This week we went live and answered questions about human behavior, where does Miscavige actually live, a breakdown on the reactive mind and a lot more. Enjoy!

This week, it’s answers about what to with the files of Scientology, thetanic possession (yes, that’s spelled right), a breakdown of some Scientology books and a lot more. Enjoy!

(1) Suppose that the Church of Scientology ceased to exist. What do you think should be done with all the PC folders and other files of the Church?  The Church’s internal files contain deeply personal information, as well as embarrassing and unreliable speculation.  Unlike patient files or police reports, we don’t really have laws or bureaucracies to deal with the expensive storage and access to “religious” records from a corporation that has lost all of its customers, employees, and assets. 

(2) I was wondering if it would be possible for a thetan to invade, or try to invade, the physical body of another thetan. Of course it’s all silliness-ness in the livingness of beingness, but would Scientologists think of that as possession (if they believe in that at all)?

(3) Hi again Chris, thanks again for answering my last question about Dianetics 55! I thought you made these up for comedic effect but there’s actually real Scientology books called;

Scientology 0-8: The book of the basics

Scientology: 8-80: The Discovery & Increase of life energy in the genus homo sapiens

Scientology: 8-8008: (no sub-title, official description:) “The complete description of the behavior and potentials of a thetan”.

What on God’s green earth could these possibly mean?!

(4) I’d like to get your tips for effectively studying and understanding something that is difficult/challenging.  How do you go about it? What do you do when you can’t quite grasp what you’re reading? Do you just move on accepting you won’t understand everything or do you not move on until you completely understand that part. What did you learn, what were your experiences from your Masters about learning something?

(5) I was watching a video about Scientology’s super-secret underground bunkers. Aaron was wondering since they are meant to survive a nuclear apocalypse how would anyone be able to enter the bunker. You’ve mentioned that the symbols that are outside are meant to be seen from the sky. So is it meant to be seen by people with technology that can fly over it or an ethereal OT that could just pass through a wall or armored door?

(6) I understand reasonably how a religious arbitration court works in the US. But as a Swede, the whole thing appears as a bad and incomprehensible comedy. In any case, I would like to have it clarified which crimes end up in the religious arbitration court and which crimes end up in the prosecutor’s office? To clarify, what Valeska Paris is suing Scientology for is a serious and heinous crime, so if the courts can’t take the case based on a contract she signed not to sue the church, then I wonder how it works if any of the Sea Org members were, for example, physically abused by COB David Miscavage. Can they report it to the police so a prosecutor can charge Miscavage with assault in a court of law? Or does the religious arbitration apply to this example as well?

This week we went live to answer questions and had a ton of them, from the different types of Scientology auditing to what is a “bring back to life assist” to the big money whales supporting Scientology to a lot more. Enjoy!

This week, I discuss remembering Xenu in Scientology auditing, give a rundown on why History of Man is important, what Dianetics 55! signifies and lot more. Enjoy!

(1) When people are being audited, do any remember back to the Xenu days?  I would think as the Xenu story is (more or less) public knowledge, someone would claim to have known him in a past life.

(2) Do you have any idea why the book Scientology: A History of Man is part of The Basics of Scientology? It seems like an odd one out. 

(3) I can’t for the life of me get a normal, non-Scientology answer to this; I keep seeing this book in association with Scientology: Fundamentals of Thought and DMSMH. What the hell really is “Dianetics 55!”?

(4) I recently heard your podcast with Steve Cannane and was very fond of it. However, from a European and German perspective I would like to argue a bit against the universal freedom of speech chant you both so happily agreed upon (after discarding the Australian bans on Co$). Freedom of speech surely is a powerful and necessary concept and it has its merits. But it is not as simple as it seems.

Nobody has total freedom of speech as there always are restrictions. Public libel and slander are illegal everywhere and cannot be justified by arguing freedom of speech. Stakes may be high to prove it, but Anglo-Saxon and especially US justice make it easy to claim threatening financial compensations. This risk alone may lead to a kind of pre-emptive censorship, which in effect is contradicting freedom of speech (reminding me of a German journalist proverb that would translate as “a pair of scissors in your head”).

In contrast most Central European justice systems have broader legal limitations and may be more willing to dispute statements in speech or writing. But penalties for breaking those laws begin very low (a few hundred Euro fine) and compensations are only rarely awarded on an also low basis (taking only proven damages into account). Severe sentences are very rare, but possible if a person or an organization stubbornly doesn’t refrain from repeating such acts again and again.

On this basis Central European countries have laws against “defamatory hate speech directed upon minorities (religious, ethnical, gender etc.)”, which I deem prudent. For me and probably most Europeans such arguments are a kind of libel or slander against a group of people instead of a single person or a business or entity. Isn’t it a bit curious, that in the Anglo-Saxon justice a business or a so-called church has more rights to defend itself than a minority of humans?

In Germany, Austria and (for weird reasons I don’t know) Switzerland and Spain those or similar laws also specifically prohibit national-socialist propaganda and holocaust denial (with some countries also regulating display of a few national-socialist emblems like swastikas). I understand this is out of history, but I’m no big fan of this legislation as it naturally bears the hallmarks of cementing truth by statute. Nevertheless I do support the idea to limit freedom of speech if it is used to defame individuals, entities or clearly defined groups of people. And in my critical thinking I don’t see plausible arguments to feel our overall freedom limited by that. I would be interested in your thoughts.

(5) I have a background in philosophy and psychology, and I got interested in studying how the subconscious mind works after learning how subliminal advertising takes advantage of it at every opportunity (especially in television and magazine ads).  I am also Jewish, and am often called paranoid by my friends, but I get suspicious when I observe things that I think might be anti-Semitic references. Here I am referring to the two main Scientology symbols: the “eight-pointed cross” and the “S” with the two triangles.

Subliminally, and perhaps not so subliminally, I look at the “eight-pointed cross” and see a Christian crucifix with an “X” over the top of it.  Do you think that LRH’s “eight dynamics” (which this cross is meant to symbolize) was an invented narrative that came after his symbol was created (or copied from Alistair Crowley) as a very private joke for himself?  In other words, could this be a way for him to symbolize a negation of Christianity?  I have heard LRH make comments that show that he did not like Jesus or Christianity, but do you think this was an outward, but purposely unexplained, expression of that hatred?  Could this symbol be a subliminal way for him to nullify a Scientologist’s belief in Christianity?

Perhaps this next question shows where my Jewish paranoia really kicks in.  When I look at the other common symbol that Scientology uses — the “S” with the two triangles, I see a Star of David that has been taken apart, with a snake crawling through it.  I have always thought that the font that is used for the word “Scientology” had a very sinister element to it, but I wonder if it was chosen so that the initial “S” looked like a creepy snake — subliminally, if not consciously.  

The reason why this could be important is that many anti-Semitic writers and commentators have referred to Jews collectively as a snake, with the head being the allegedly evil Rabbis and Zionists who desire to take over the world, and the body of the snake being the rest of the Jewish population.  The dismantling of the Star of David into two plain triangles could be LRH’s secret desire for Scientology to wrest this fictitious control from the Jewish people and their supposedly evil conspiracy.  

So I am wondering:  Did you ever hear or read any anti-Semitic comments from LRH?  Have any been recorded, as the anti-Christian comments have been?  Narratives always seem to come after the fact as necessary, but could the A-R-C and K-R-C explanations for the two triangles have been invented after this symbol’s creation, solely as a means to legitimize it and get it out there in the public’s eye (and subconscious)?

(6) In a lecture to auditors (1955) LRH talks a lot about “mis-ownership”. In the last part of the lecture he says that one can get “solidity by mis-ownership”, and he talks about running the “ownership process”. Besides gobbledigook, what does that mean?

This week we went live to answer questions and we had some great ones about Scientology money flows, extremism on the Left and Right, what “clearing the planet” would look like and a lot more. Enjoy!

This week it’s answers about what Sea Org members consider a luxurious lifestyle, where is David Miscavige on Scientology’s Bridge, what are the origins of the Scientology cross and a lot more. Enjoy!

(1) Do any high ranking Scientology staff or Sea Org get to live in luxury or is that limited only to Miscavige?

(2) Do you know the highest OT level attained by David Miscavige? If I understand correctly — having never been a Scientologist — the upper levels on the Bridge involve self-auditing. Yes? If so, that seems perfectly tailored for the narcissistic head of the cult, whether Hubbard or Miscavige, to advance himself to the highest levels with no accountability.

(3) The Church of Scientology uses the Christian-style cross symbol with a star behind it, but something jumped out at me. It looks more like a British-style long sword upside down stuck in a rock like King Arthur. I acknowledge I’m grasping at straws here but there is a handle, hand guards and the blade which has a line or crevasse in the middle like a bayonet. I know this is far-fetched but I’m really starting to think Hubbard tried to use a cross for religious symbology but threw a sword in there. You have explained how he uses subliminal messages like the volcano on the Dianetics book that any thetan is supposed to respond to. The sword is also extremely symbolic for Navy officers, Marines and many maritime entities including the British, the Japanese, you name it. Hubbard was a Naval officer. Anyway, another wild theory but would love to hear if you possibly notice something there. Thanks again and keep up your work!

(4) I was wondering what your thoughts were on R Kelly. Do you think he is a cult leader? It seems like he fits the criteria. What do you think about his enablers? Did they help him because of money or because they were also brainwashed or part of his cult?

(5) In the Descent of Man lecture (1955) LRH talks about “ownership” and “mis-ownership” regarding engrams. He said that ownership can cause the “erasure of engrams, secondaries and even bodies”. He later said that mis-ownership can cause restructuring of a lock and secondaries. These are new terms to me. What are “secondaries” and “locks” and what is “mis-ownership”?

(6) It seems David Miscavige is essentially in hiding now. Do you think he’s likely to spend his days like Hubbard did, i.e in hiding due to legal cases? It certainly looks that way – some have predicted he will try to escape on the Freewinds rather than have to appear in any US-based court case? Thoughts?

(7) I know Hubbard invented Scientology and all of the OT levels, but was he 0T8 and if so, did he do all the levels as he has laid out for the public and if so, who awarded him or agreed he was OT eight or did he simply just say hey I am OT 8, I invented it, end of story. I would be grateful if you could shed light on this question

(8) As a long time SO officer you likely became personally familiar with the snitching & reporting culture of Scientology. No doubt you had many reports written on you, as that seems to be just how things go in that environment. What was your reaction to the first written report you ever saw about you?

This week, it’s answers about how to deprogram North Korea, more Scientology terminology defined and explained, past life beliefs and why they are so powerful in cults and a LOT more. Enjoy!

(1) Hey Chris! Seeing that you’re a subject matter expert on cult de-programming, I wanted your opinion on this situational question:

Assuming the Kim regime eventually falls in North Korea, what steps do you think would need to be taken to properly deprogram the population? How would the deprogramming of an entire population compare to that of someone leaving a cult who has the ability to re-enter a society that never fell victim to the programming?

I know this has already been done with the de-Nazification of Germany, but I’d like your unique perspective on this present-day situation.

(2) In a lecture on the Descent of Man (1955) LRH was talking about communication and used several terms I haven’t heard. He said that “stopping communication acquires mass”, he mentioned “thereness” several times, “communicatingness” and “start, stop and change”. O, lord of all things minutiae – besides word salad and nonsense, what are the meanings of these? I ask humbly in Hubbard’s name. Amen.

(3) Growing up the only concept of past lives I was ever exposed to was that of Reincarnation such as in the Eastern religions, where it is an incentive to be good in this life so that your next one is better. However, I’m noticing that high control groups seem to be using the idea of past lives pretty frequently, both with and without members laying claim to famous names (“I was Cleopatra! And also Joan of Arc!”) This to me is very curious and interesting. Could you talk about why this is, and what functions “past lives” serve for cults and high control groups? Scientology and otherwise. Also, does it take a lot of effort to convince people they have had past lives?

(4) I´m from the Czech Republic and I watched many of your videos. It is very helpful including the coercive control topic. It´s healing and thank you for that. I´m contacting you concerning the topic of repayment / refund. There is not many information out there about it. It´s clear that the other abuses in the Church of Scientology are of greater priority especially those in the Sea Org and the psychological abuse, but the situation concerning repayments (“money on account”) in Scientology is also energetically uneven. They are super active when they want money but complete opposite when it comes to balance. Financial abuse might have similar or same impact on emotional health as other abuses. Never pay the Church of Scientology in advance! I will be happy if I can get any feedback from you on this topic and if this might be a topic to talk about  in order to help people heal from this hidden abuse.

(5) As someone who works in litigation, I’m almost ashamed at how the “art” of examining a witness is not about revealing or approaching truth, but more about the witchcraft & cruel game theory of making people appear untrustworthy or casting the shade of doubt on testimony through rhetorical tricks. While it is important to carefully examine witnesses, and sometimes to confront them with unpleasant facts, I think all that can be done without the theatrics and rhetoric that are NOT designed to engage our critical thinking, but rather (literally) to disable it.

When we look more broadly at sales and marketing, not to mention politics, I wonder if it makes sense for you, as a former cult member, to consider the extent to which mainstream culture is an environment openly hostile to critical thinking.

Doesn’t it appear as though a cult-like environment is infecting our broader culture, and that just living in society presents us the same challenge to liberate ourselves from the confines of a situation that is constantly operating against our ability to be autonomous and reasonable? As someone who has emerged from a true cult, do you sometimes find yourself going through the same process all over again in civilian life?  I realize that, on a micro level, we have extraordinary freedoms.  But, on a broader political & cultural level, I think sensible people & sensible thinking are very marginalized.  I’m very curious to know your perspective on this, in light of your experience as a former Scientologist.

(6) In the unlikely event that the CoS is actually held accountable for their alleged illegal activity, how many Sea Org members, do you think, will “drop their bodies” (“unalive” themselves) as other zealous cult groups who believe in reincarnation have done in the past?

(7) If the Sea Orgs were an alien race in a Star Trek movie, would they then be called: THE SEA BORGS?

(8) How did Tom Cruise get into Scientology?

This week I went live to answer viewer questions and we had some really good ones about how the Sea Org is structured, psychiatric medications, pricing for auditing and a lot more. Enjoy!

This week, it’s answers about the negative range of the Tone Scale, a long description of stages of recovery from cults, the Non-Interference Zone in Scientology and a lot more. Enjoy!

(1) I initially thought the Emotional Tone Scale only went from 4.0: “Enthusiasm” at the highest, down to 0.0: “Body Death” at the lowest. I’ve since found out that Thetans can experience a broader range of tones without the supposed limitations of their bodies, but I can’t find any descriptions or definitions of these extended tones anywhere! What does -8.0 “Hiding” and -30 “Can’t Hide” mean? What does the lowest tone of -40.0 “TOTAL FAILURE” entail?

(2) Based on Tom Cruise’s deplorable behavior and – sorry for saying this – watching some past Scientologists’ channels, I have started thinking that one of the appeals of Scientology might be that you get to feel really superior. After all you are going to be a GOD and the Wogs don’t get it. After leaving Scientology does that not seem to stick? I just look at some of the ex-Scientologists and much as I like them, I just wonder about whether ex-Scientologists realize the sustained damage that has been done to them. The lack of empathy that lingers, the ability to go after other people relentlessly, the smirks, the sneers; these just seem to be a Scientology state of mind that lingers. I wonder how many of them would have left had it not been for Miscavige. I am guessing they would all have stayed and since I strongly believe that is the case, it bothers me, because it is such a human thing. Why do things have to get so bad for us to change our lives? 

Also, when a person leaves a destructive relationship… to truly leave, does that not require one truly looks at what one found appealing about it? What one closed one’s eyes to? What one ended up accepting and maybe ended up doing to others? I think it is a humbling experience to realize deep down why one did not stop. Kind of like soldiers cannot simply say that they followed orders. In my experience there is a payoff in every relationship. Even the bad ones. And you won’t be truly free till you look that in the eye. (Only children are really exempt from that rule, and only while they are children) I feel that that is the only way to avoid another bad situation, by facing what the payoffs were in that situation. Would you agree or do you think it really only is a matter of outside forces manipulating you? I think it cannot only be manipulation. 

(3) I’d like to hear your thoughts on the Scientology book released in the early 90s, ‘What is Scientology’. Out of all the books released by the church this was for me by far their most easy to read book and actually enjoyable. It really got me curious about Scientology such was its ability to explain Scientology concepts and make them seem reasonable even though I knew they were an insidious cult that ruined lives. It also did a great job in its use of illustrations and its front cover draws you in. So after its release was there an explosion in public coming into the orgs? Did it sell well? Did Scientologists love the book? Were they all talking about it? Am I right in thinking it does a good job in selling Scientology unlike every book before it?

(4) Has anyone ever been satisfied “becoming Clear” without moving further up The Bridge?  If someone did, in fact, say “ I’m happy with the state of Clear” does Scientology respect their wishes or do they cajole them into continuing on?

(5) In a lecture to auditors from 1963, LRH talks about the “itsa line”, “overcharged areas”, “tone arm action” (I’m guessing on the E-meter) and running “Routine 1C”. Can you help me understand what these things are? These are terms I’ve never heard.