spreading false tales to invalidate Clears or spreading libelous and slanderous statements about the alleged behavior of Clears.
Nice defence. First of all David Miscavige degraded Clears multiple times. Besides this many Clears cannot show that they are clear, because there is no such as a state of Clear. I have not met a single one, just a lot of weird people. Not a single promise in Dianetics was dealt with. Super recollection, no glasses needed, emotional stability etc.
It is a high crime to publicly depart Scientology.
You mean like a football star leaving his club?
1. A person may be summoned to a Court of Ethics or Executive Court of Ethics if it be found that he has gone past a word he does not understand when receiving, hearing or reading an order, HCOB, policy letter or tape, any and all LRH written or printed materials including books, PABs, despatches, telexes and mimeo issues which resulted in a failure to do duties of his post, without his at once making an effective effort to clear the words on himself, whether he knew he was missing them or not, as the source of his inaction or damaging actions.
Very interesting, but what if it cannot be understood, because there were so-called SPs altering the policies and bulletins. David Miscavige, how to solve this one? You pretended to know since years that the scriptures were suppressive.
The charge is neglecting to clarify words not understood.
OMG! Go to jail?
4. An auditor failing to clear each and every word of every command or list used may be summoned before a Court of Ethics.
Oh, yes. The poor guy, who spent all his time and money. This guy had good intentions. And now – within seconds – he commits a “HIGH CRIME”. Not just a mistake – it is a crime!
Any executive issuing an order that certain HCO Pls or HCOBs are not to be followed, where this is proven beyond reasonable doubt, shall be considered as having committed a high crime, and this can carry the assignment of the condition of Treason for both the person issuing the order and the person who receives and executes it.
This, KSW1 and the Fair Game doctrine are a dangerous mixture. Use it against Scientologists in court. You cannot lose the case!
Any auditor seeing a rock slam on a preclear and failing to mark it down and report it is guilty of a high crime, as this injures society, the organization and the person himself.
Unless it was a Mark V e-meter or Hubbard holding the cans. Who does not know the story of poor Otto Roos?
If red tags, per the Examiner’s 24-hour rule, continue unhandled by Tech or Qual, the matter becomes a high crime.
This is a pretty cool way to charge you more, even though you ran out of money. I know red tags very well. I had lots of them. They frequently came when I had money on my account, but the auditing action is not long enough.
1. Abbreviating an official course in standard Scientology administrative policy so as to lose the full theory, administrative procedures and effectiveness of the subject.
Well, what has happened to the Student Hat course? Nothing is in its original form. Still no cognitive dissonance?
Forcing auditing on a pc when he is refusing or protesting it, rather than finding out why the pc doesn’t want the auditing and straightening it out is using auditing suppressively. Any C/S or auditor guilty of this must be handled with group justice proceedings which would include a Comm Ev and could include a penalty of being declared suppressive and expelled from the Church.
This contradicts the “red tag” theory. Eh? You always lose.
To be continued ….