Subject: SHSBC 22
Date: 16 Mar 2000 01:05:53 -0000
From: Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (fzba)
Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net
Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology,alt.religion.scientology

DEALING WITH ATTACKS ON SCIENTOLOGY

A lecture given on 26 June 1961

Thank you.
You know, give her the applause. She's the one that's doing all the work.
It's very funny. It's very funny. She never takes over as D of P anyplace
but what they don't stack up pcs in all directions, you know. And all the
cases crack brrrrrrrrr and so forth.
We haven't told people out in the field their cases would be personally
supervised by Mary Sue in the running or we wouldn't be able to hold the
course. That's - that's the truth. I'm not... She's just depreciating now
because... She's running - I think the level she's running at the moment is
"Failed Depreciated."
What is this? Twenty-sixth of June 1900 and AD 11. Okay.
I want to say a word here at first about tactics and strategy with regard
to anti-Scientological activities. It might be of some benefit to you to
know this. After all, I've been fighting this war now for eleven years,
very often without very much help. Every once in a while Scientologists
tell me how reasonable it all is that somebody has a casus belli or
something of the sort. It isn't true.
Our people are trying their best and they're doing their best and I'm very
proud of them. If we had anything at all to hide, we long since would have
been blown out of the water with various salvos. All we had to do is have a
few Achilles' heels and we would have had it. Well, we don't have Achilles'
heels, so recently the Better Business Bureau of Washington, DC wrote a
letter, which is the most backwards letter anybody ever heard. Although
many government agencies have tried to get something on this organization,
none of them have ever been able to turn anything up and - can you imagine
somebody writing something like this, you see? And as for Lafayette R.
Hubbard who is a principal in this particular organization, well you can
look him up in Dun and Bradstreet. And they just dismissed the whole thing.
Well, they used to run an entirely different line of approach. They used to
say, "Oh, they shoot people and kill babies. And they've been well known to
throw people off top of St. Paul's Cathedral. That is their specialty."
Anything ridiculous or stupid. The British - that medical association, by
the way, has written letters to its doctors urging them to tell patients
how bad we were and so forth. We've not had whispering campaigns; we've had
loudspeaker campaigns going. But that type of backfire is inevitable.
I call your attention to an essay on the circulation of the blood by a
fellow by the name of Harvey, who was a graduate of the Royal Medical
College of Physicians. He was I think a physician to the Crown. I think he
was everything you could think of. And this man dared come up and say the
blood beat, not because of the tides of the body but got pumped through a
bunch of tubes. And he very carefully carried on a lot of experiments this
way. And promptly the whispering campaigns and so forth which rose up
around this were fantastic. It tore the whole medical profession to pieces
about 1620 or thereabouts. Tore them all to pieces. Ripped them up one side
and down the other. And one doctor was heard to say, "I would rather err
with Galen than be right with Harvey," which I - is the most marvelous, I
think, statement ever made in a controversy.
Let's go back a little earlier. A short time ago I was standing outside the
prison of Socrates on Pnyx, I think the name of the hill is, in Athens. And
it rather struck me as very peculiar that the story they have about
Socrates in Athens is quite different than the story which we hear about
Socrates in our own textbooks. And of course, there's always local
information about various things which has a sort of a verbal tradition
when they come on. And apparently Socrates said that those gods of stone
and marble and so forth didn't have much to do with the regulation of the
universe; that man was basically a spirit. And so they finally tried him
for heresy against the pagan religion of the day and had him drink the
hemlock. That's the local tradition about Socrates. It's not the story we
read in the Encyclopedia Americana, Britannica or anything, you see. But
everybody got upset because here was a new idea. But let me show you
something.
Today people feel a pulse. They don't look at the sun to measure the tides
of the body. They know very well there's body circulation. When somebody
gets his arm cut, they put a tourniquet on it. Got the idea? This is very
well accepted theory. Actually, it became a well accepted - don't think
these things take a long time-it became a well accepted theory by about
1628. There was hardly a ripple by 1632. In other words, this had become an
accepted idea, but in the first early years of its advance, there was an
enormous amount of upset.
Now, Socrates was henpecked and unfortunate in his choice of wives. And
being so, of course, the man was emotionally unstable to some degree, and
worrying all the time that he daren't be out talking in the club or the -
or the groves, you see, because he ought to be home and he shouldn't be
wandering around like this; he ought to be making a living like honest men
do and all this sort of thing.
But anyway, he decided to give it up. And he gave it up. And the charges of
heresy and so forth that followed with his relegation to the prison and all
that sort of thing. Well, it is interesting that about a quarter of the
people of Athens, that particular night that he was put in jail, were
standing there with tickets bought on the nearest ship to Crete, see.
People all over the place were trying desperately to get Socrates, who was
not under very close arrest - his guards were very, very happy to turn
their backs - they were trying to get him simply to walk down to the dock
and walk up a gangplank. And everybody thought that this was what he would
do and he didn't. He stood around and said, "Well, for the principle of the
thing, I ought to take this hemlock." He really made the government of
Athens guilty, because that sort of thing ordinarily, you see, didn't
happen. They'd condemn somebody to death, and then the fellow would walk
out the back gate and over the hills, and that would be it. It was actually
a charge of banishment or something of this sort.
But in his particular case, he had so many friends who would have paid his
passage, who were trying to pay his passage that night, who were trying to
get rid of his guards, who were trying to help him out, that they went into
a total dismay. What is wrong with this man? Well, as I say, you make wrong
marriages, and you're liable to get all sorts of repercussions and suicidal
impulses.
So this thing about Socrates hasn't anything to do with the price of fish
at all. Fact of the matter is that promptly and immediately everybody in
Athens practically was talking Socratian philosophy and have continued to
do so ever since. His critique stayed as one of the primary philosophic
modes right on up to the time when Kant overdid it.
And this - this is a new idea, however, in a society. Not necessarily
attended by fatality at all. You hear a great many martyrs, but every time
you find yourself a martyr, you find yourself somebody who is bound and
determined, you see. What happens is, well, on the whole track you may have
been a tyrant yourself at one time or another, you see. And this fellow
kept going out in the public square, you know, saying, "Regulus the Third
is a schnook and he eats herring. And he does this just to popularize it so
that the populace will eat it and he can collect the duty, you see. And
herring is actually very bad for you and will rot your teeth, you know,"
and so on.
And this fellow kept prowling around and telling people things like this,
and I dare say that for, oh, I don't know, for maybe months and months and
months, you'd keep getting ahold of somebody or sending some of your police
or something like that to go see him and say, "Look, son. Just lay off,
will you? You know, skip it." You'd probably offer him a free passage to
Gaul or almost anything you could think of, you know, and say, "Just go
away and get lost," and so on.
And eventually, why, he just kept saying, "Well, kill me then if you
believe this," and you had to. You got the idea? I mean, there's this idea
of being so stuck on the idea that you have to get stuck on the spears, you
see. But it's perfectly all right to be dedicated to a thing, but when one
consistently fails to advance an idea, he feels, then, that he must commit
suicide to fan - to further the idea. You got the idea?
In other words, it's a failure to advance the idea which brings about this
suicidal frame of mind. I imagine if anybody at all around Galilee had
bought the Nicene Creed, I'd imagine Pontius Pilate for - for a split
sesterce would have knocked that whole thing off, you know. But it was a
failed idea, and - he made it stick by proving it with suicide, right?
I've never been in a very suicidal frame of mind; must be something lacking
in my makeup or something of this sort. I believe first in making the idea
effective. I don't believe in the idea that you should fail with an idea,
you see? If you're carrying something forward, you're standing for
something, you shouldn't be ineffective about it. You should go forward and
carry out the idea.
The object is not to fail at the idea and then make everybody guilty
because they kill you. You got this? I'm not putting us in any category of
any religious or philosophic lineup. I'm just showing you that new ideas
are very often attended with tremendous success, although we are taught
carefully that people should martyr themselves for new ideas or sacrifice
themselves for new ideas. And that's to prevent new ideas, don't you think?
Would do so rather effectively, wouldn't it?
So if you got enough philosophy abroad whereby, that anybody comes up with
a new teaching or a new idea is then martyred - if you got that philosophy
abroad, of course, the old ideas are protected. And somebody sooner or
later - Socrates or somebody - will fall for it. You know, you'll say,
"Well, this is the thing to do," you know. "I seem to be failing in getting
this stuff across, so therefore I'd better commit suicide."
Harvey, on the other hand, lived to a ripe old age, revolutionized the
whole field of medicine. A few years later, why, his worst enemies were
patting him on the back saying, "Good boy, good boy. You remember when I
was right in there with you."
Now let's come up to more recent times. Of course, I'm talking about
magnitudinous ideas because it's something about which we all know
something about.
Let's take a fellow by the name of Albert Einstein. Of course, Einstein
should have done some of his thinking in a private notebook. He shouldn't
have been writing Franklin Delano that he could blow up Earth, which was in
effect what he did, and then years afterwards worked all he could possibly
do and then gathered up all the funds he could gather up to wipe out what
he had done with atomic fission. He organized organizations, societies;
they maintained offices every place. The man - old man worked himself into
a grave through having actually made a discreditable creation.
Nevertheless, the actual course of history of Albert Einstein is quite
interesting from our viewpoint. The man advanced a brand new theory of
mathematics called "relativity." There might even be some truth in
relativity. Who knows?
At one time a fellow by the name of something or other in the University of
George Washington was holding his job as the Chair of Mathematics, simply
because he was one of the twelve men in the world who understood the theory
of relativity. I went in to see him one day to interview him for the
college paper. I wanted him to tell me something about this theory of
relativity this fellow Einstein was kicking around with and so forth. And I
never had such sneers, contempt or was turned out on my ear quite so fast,
you see. I turned out one on our Mathematics Department instead.
"Mathematics: Has It Come to Stay?" I think was the name of the article.
You probably don't know the theory of relativity too well. You think you
have a talking acquaintance with it because everybody's dressed it up now
so that it fits with modern atomic physics. And you'll read textbooks and
pocketbooks off the bookstalls all about the theory of relativity and so
forth.
Actually, the theory of relativity is that c is a constant. You can't go
any faster than light. It brings up all kinds of wild surmises, such as if
a man went the speed of light he would then be the - as big as the
universe, you see, and that time would not exist if you were going at the
speed of light. I mean, it's a whole bunch of fantasies and fairy tales is
what this thing originally was, you see. Well, it had "MGs equal Jaguar
squares," or something like that as its primary modus operandi. And nobody
could, of course, prove this fellow wrong because this "c" that he keeps
throwing into all these equations, of quantum mechanics and so forth, is
not a constant.
The speed of light is not an exact constant, so therefore, all these
equations go a little bit wrong. So you never can quite prove it. It's very
interesting. When they developed the atomic bomb, they did not use
Einstein's theory. They put stuff in and out of a pile until they found
that there was something called "critical mass." And they thought "That's
very fascinating," and they took it from there. And every atomic bomb
you've got today was developed empirically. None of them were calculated.
But he led the way, and it was a new idea, and so forth; the old man was
sorry he did it.
But what is actually the history of the Einstein theory out in the public?
In 1928, a paper was read before the combined societies of mathematics in
Germany - and you can imagine how many people that was. The paper was the
wildest piece of slander and libel that anybody ever heard. And it
condemned the Einstein theory as the greatest mathematical hoax of all
time.
Einstein was in trouble with this theory for years. He was practically
hounded out of jobs in universities, and everybody was on his back, and he
finally went to Princeton and wrote Frankie, and we've got the atomic bomb.
That's the history of the Einstein theory. But look-it-there. In spite of
the fact that it was a discreditable creation, the old man died with his
boots on, and the - and the old retainers weeping around the bedside, you
know. Why, he was actually totally successful. There's no martyrdom
connected with this at all except he was sorry for having developed the
atomic bomb.
Now, what about many other creations of this character? Take Freudian
analysis, for instance. Old man Freud, he got thrown on his ear by the
medical association of his day. And they just gave him the yo heave, and
they wouldn't have anything to do with him, and they just raised the devil
down around Vienna and it just went on for years. And finally, about 1894,
why he made some startling statement and made a breakthrough of one
character. He announced his libido theory in 1894 and from that time
thereon, why, all was good roads and good weather. And look, the man would
- had practically nothing to go on. He practically had no results, he
practically had nothing but a dreamed up theory and so forth. It was
terrific, I mean, that he'd go so far.
But he did have a new idea. And that is that man's physical ills could be
assisted mentally. And that was a new idea. And that was the idea that
Freud put into the world. But the old man died with his boots on surrounded
by the old retainers who were weeping to see him go, you see. Sung the
world around and very successful. This man was a very successful man in
spite of the fact that just before he died, he wrote a paper called
"Psychoanalysis: Terminable and Interminable." And he had learned that some
people go on and on and on and on and on, and you can't seem to do much
about it.
The paper and this sort of thing is now a woof and warp of our existence,
and it isn't even true. Eighteen ninety-four, and he was totally over the
top by about 1933. That's very interesting, isn't it? There's an idea the
breadth of the world.
But don't think the idea in its early stages wasn't fought. Harvey's ideas
were fought. Galen, Socrates: any new idea gets fought. That's the nature
of man, is when he sees something new, it threatens change and man is a
great believer in no-change while he obsessively changes. While obsessively
alterising everything in view, he believes in no change. And of course,
that's why he obsesses everything of this character. That's why his
alter-is is so obsessive, is because his basic belief is on a zero.
All right. Now, I'm just talking to you about this, just looking coldly and
dispassionately. What's the chances of Scientology, of success? Well, we've
been told it takes a hundred years to get anything done. And we've been
told all sorts of discouraging tales, that it's martyrdom, that it's this,
that it's that, it's the other thing. Nah, we're over the top. We're over
the top. But we still get fought; and we're still in a period of being
fought.
And you can be fought with a velocity that you are right. Because then you
are terribly dangerous.
You think of the thousands of philosophies that must have come up since
1950. There must have been just libraries full of books written by people
all over the place detailing theories about life. Where are these books?
Where are they? They just don't exist. And right now the psychologist is
changing his own textbooks; and all sorts of weird things are happening in
the world. The medical profession now will tell you most glibly about
prenatals, and we've long since forgotten them.
But the point is, is we've made our incursion, but we threaten to upset far
more than somebody's belief in whether or not the god was of marble or
lightning, you see. We threaten to upset far more than that, if you're
looking at it in terms of upset. The only reason it's safe for us to do any
of this is because we can undo what we do. And Mr. Freud couldn't undo what
he did. And Mr. Einstein couldn't undo what he did. And Socrates couldn't
undo what he did. Let's take a look at this, you see.
And they're all kind of sorry for it. And they got into a suicidal frame of
mind. But we're in a very safe channel because we can undo what we did. Do
you know that you can take somebody that's been very thoroughly badly
audited and simply run the auditor off? And the auditing disappears. Why do
you suppose that I include and will continue to include in any Security
Check - there's two reasons - questions about overts against myself. This
seems an odd thing to do.
Actually, there's two things: One, if a person has a lot of overts against
me that he thinks is bad, he won't get any benefit from Scientology. That's
quite obvious. He's got overts against the source. That's the thing. And
you think basically that's the only reason that's there. No, there's
another much more subtle reason why you have to keep these overts off. The
only way you could acquire a forceful, overwhelming valence called
"Scientology" would be by piling up a bunch of overts and motivators on it.
Think of it for a minute. Isn't that the way, basically, you got into any
valence you're in? So this would be the first time that anyone was going
along the track saying, "All right. Here's what I say. Try it out. Run me
out." Don't you realize that? So there's no overwhelm mixed up in this.
In the early days, people who had been all mixed up with Taoism, and all
that sort of thing, they kept telling me that we needed tremendous
aesthetics. You know, we needed a swinging incense pot and all that sort of
thing. And these tremendous aesthetics which we were supposed to have
something to do with, of course palled on me in the very earliest stages,
because I've said you can always overwhelm a thetan with aesthetics and we
haven't the least desire to overwhelm a thetan.
So if you wonder why Central Organizations don't hire the Empire State
Building or we're not flat out to make a totally overwhelming ritual of it
all, don't you see, that's all part of the same picture. If it's true for
you, it's true. It's not true for you because we have overwhelmed you. Get
the tremendous difference there? This is the first time this has happened
to man so, of course, it appears very dangerous and very strange. They
could understand it if we were simply trying to overthrow the established
church, established science or established governments. Then they would
understand this and you'd probably find that we weren't being hard fought.
"Oh, well. Oh, yes. Oh, those people? Yeah, we understand them.
Revolutionary group. Revolutionary group. One of the things which they're
going to do is blow up Buckingham Palace and the White House. Yeah, that's
what they're going to do." That's right. And you'd probably find the cops
coming around and seeing you, being quite chummy - I'm not kidding - and
understand you.
But to understand somebody who was - basically has no evil motives... Every
man who has been overwhelmed by what he considered evil valences, asks
himself this question: "What's the pitch? What's the pitch? What's the
pitch?" He's just totally frantic. You know? "Well, you audit this fellow,
and he gets more intelligent and he gets more able and he's happier and he
- what's the pitch?" And, of course, with running Security Checks all the
time on pcs that come up the line, what's the pitch? Well, there his
question becomes totally unanswerable, because we're running ourselves out
as auditors, philosophers, teachers or anything else. Of course, if you
can't make a thetan commit tremendous numbers of overts against you or set
him up in a situation where he can commit tremendous overts against you,
and then remove any possibility of his ever running the overts, that's the
only way you can actually overwhelm him and get him so stamped down with a
valence that he can't thereafter wriggle. You see that?
So these former efforts were entrapments, and this is not an entrapment. It
is not even a total freedom. I've even told you occasionally total freedom
would be existence without barriers, and I think you would find everybody
very miserable.
All right. We're an incomprehensible factor. This is the first time,
actually, a high-powered, rather selfless philosophy has hit Earth which
didn't at once demand of its practitioner or in - the person who embraces
it, that he totally subjugate himself utterly and become enslaved by the
philosophy, don't you see; and which didn't say that the originator of the
philosophy must then be carried as an imperishable valence from there on to
the end of the track, and everybody should bow down to this, don't you see.
That alone is incomprehensible amongst the - the works of man. These are
different. These are different.
And these are the differences that man becomes alarmed at, because he's
certain that if there's this much and you neglect these obvious factors,
which he sort of senses you neglect, there must be some much deeper, much
more vicious motive mixed up in all of this, you see.
And they can become quite excited. And recently some chap out in California
took his finger off his pc and probably didn't flatten the process. The pc
went out and assaulted her husband on the street and had him arrested and
tried to have the auditor arrested, and signed a check over to him. The
police raided the building and took his E-Meters and tapes and made the
usual mule's south ends out of themselves (because I like horses), and went
ramming around madly, you see. Now look at the hysteria. Look at the
hysteria. They sent a telex to every police department in the state of
California about this terrible case which they had just uncovered. What
terrible case?
Well, with a good attorney on the job and this thing sorted out and
everybody keeping calm about the thing and not fighting it violently but
just putting up a consistent and continual effective pressure against that
particular attack angle, ... and it will not wind up in 30 days, I assure
you. Courts are not rigged that way. Nor will it wind up in 60 days, nor a
180 days. You will still be hearing about this in about three years. And
there is never any reason to rush anyplace and do anything about characters
like that. What you do is just put up a steady pressure in that particular
direction. Just take the effective actions and let it coast. Do not become
absorbed in it, because it is out of terror that the attack is born and
people who are in terror make mistakes. And all we do is just don't make
any mistakes and continue to put up an effective pressure against this
sphere.
And investigate loudly is one of the things we do. We have a regular modus
operandi and these people become more and more terrified because they now
begin to feel guilty of an overt act. I saw the president of a law
university who had me arrested one time as a witness in a bankruptcy.
You see, in the United States, if you're a witness in a bankruptcy in a
Federal Court, you can be arrested. Because you're liable not to witness,
you see. They even fingerprint you, you know. It's very degrading.
Witnesses in bankruptcies - that has to do with money. And after all, all
the money in a bankruptcy belongs to the attorneys and the judge. And you
can't - you can't go around - you can't go around being a witness lightly,
you see. And these fellows - the only way they could be coaxed and the
judge could be coaxed, and everybody could be coaxed, was to issue this
silly witness in a bankruptcy warrant. You see, that's totally meaningless,
you know.
You watch - you see an accident happen and in New York City the cops can
grab hold of you and put you in jail for three days. As a consequence,
accidents and murder happen in broad daylight in New York City and you just
ask anybody around you what was going on, and they look at you rather
searchingly and don't answer. And you say, "Is there anything that happened
on this corner?" And the fellow said, "No. I wasn't here" - his twenty
cigarette butts littered around his feet you know. He wasn't there. He just
arrived. You can't get anybody to interfere in New York City or witness
anything in New York City, just because of these silly witness rules.
Anyway, the president of a law school had been employed to obtain this
warrant and the Chief Federal United States Marshal - I think they have a
sort of a feeling like they're still western marshals or something. They go
around with big guns hanging on them and so forth. The only trouble is they
normally pick people off skid row to have these jobs, and it's rather
incongruous, you see. And this fellow, he was utterly mad-dogging because
he was sure that I had just beaten up two of his marshals.
Actually, I hadn't beaten up a marshal. I had taken the gun away from one
and told him how to use it and put it back in his holster, because I
thought he would get into trouble. I explained it to him. I said, "You'll
get in trouble waving that about and so forth; and this is the hammer, and
this is the trigger." And he handed it over to me, and I said, "These are
the butt plates, and there's the ammunition," and so forth, and slid the
cartridges out of the chamber and told him to put them in his pocket, and
put the gun back. Don't - nobody was picking on him, and it was all all
right, and he did it. You think I'm kidding you, but he did it.
People that walk up to you shaking and nerves with a drawn, cocked gun -
you don't - you don't monkey with that sort of thing. Teach him - teach
them how to use it! Anyway, this was pretty wild. This was years and years
and years ago. It was clear back in 52. Anyway, these guys began to realize
that, one, they were not dealing with a criminal, that somebody had told
them some lies.
And they gradually ran up little white flags, and they became more and more
apologetic and more and more apologetic. And in the course of about three
or four days, finally took me down to the court where I was supposed to
give my testimony, and I sat down, and I said, "Yes, I knew of this
company. Yes, my relationship with this company was so and so. No, I didn't
have any money from this company." And that was it. Oh, yes, and I said, "I
don't even have any money now." And that was it, and that was the end of my
testimony. The judge, however, he'd heard some rumors, you see, that two US
Federal marshals had been beaten up and so on. And he said, screaming (and
I won't blast the microphone), "But isn't there anything on which I can
hold this man? Isn't there anything?" You see, he had been told by
everybody that this fellow had a new idea and therefore ought to be shot,
you see.
And the Federal marshal and the president of the law university ran - they
did not walk - they ran up the aisle to the front of the judge's bench. And
they said, "No, no, your honor. This is a perfectly decent man. You've got
the whole idea all wrong." And they were just interrupting each other and,
"No, no, your honor. You don't want this man. He didn't have anything to do
with that. And you have been improperly informed and so forth, and this
whole thing is a mistake! And you must let him go right now. There's
nothing else you can hold him for, and there's no reason to hold him."
And they came back, and they said, "You know, you ought to do something
about it. You shouldn't let people say bad things about you like this
because this is a terrible mistake." And they escorted me out and took me
down to my airplane, by the way, in a gold-plated limousine (as near as
they could make it), you know, and shook my hand and so forth. Sure was
terrible what mistakes people could make, namely them.
So when they run that many overts, they get propitiative; and when people
are in terror, they make mistakes.
Now, let me tell you the denouement of the last attack on Scientology
through the law courts in Washington, DC. The witness in this particular
case would not state - would not state - that he had not been financed in
all of his attacks on Scientology by the APA (the American Psychiatric
Association) and the American Medical Association. This was the one
question he wouldn't answer. He would answer questions to the effect of,
yes, he had been in jail. Yes, he had been in insane asylums. Yes, he was
wanted for this or that crime in various states. Yes, he'd answer these
questions, but he wouldn't answer this one question. Was his whole attack
financed by the American Psychiatric Association and the American Medical
Association? That question he refused to answer.
Now of course, in a regular trial, he would have to answer that question.
But his witness deposition was simply being taken in open court. And he
could not be forced to answer all the questions, but when he was - finally,
when the whole thing came up for trial, he would have to answer those
questions. Now, he was attacking us. We weren't attacking him. He was suing
us for false arrest. He kept calling up the office and doing various things
around and about the place, having swindled the organization out of about
fifteen thousand dollars. I took my finger off my dollars for a second, and
there - the organization's dollars - and there it went. And then, because
he was arrested for pulling this, he was arrested in the wrong county or
something. There are several counties and nobody can quite tell which
county is which there at that corner of Maryland, so they arrested him in
the wrong side of some line. So therefore, he had this fantastic charge of
false arrest that he could bring about, don't you see.
Look, this kept going for nearly three years. Well, there were nerves
during all these three years. There were people investigating things and
calling things up and doing all kinds of things. For three years. There
were people -you were hiring attorneys and hiring detectives and listening
to reports and so forth for three years. The man's name, by the way, is
Ettleman. And the Ettleman case is very much in point. Three years this
goes on.
Every principal in the Washington organization was being sued for a minimum
of a hundred thousand dollars cash. Why, you say, that ought to make you
nervous, man. That's a lot of money. Three years. Marilyn and Sue and
myself, and anybody else connected with it. Everybody was sued for a
hundred thousand dollars cash.
As a matter of fact, the only one that got any satisfaction out of it was
Susie, and she, I think, knocked the attorney silly. He tried to attack me
in the lobby, and I knew better than to hit him. It was a great temptation,
you see. He was not very big. And they were serving a warrant, you know,
right in the middle of a congress, and it was a great temptation, and I was
gripping my hands rather tightly in my pockets so that I wouldn't succumb
to it. Because all he needed, you see, was an assault charge; then he would
have had it, you see. He would have had it made.
But evidently even he realized it was silly to bring a suit against a woman
for assault. Mary Sue wouldn't have anybody talking to me that way, and she
clobbered him. About three times. He sort of looked at her like, "You
shouldn't have done it," you know. Wrong attacker.
Well, anyhow, after all of this nonsense and cops and robbers and
everything else that you could think of, you see - three years worth of it;
considerable expenses in courts and all that sort of thing - finally it
comes up the great day for trial. The great day for trial has now arrived,
and Ettleman is there spitting as usual and being paid to say this and that
and the other thing and everything is all set and raring to go. And the
judge who should have dismissed it - he should have dismissed it two years
before, because they kept altering the bill on him. You see, they kept
altering the statement of charges - Ettelman's attorney did. And it was
very illegal, but he still didn't throw it out. Everything had gone wrong.
And we were all there - that is, I wasn't there, but the representative of
the organization was there. Marilyn, actually, was there and our attorneys
and all this raised and waiting on the fall of the gavel. And we look
everywhere in vain, but Ettelman's attorney has failed to turn up, and has
forgotten that it was this day that the trial was supposed to be held. Of
course, the judge dismissed the case and the attorney, Houston, couldn't
even get it reinstated again. After three years. If you wait them out long
enough, they sooner or later will make a mistake. That's all it amounts to.
If you just go on being effective.
Now, the only thing that can be done to a Scientology organization or a
Scientology personnel is to be worried to a point where he doesn't do his
job, either in an organization or an individual auditor.
Now, remember that. That's all that can happen to you. You can be worried
and harassed and upset to a point where you are made ineffective. And the
whole gain of the people who oppose new ideas is then, by making one or
more organizations or Scientologists temporarily ineffective. You got it?
All the time you spend on this, of course is lost time. And the more you
worry about it, is lost worrying.
Go ahead and be effective. But remember the only thing they will ever gain
in the long run... They have never yet thrown anybody in the clink, you
know. I mean, it's just all yipple-yapple. They never can. They never have
any evidence. It's just the amount of time you lose in worrying about it.
You understand? And the amount of dispatch time you absorb and the cost of
cables and attorneys. You got that? That's the whole loss. That's all that
ever happens. It is the lost time of a Scientologist, one or more, being
rendered ineffective for a period of time and being tied up and worried
because he's involved in some kind of a yickle-yackle. The way to fool them
is go on and be effective with regard to them and go on being effective as
a Scientologist. Go on being effective in an organization. Go on running
things effectively - keeping the show on the road, in other words - and
just don't fall for the only loss that you can be thrown for, which is to
lose your own time and forward pressure, you see, and a little money one
way or the other. That's the only thing you can lose.
Well now, if you go ahead and concentrate a thousand percent and put
everything on a high, high, high, high emergency priority basis, of course
all that is wasted motion and action. And the more you indulge in it and
the more you worry about it, the less Scientology you get done, so it's
only to that degree that the enemy wins.
They get a negative gain. They take one organization or one personnel or
one auditor or something, and they move him out of the lineup for a short
period of time, and maybe blunt a little bit of his enthusiasm because he
says the world is an evil place after all; and that is the sole thing they
can win. They can't win anything else. And of course, if they're going to
play a game like this - and we have no other choice than to play some of
this game. . . I always ask myself, by the way, "What game is this that is
being played?" Sort it out pretty well. Find out what game is being played
here; and then find out if it's our game. And believe me, ladies and
gentlemen, if it is not our game, there are no marbles of mine lying in the
ring, there are no cricket bats out there on the green that have my name on
them.
They can go ahead and box with their own shadows and climb mythical ropes
and do anything they want to do, but they're not playing a game with us. Do
you understand? But I will go ahead and do the effective things. In these
effective things you usually get very competent assistance and get it fast.
Force people to accept our assistance. That is to say, if somebody is being
attacked, don't let him avoid our help. The only time we lose or the only
time anybody loses is when they avoid our help. You know, they say, "Well,
really I probably ought - shouldn't have any help from HCO or something
like this, because it's all possibly very bad, and it'll all wind up bad."
And they do. They lose.
There have been one or two minor little cases of where they did lose badly.
Or they don't say anything that is at all bright. If it's totally outside
of our perimeter of control, something like a knucklehead one time down in
Phoenix keeps going in and saying, "I practice Dianetics; I don't practice
Scientology." He wasn't. He hadn't practiced Dianetics in his whole
lifetime. He didn't even know how to run an engram. The only thing he could
be cuffed around for or told not to practice was Dianetics. So he keeps
telling everybody that he practices Dianetics.
We keep telling him, "For God's sakes, shut your mouth. Tell people you
practice Scientology." No, no. He couldn't do that, so we couldn't help
that man. And there was a fellow out in Australia - a fellow out in
Australia around Perth and so forth, and he wouldn't even accept an
attorney, he wouldn't accept anything. All he got was a small fine. But he
just wouldn't accept a thing. And we even knew - we even knew-things about
the person who was bringing the charges and the doctor bringing the charges
and so forth, that were practically unprintable but very provable. And he
wouldn't let us enter any of these things - nothing like that - so we lost
in that particular sphere.
Now, how much time can be developed by one of these attacks? That is how
much time can be involved by one of these attacks? Plenty. Morale can be
shot. Various things can happen, and so forth. For instance, we've never
had a day's worry really about the government since I told the Food and
Drug Administration in Washington, DC to go fly a kite, if they knew how,
if they had intelligence to read a book about flying kites.
And the way I did it, is I read their law and I found out that if you
manufactured anything that came under their purview, then your whole
organization was under their authority, which is quite interesting. That
is, if we manufactured an E-Meter, they were in charge of all E-Meters,
because obviously an E-Meter is both food and drugs. That's the way the law
reads. That outfit passes psychiatric machines which kill people. Murders
them. I'm not lightly stating it now; it does. They have shorts in them.
They're ineffective electrical equipment. Completely aside from being a
shock machine; they are badly made. And the Food and Drug Administration
has a purview of those things, and they let them go on killing people, but
that's all right with the Food and Drug Administration.
But somebody has an E-Meter. They said the E-Meter was a diagnostic,
therapeutic instrument and it was used to cure people of things and the
small current that went through it titillated or agitated the brain and
made the brain cells well or something. I don't know what they had figured
out. So we just stopped selling E-Meters and we stopped selling these
Dianazene anti-radiation bombs because people kept asking for them. You
know the little pills.
And we just quit that and the Food and Drug Administration said, "You
shouldn't have done that." But I also caused him an enormous amount of work
and I imagine our name is an anathema to him. Because every time I turned
around I had him writing letters to senators and congressmen explaining why
he was attacking this church.
The poor man, the head of the Food and Drug Administration, with all of his
administration had to write additional letters all the time. We turned them
out on Robotypes ourselves. They all looked like personal letters. They
weren't. And then the senator would write him and say, "What is this?" and
then he'd have to write a long explanation. Part of his text was "You'll
remember, of course, L. Ron Hubbard because he's the one that's had so much
publicity in recent years." He always included this phrase in his letters
to the senators and congressmen. They, of course, would instantly forward
his letters to us. We just set it up on an administrative line. It just
went off one, two, three, four. We were worrying them to death.
And then all of a sudden when I found this clause in the law, that said
that they had no purview over you if you didn't manufacture anything out of
which they had any purview, see, but if you did manufacture, then they
could run your whole organization for you. So I just said, "Kick these
items out of our immediate sales bill," and that's why they're not there
anymore, and the Food and Drug Administration had to go away and get lost.
All right. And they did, because it wasn't our game.
So my cricket bat was no longer lying on the green. Don't you see? And
their poor, unemployed agents had to wander and go to movies in the
afternoon instead of in... But the only thing you can lose - the only thing
you can lose - is your time and your equanimity. That's all; that's all.
And if you rig it up so these things are not disturbed and you have gone on
being effective the whole time and' taking very effective steps to handle
this all and square this all around and realize fully that there's nothing
wastes as much time as the law...
You see, the law has overts against men's time. It puts them in jail. Overt
against time. Overt against time. So of course the law has slowed down to a
point of where to get a civil suit tried of having bought a package of
biscuits at the store which was moldy, and you're suing the store, that
will be heard in two or three years, you see. That's the way the law goes.
But - because it's overts against time, it goes this way.
All right. Now, don't worry for a minute about the future health of
Scientology. It is going through these exact periods that every new idea
goes through. It is actually being fought much less expertly than many
things have been fought in the past. There are tremendous things which
could be done, but I've begun to realize that nobody is going to do them.
So I never bother to provide against them anymore to amount to anything.
But there are some sleepers back on the track. If anybody tried to attack a
Scientology organization and pick it up and move it out of the perimeter or
go over the hills with it today - this happened to us once - why, they
would find themselves involved in the most confoundedly weird mass of legal
- well, it's just like quicksand. Quicksand. It's an interesting trick.
Every time they shoot at you on the right side of the horse, you're on the
left side of the horse; and then they prove conclusively you're on the left
side of the horse, you prove conclusively that you're on the right side of
the horse.
They go mad after a while. This is what the basic legal structure is.
Furthermore, Scientology is so fixed up these days that if any one
continent shut down, the enemy realizes much better than you do -because
it's happened - that any area so closed off, could be flooded from an
exterior source. You understand? So it doesn't do any good to close any
area of Scientology out in the whole world; and no agency exists which
could do so. You see how that would work?
They might close them all out in the United States or they might close them
all out in England. But their apathy comes about at once by the fact that
if they closed them out in the United States, they would be bombarded from
England. And if they closed them out in England, they'd be bombarded from
the United States. And in the United States, the difficulty is that if they
attacked in one state, they'd find you operating in another state, don't
you see? That isn't the same corporation that you're attacking, you see.
It's all very involved, but.
And this drives, by the way, the Better Business Bureau berserk. They know
what they want. They're mainly subsidized, by the way, by the American
Medical Association. They're always putting out tracts about quack
medicines and all this sort of thing. They blackmail you. And we never buy
blackmail, is another one of our defensive mechanisms. We never pay
blackmail. Drive us to the wall, shoot us down, but we won't pay blackmail.
That's it. And people realize this and it's very upsetting to them.
So the upshot of all this is, is there is an unpleasant side to the
business of dissemination and that is the backflash. And it's a very
interested backflash, but a very terrified one. It used to be a ridiculing
backflash. But now it isn't; there is fear in it. There is more than fear
in the United States in it. I had a fellow investigating Scientology for
the government. He was told to by the White House, so he didn't dare do
anything but actually investigate it. Finally he was looking more and more
whipped and more and more whipped and more and more whipped and he finally
picked out one profile showing a bottom to the top gain and he said, "If
just this one profile were ever published in the American Journal of
Psychology, it would upset the whole field. Do you realize that?"
And the other fellow says, "Yes, well, we don't really blame you for
keeping it all to yourself and keeping a monopoly on it." Yeah. Keeping it
all to ourselves. Just let anybody stand still long enough to listen and a
Scientologist will give him the works, you know. And yet psychology was
upset because we kept it all to ourselves.
No, at no time - at no time have we ever really faltered now since about
1953, we're - been going pretty good since 53. Up to that time, we had no
corporate control. People say what I did before 1953. Well, what I did
before 1953 was try to keep the show on the roads and fight them off
single-handed and after a while, why, we got enough people in line so that
it wasn't quite this tough; and that's really what happened. And now, on a
present time, our modus operandi is so well worked out that an attack in
one quarter of the United States brings about a certain series of actions
in an entirely different quarter in the United States. And suddenly, why,
the enemy is looking at all kinds of attorneys and looking at various
backflashes. And now an investigation has been started of the people who
were behind this attack on Scientology; and that investigation will go
forward and these people will be very discredited before we get through.
Don't think that this is an entheta operating atmosphere. It is not one.
I'm trying to tell you what we do to fight back; and what we do to keep
going. And that is to say, above all else, we keep on doing our jobs, and
we're effective in combating the attack. And if you just remember those two
factors, why, you've got it. Be effective in combating the attack. Don't
let it keep you from doing your job. That's the only thing the enemy can
win; and all else is of no consequence.
Frankly, not for years has anybody been hurt in one of these attacks. Not
for years and years and years. I first laid down the modus operandi of what
to do about it - various ones have been laid down - about 1955. And they
have been uniformly successful since that time. I haven't got any wood to
knock on particularly, but I do have a lot of faith on Scientology and
Scientologists. I've got a lot of that to knock on and that's good.
All right. Well, that's a long dissertation which you probably feel didn't
have too much to do with you. But it's something for you to look at and
realize that you would be as nothing. What you would be doing would not
even be important if nobody fought you, anywhere. If nobody disapproved of
what we were doing anywhere, do you realize it would be like reaching into
a soundless void?
Think of the thousands of philosophies that must have been developed in all
parts of Earth by two and half billion human beings in the past eleven
years. There must have been quite a few. There have been rivers of books
written, all of which had new, startling and strange ideas. None of these
are ever fought. Not one of them; and nobody's ever heard of them. But we
have the enemy - aberration, ignorance, enslavement - we have these things
on the run. And the hallmark of having them on the run is that somebody
gets excited about it.
Right now the American Medical Association - I don't know what their mood
would be today if you walked in - opened the front door, and walked in to
the receptionist, and said, "I'm a Scientologist." I'm sure you wouldn't be
unknown. They might try to pretend they didn't know you, but that's it.
Yes?
Male voice: A couple of years ago, Ron, a man who didn't want his
girlfriend processed, wrote a letter to the American Medical Association.
Got a letter back from their secretary saying, "These seem to be fine,
earnest people who are in a totally different field from the field of
medicine, so they give us no trouble and we give them none.
Oh, is that so?
Male voice: Right.
That's how far it's gone. I wish I had a copy of that letter.
We've just received the surrender papers of the Better Business Bureau.
Male voice: Good.
They're sort of written backwards, but they're nevertheless that.
But there's the point. As you move forward in life, and as you move forward
across the face of man's thought fields particularly; think of the
hospitals, think of the vested interests, think of the utterly wha -
billions of dollars and pounds that are undoubtedly invested in education
and all these different spheres - the facilities. Why, I think if you put
together all the electrodiathermy machines that won't cure anybody out here
in this ten-acre park, they'd probably make an awfully nice mess of a
mountain. When you think of all this vested interest, when you think of the
electronic organization, when you think of the drug people, when you think
of all these vested interests, think of what they'd lose. It's fantastic. I
think they're being gentlemen about it, myself I think they're - so on.
They eventually will turn over their sword and that will be the end of
that.
But if you weren't fought and if you didn't have backflashes and if you
didn't hear wild rumors of one character or another running around the
field, start worrying. Start worrying. Right then, start worrying because
you're not getting through. What do you think the highest level of approval
of the human race is right now? What would it be?
Male voice: Communicate.
Yeah. But when you don't hear any of it, know you aren't being heard. Okay?
Well, I didn't mean to give you such a lugubrious talk on this situation,
but it's been a bit on my mind, and I thought you might know something
about it; how we are alert to these things, and what we do concerning them,
and why you don't find me tearing myself wrong side out every time somebody
jumps up. But where you do find this, you do find us doing something
effective. We move in rather rapidly. Our communication lines are much more
rapid than the enemy's. Much more rapid. They're very fast.
The speed of HCO's communication lines is your best guarantee of defense,
and that's why you must keep the speed of HCO lines up. They must be rapid
and there mustn't be any comm lags on them. Whether there's anything
important going over them or not, keep them up.
Because this alone is very discouraging to people. Very upsetting. They
think we'll hear about it in a month or two and maybe do something about
it. When within something like hours after this incident happened, anybody
who - in authority in Scientology knew all about it within hours after the
thing occurred. And of course, they just started moving up various
artillery units and that sort of thing and lining up things one way or the
other. And you've got some isolated unit that was making an attack on a
Scientologist, and he's going to wonder what the hell cooks after a while.
Now of course, the backfire is going on the basis that in view of the fact
every police agency in California has been informed of this terrible case
and these terrible people, well, naturally they've made it inevitable that
we have to get them investigated thoroughly. And so that is happening. And
the next police report that I expect to come through on this line probably
won't be through for almost a year. But it'll be somewhat on the basis of
this: "You remember that case in Eureka?" "What case?" "Well, the case
about the Scientologists up in Eureka, you know? How they were drugging
everybody and so forth. Well, I think this case we're into right here in
Portland," (which will have something to do with nothing connected. with
us, you see) "I think it's similar to that. Yeah, I think it's just similar
to that Eureka case, you remember?" And they'll be using it as a model of
comparison of how to subvert an organization, you see. Only we won't be the
people they will be saying were bad, see. It'll be somebody else on this
thing.
Well, those are good things to know. I'm giving a talk about it because I
see that once in a while your judgment can be startled on something like
this. You hear some fantastic rumor of some kind or another. And you say,
"Well, there must be truth in it. Couldn't be, otherwise." No, the only
truth is, is we're making progress.
You never get rumors when we're being ineffective. If we're not getting
wins on cases, and HGCs and Academies aren't good and that sort of thing,
you know we never hear a thing about us. It's all of a sudden, though, we
go into a wild wing-ding of clearing them left and right and straightening
out organizations and so forth, and the enemies say, "Oh, my God, there
they go again," you see. And I use as a positive indicator of the strength
of a Central Organization whether or not it's got any backflash. Is anybody
yelling about it? Is anybody complaining about it? Is anybody screaming
about it? And if there is nobody, I say they must all be sitting there
doing nothing! They can't possibly be getting any results in the Academy.
They can't possibly be getting any results in the HGC. They can't possibly
be doing a blessed thing, because nobody's worried.
But you give me a big flood of letters coming in from someplace saying
"Those dogs down in Sydney are just doing the terriblest things and
everything is bad in Sydney, and Sydney is terribly bad. . ." Oh, I'll
forward it through for information. I'll even look into it a little bit.
But the basic thing that registers with me is somebody in Sydney is being
effective. That's the thing to remember on these things. And I received a
letter today asking me to return Ken quite rapidly so they could do
something about this; and I'm putting it in its proper perspective. It's
much more important that Ken finish off some effectiveness.
You see, by withdrawing him from a course, we immediately make ourselves
less effective. See, California would be less effective. You get how we'd
lose that way?
In addition to that, people have a grandiose notion that this is going to
take place, that something is going to happen. Nothing is going to happen.
It's going to go on for months and months and months. It'll leave somebody
sitting on the hot seat for months and months and months. Nineteen
sixty-two will come and go. Nineteen sixty-three will arrive; and still
nothing drastic will have happened. Okay?
That's the status of rumor. That's the status of combat with the society.
When there's nothing to lean on, there's nobody listening. If there's
nothing flashing back, there are no ears hearing you nor eyes seeing what
you are doing. So I don't care how much entheta you stir up. Just be
effective.
Thank you.
