What’s in it for me?
But really; why do I do this? Why on earth would I quit the church and go public with criticism? It surely couldn’t be because I am telling the truth and want to put lights on abuses in the church. Because there could not possibly be abuses. Scientology is as far from abusive as you could possibly get. And the church is Scientology. David Miscavige could not be a suppressive person. He is Scientology.
So who is paying Geir Isene? Or who is conning him into writing on this outrageous blog?
In the last month I have heard some creative takes on why I left the church. The Scientology field in Oslo is busy making up a good enough reason for why I left. The latest is that I have been conned (by Anonymous perhaps?). There is also the knee jerk reaction that someone must be paying me to do this. Just like someone must be paying Anonymous or Marty Rathbun or any other person daring to voice some criticism of the church or the man at the helm.
Money you say? The church has a button on money, so it follows that they would easily accuse others of getting paid to do what they feel is right.
Hubbard wrote a lesser known scale of motivation. It goes like this:
- Duty
- Personal conviction
- Personal gain
- Money
Duty is at the top, money is at the bottom. Nothing wrong with money per se, but if a person’s primary or only motivation is money, he can be bought. If he is at “Personal gain”, he would factor in other elements such as social benefits, travel distance, time with his friends etc. A person who held a job out of the broader “Personal gain” would be harder to make leave his job. If he held a job out of “Personal conviction”, there would be extremely hard to bribe the person into a job shift. Few nurses or aid workers would switch jobs only because of more money. Then there is “Duty” – doing what you do for the greater good. Sacrificing much for what you see as a truly worthy cause. The Dalai Lama is operating on duty, the same are many people working within the Red Cross or Amnesty International. Those people cannot be bought.
Neither can I. There is a large element of duty in what I do here.
So, what’s in it for me?
Apart from loosing many of my closest friends, loosing a whole social network, loosing my Moscow office (the CEO of FreeCode Moscow was a Scientologist – he disconnected from me) and loosing other business opportunities – not much in it for me at all.
I would do this even if I would loose a lot more. It isn’t even a consideration that I personally loose a lot by leaving the church. It really isn’t. I consider it a duty to stop the abuses, to get the top dog jailed, to show the world that the philosophy is not equal to the church and to salvage the delivery of Scientology services. I see it as my duty to help Scientologists see what is going on within their own church and make this their own duty – despite personal danger or loss.
Leave a reply to loriu Cancel reply
Quick links:
Navigation/index page
General questions and comments
Your gains from Scientology
Purpose: To help differentiate between the Scientology philosophy and the Church of Scientology.
Feel free to contribute by adding your comments to the blog posts. When you do, please observe the rules of this blog.
Note: I will not post or link to confidential material on this blog. Scientologists should feel safe coming here to get truth.
Spread the word: Feel free to translate my Doubt write-up and spread it far and wide. Use OpenOffice to open the file. Please keep the formatting so that it remains a valid WOIM list. It is already translated into German
Geir Isene: Straight talk on Scientology 
Thank you for what you are doing. You have honor and integrity.
Persons can either see a Truth, or not. It is one’s own observation, own counsel,
own determination to be Truthful. I daresay no one has to believe your blog, or any of the other voices on this subject on the internet. But it is my right to observe what you and others write, and make my own determination.
Isn’t that what Freedom is all about?
It sure is.
Geir,
I know that little known scale. It aligns with the others. You are manifesting the others, and that truth, that elan, is what life is. It is hard to grasp a level way above where one is at, it is done by gradients, little by more by more. With your help many are climbing up the line. Thanks, and that’s a half ack as there is more to do.
Disturbed, you need a new name as your calm certainty resonates.
Half-ack received.
Bravo Geir! That is a simple way to summarize what is happening currently with the CoS – pure money motivation. So that is where they peg you. Too easy.
There is another interesting scale called the Tone Scale of Governments, Companies or Groups (Basics version of Scientology 08, page 126) from the PL 9 January 1951, An Essay on Management:
>>
Near cooperative state
Democratic republic
“Emergency Management”
Totalitarianism
Tyranny
Apathy of a dying organization or nation
>>
The awareness of the tyranny is growing every day and it seems we are dividing into those who will fight and those who are falling into the apathy of a dying organization or nation.
That’s right, on the subject of duty, I came to the conclusion that personally it was not just enough simply to get clued up about the true state of CofS as it currently is, valuable though this is; as scientologists I believe we ALL have to share a responsibility for the state of things right now. I have been in Scn nearly 30 years – 5 of them in the SO, and I am horrified by what is happening. There are some great suggestions at http://www.scientology-cult.com/how-you-can-help.html re. practical actions. I might briefly share a recent experience on this. I contacted a leading OT in my area and informed this individual about a few things (s)he was completely unaware of. Nothing was really “reading” or registering with this person – violent abuse by COB, mis-using parishoner donations, 20 years of delivery down statistics – he seemed to have an “answer” for it all UNTIL I mentioned altering the message of LRH. A blatant example of this is highlighted clearly here http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2009/09/04/reverse-black-dianetics-scientologys-1984/ The thought here is that scns in the field may be very “forgiving” (I am trying to be charitable here) about all sorts of crimes and shortcomings of DM and his lieutenants, but altering the message of LRH is an indiscretion too far. THIS is the button that will get their attention and start the “waking up” process I feel. Communicate on whatever lines that DM is NOT interested in KSW with specifics and this should impinge. Let us not forget that onlines scns are not the problem, in fact ultimately are part of the solution. Let’s correct-target the source of this whole mess, self-elected Chairman Miscavige.
thatsnotmyname,
Excellent point on the button to push. The rest is good too, but that ‘beyond the pale’ idea is promising.
Thanks Geir for what you are doing. You are setting a brave example for all of us to follow and I am following it and will get as many others as I can to do so also. I used to be worried about the attacks that the church was going to get from the Psychs and drug companies. I never expected for the REAL THREAT to come from within. It is so devious and evil it is hard to confront. But confronting it is giving me case gain! I like it. Thanks again to all the freedom fighters out there. Special mention to Marty, Geir, T. Paine, Thoughtful, Matt Pesch and how about the lovely Amy Scobee!! Lets keep going and get the product!
Geir,
You’re doing something very important together with many others. Just observing the truth, telling it and as-ising it. THAT is Scientology. You’re handling this the Scientology way, while some squirreling is going on inside of CoS. Of course, there are lots of great Scientologists in CoS, but you’re not afraid of telling the entire truth.
To see the truth, one must also see and point out the good in the bad – some critics have a great deal of problem doing that.
You my friend epitomize the noble ideals of duty, honor courage and integrity. It is always tragic when groups bringing order falter from their purpose. Scientology is not the first spiritual moovement to suffer scisms when its founder passes. History is replete with examples: It took no less than the emporer Constantine to bring some order to the shambles that was Chritianity in the 4th century C.E. Martin Luther attempted to put in ethics on the Roman Catholic church in the 16th century with only limited success. Sunni and Shia branches of Islam are fighting to this day over who is the true successor to Mohammed.
The truth that LRH brought to light will not be extinguished as it lives on in the universe of every free being who refuses to submitt to the tyranny and slavery that is ignorance. I commend you and wish you the peace that comes from knowing that you are fighting the good fight and have many alies. Use the pulpit that you have been given to demonstrate what a true Scientologist is capable of accomplishing with communication
“to show the world that the philosophy is not equal to the church”
You’re a bit late on that one. Everything there is to know is available on the internet and elsewhere. It’s been more than 30 years that the wog world know how the church is running. And more than that that the philosophy is junk science (the first scientific evaluation was written in ’53).
Sweeping and broad generalities. Have you ever tried to find something good in the philosophy? Have you tried to benefit from it?
“Sweeping and broad generalities.”
Not really, it’s a summary of my own research on the subject. You can read the Experimental Evaluation of Dianetics that Harvey Jay Fischer did in 1953 for example [link removed] “If a method is based upon loosely documented theory, then there is little hope for the efficacy of the method”. I couldn’t say it better.
[clipped TL;DR]
My point: you cannot base something on another thing that has shaky grounds without being wrong, again.
“Have you ever tried to find something good in the philosophy? Have you tried to benefit from it?”
It’s a bit like saying did you try Nazism? Did you try Heroin? No I didn’t try it because I have enough information that it can be harmful to do just that, just like trying illegal drugs will make you dependent. One of my favourite criticism is here: [link removed]
And then I read something like “The Total Freedom Trap” [link removed] and I can understand how people like you are still under the spell despite having rejected the current church management. And you know it’s easy to put the blame on David Miscavige alone, he is the perfect evil man like Stalin or Hitler were. All the evil is of course only coming from them, not their followers or their philosophy. Yeah, sure. My conclusion is that Scientology is build like a trap and it has to work like DM is making it to work to stay afloat. Because without all the sec checks, disconnections, RPF, etc. a lot of people would leave because they would have access to critical information. LRH had to build it that way to make sure the money would flow in his direction.
You can delete this message if you wish, I will not take offense if you do. My guess is that you will do it if I got it right, or you’ll publish it if you have found a fault so that you can discard the critical information that doesn’t fit your current way of thinking. You can also delete it because it doesn’t respect the goal of your blog. But in my view you cannot really separate the church and the Scientology. They are both harmful in their own rights IMO.
(Links removed due to reference to confidential material)
Maybe a better question is to get off the ‘academia’ and reading of papers, that quote papers of a man that admits that he didn’t actually folow the protocols, and consider actually doing a first hand experiment. That is, read SelfAnalysis, follow its exact protocols, do its exact procedures, on yourself and on another. Then we might have a rational discussion. To date, this is rhetoric. I submit William James as a suggestion for this:: “In the natural sciences and industrial arts it never occurs to any one to try and refute opinions by showing up their author’s neurotic constitution. Opinions here are invariably tested by logic and experiment, no matter what may be their author’s neurological type. It should be no otherwise with religious opinions.”pp 17,18.
Logic and experiment.
🙂
Geir,I apologize for saying this but…
Scientific Evaluation my ***.
The Doctor ran Dianetics for some 16 hours at the most and then tried to see if the PC’s had any Clear abilities(as defined by DMSMH).
Naturally the Doctor failed.Anybody who ever even LOOKED at scientology for more than a couple of hours knows that clearing random engrams is just that,clearing random engrams.The Doctor didn’t even run engrams on a chain.Naturally no Clear abilities occured.
Oh and to have fun with you while you’re still in shock.
(link removed du to reference to confidential material)
Even Nibs recognized Clear and OT ability,something anons LOVE to ignore when quoting this very lecture!!!
And Nibs also died an independent Dianeticist,albeit a Christian one(nod nod).
Again Sorry Geir,but the arrogance and generalities of these people just isn’t cute anymore.
Oh and with regards to the link,some of the black pr stuff is “off” to make an understatement.
– The “New Church of Scientology” is Born ! Anybody can become a member of it, if freezoner, Squirrel or Anonymous, ex scientologists or COS, anybody can be member of it. If Anonymous was able to rally several 10000 members in no amount of time the NCOS will boom in no amount of time. The whole tech, courses and many other services will be available for free or some justified donations ONLINE. –
Dear Gear
Above is my vision ! And I hope, but I’m sure, it’s also yours. I would like to thank you for what you’re doing and for your courage to do what you do, despite personal danger. I allready would sign your condition now !
On my part the last days have been a little hell for me, having a heavy influenza and being terrorized by my own past deeds. I’ve been a COWARD for 35 years, compromising with my own reality and saying sometimes yes to the greatest nonsense one could believe. I gave a “That`s it” to it and I’m recovering my own integrity. This is so beautiful and full of theta. Really the NCOS is it. This is it ! Where do I have to send my first donation for the NCOS and how can I register to become a member ? Perhaps I would like to open a Mission for the NCOS, when and where can I start my trainining ? Man you’re doing a good job !
“Then there is “Duty” – doing what you do for the greater good”
Soderqvist1: I totally reject the so called greater good; it is the arch enemy of individual freedom!
“Sacrificing much for what you see as a truly worthy cause.”
Soderqvist1: I am not a sacrificial animal, selfishness is my virtue!
“The Dalai Lama is operating on duty, the same are many people working within the Red Cross or Amnesty International. Those people cannot be bought.”
Soderqvist1: true!
But the drones are potentially set up to be manipulated by the party line, because they believe that they are there to be used, their life has no end in themselves!
“Neither can I. There is a large element of duty in what I do here.
So, what’s in it for me?
Apart from loosing many of my closest friends, loosing a whole social network, loosing my Moscow office (the CEO of Free Code Moscow was a Scientologist – he disconnected from me) and loosing other business opportunities – not much in it for me at all.”
Soderqvist1: I would probably do the same if I was in your shoes!
Not because of sacrifice, but because I have my long term survival in mind, and it doesn’t bode well for me to be in connection with persons which are going downhill, or are on their way out!
Soderqvist1: Btw, I am reading the book; “Twelve against the Gods” by William Bolitho from 1927. Bolitho says that in the preface that “greed is a virtue, which has been loaded with almost as many stupid insults as that other fundamental, sexual instinct. The Adventurer is an egotist, what he does, he does for himself, and his motive may be simple greed.” L. Ron Hubbard was asked in 1983 by a newspaper which book is the best you have ever read? He answered; “Twelve against the gods by William Bolitho” I have read this in “A Piece of Blue Sky” by Jon Attack some years ago, and it seems to me a largely misrepresentation of the adventurer L. Ron Hubbard as alleged pest, it ignore the other side of the coin, the Adventurer the societies benefactor, so instead I link to a Hubbard friendly home site part IV about it. A parallel between L. Ron Hubbard, and Edgar Rice Burroughs
http://www.erbzine.com/mag23/2341.html
Soderqvist1: my primary goal is to survive, that is so egotistical it can be, but I cannot survive without exchange with the rest of my dynamics as described in detail here by me!
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=229477&postcount=37
Yellow card for TL;DR. Next is a red. Keep it short.
The current regime will also whisper that you must have been PDH’d by evil psychs and that is the reason for speaking out and telling the truth. Unfortunately LRH
seemed to always blame others for what was wrong inside Scn rather than confronting the fact the he was just plain wrong about some things.
That is patently untrue Patty P and you know it. In KSW he says right there:
“The only thing you can be upbraided for by students and PCs is ‘no results’. Trouble spots occur only where there are ‘no results’. Attacks from governments or monopolies occur only where the there are ‘no results’ or ‘bad results’.”
He also says in a later paragraph later in that same PL.
“So the ogre which may eat us up is not the government or the High Priests. It’s OUR (emphasis added) possible failure to retain and practice our technology.”
So where exactly is he blaming others in those above passages?
Also I did the Briefing Course and there were many times on that course where the Ol’man acknowledged that he may have been wrong about some things.
Besides what you say are generalizations not supported by anything but you’re own opinion.
Let this be an example of how to treat generalities posted as comments on this blog. Fact rules. Generalities get a slap.
Patty P,
Hubbard himself said in a lecture something like “please differentiate between my opinions and when I’m talking about facts”.
Geir,
What do you think of the following questions?
1. What do you think the “tunnel of light” is that has been reported by many people who were about to die and then returned to life?
2. When a person dies he becomes a free thetan, being able to go wherever he wants? That means travel to Mars or the Andromeda galaxy just to check it out?
3. Why don’t the people (when having passed away) in third world countries just leave those areas and reborn in a better place like Europe or similair? Too stuck in one place? Not that aware of other places?
4. What happens if no free thetan is nearby, e.g. giving birth at the Northpole or on a spaceship to Mars or similair? A body without a thetan just wandering around?
5. A thetan should be able to take an animal body, right?
Just some thoughts. 🙂
1. I believe it is a valid experience. It may be an implant, it may be something else. Not sure.
2. I believe implants straight-jackets the thetan to much for a cool “grand tour”.
3. Familiarity, I guess. Remember what state a person is in when he has just died – it’s extremely bad, total chaos, the worst of losses. The need for comfort through familiarity would be a factor. There is also competition among to many thetans.
4. There’s lots of thetans.
5. Yes, but do you know how to operate a sparrow body?
What’s in it for anyone? 😉 It seems common enough for anyone on the defensive to misattribute cause/motive, but the CoS seems to have elevated it to a fine art. I have personally been told I am in the employ of psychiatrists, or big pharma, or that I’m an anti-religion bigot and/or being controlled by them. That’s CoS PR for you, and the same line that has been used since I can remember, and as far back as I can research. The ‘in the pay of X’ one seems to be the most popular right now (so I believe you are onto something with the money ‘button’ idea.)
The problem is the choice to believe this line or not is difficult for someone who refuses to examine all of the premises of their belief. If the first premise is the infallibility of church dogma, then no matter how outlandish the false cause is,and no matter how little agreement it has with observable fact, accepting the lie is preferable to questioning the first premise. This is true if only because so many other beliefs are built upon it, that it would require system-wide re-evaluation. (not fun)
IMHO, the best way to deal with such situations is to work from an area that does not touch so directly on the first premise, or does not rely upon it at all and move forward (or backward) from there until my conversation partner is able to re-evaluate some of their foregone conclusions..but I am not an ex..I can only make (somewhat uninformed) guesses as to what the hierarchy of preference/belief is for someone with those experiences is like..and I am left fumbling for a starting point. And so here is the question: What are “safe” starting points? What information would a Scientologist with that unassailable dogmatic belief in the infallibility of the CoS PR be best able to evaluate without shutting down?
Apologies for the tl;dr.
Because of you apologies for the TL;DR, I didn’t clip.
Bravo Sir, I applaud your efforts on this insightful blog and words cant express how the great deal of respect I have for you all the other former members who speak out and take on the arguments such as this one that lay behind so many the cult’s current spin doctoring defenses. You fine words bring a few of may favorite quotes come to mind…
“The right to search for the truth implies also a duty; one must not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be the truth” ~ Albert Einstein
“He has honor if he holds himself to an ideal of conduct though it is inconvenient, unprofitable, or dangerous to do so.” ~Walter Lippman
You sir, have taken a path that is all the ^^above – i too salute your honor and integrity for standing up for what you feel is right.
“The most tragic thing in the world is a man of genius who is not a man of honor” ~George Bernard Shaw
If LRH had a fraction of the honor an integrity that you have Geir, his genius might of had some positive outcome in the bigger scheme of things.
“Rather fail with honor than succeed by fraud.” ~Sophocles
Ron is gone but the con goes on, and the only way it will stop is for those who have suffered for the greater good of protecting that fraud own up and speak out like yiou have about just how bad the “greater good” really was.
/MarcabianSalute
Was *that* his opinion or was that a fact?
Was ‘KSW’ LRH’s opinion or a fact? Etc.
LRH was a manipulative individual. Best wishes on finding your way out if the mirror maze he constructed.
Watch the adHom. Using phrases such as “LRH was a manipulative individual” and discrediting something he has written based on that is a logical fallacy. Discredit what he has written based on what he has written. Otherwise you open yourself to the same line of discreditation, like “Briana Volta is a rabid critic, therefore…”. = Not productive.
Very well, however, the statement is not really a “logical fallacy,” although it might have been prefixed with “IMO.” It does assume that others have examined an area that – in all likelihood – many here have not. I’ll try to “watch my language.”
Basing an argument on an opinion masked as a fact would qualify as a logical fallacy. Repeating it falls under “Argumentum ad nauseam”. Yellow card stands – keep it close as a reminder.
Geir Isesne,
I am 15 years deep, public only but plenty familiar with the tech and entrenched work, school, family, friends etc. Here goes, I read a few of your posts and your position seems SO fair to me. You seem a fervent believer that the tech actually does work, am I right? The real question on every ones mind may be HOW to get the ethics and tech IN upper management. Doesn’t going public with this information nullify any chance of open communication within the org? By even reading this I’m sure I’m violating some policies, doesn’t that make my hands a little “dirty”? I should hope that real change can be affected but that will only happen when ethics are in. I postulate that the church will survive intact, not secularized and hope the intention to improve conditions is true. Can a scientologist be in com with you and have clean hands? That’s what it will take to clean up.
1. Yes I know the tech works.
2. The fact that the church makes your hands dirty for reading facts on the Internet is “making another guilty of an overt act” – which LRH states as the basic overt in itself. It is sad that the church has dropped down to this low level. I believe in a church that actually complies with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – and not only use it for PR.