Home > My timeline > Breakfast with Jason

Breakfast with Jason

Jason Beghe is the most real person I’ve ever met. He speaks his mind without social filters or veneer, being totally honest with all his views – the bad and the good. Never have I met a person with such an ability to just be there and communicate and with such empathy and care for the other.

I had the pleasure of having breakfast with Jason. And lunch, and dinner, and walks, and chats on the porch. I find that most Scientologists in the church are wary about talking deep seated beliefs and views, emotions and what’s really real for them. Philosophical conversations on the tech without the need to cover up faults or avoid the bad is indeed rare for Scientologists in good standing with the church. Jason has non of that veneer, the superficial, the supposed to’s, the pretense that you will find with too many Scientologists. He’s the opposite of the cliché Hollywood personality. There’s nothing synthetic about Jason. And he’s as smart as anyone I’ve ever met.

Thank you Jason for the time we spent together. Truly enlightening. You’re a true friend.

Two friends :-)

Advertisements
Categories: My timeline
  1. ExKane
    2009-09-26 at 05:50

    You may have discussed this with Jason. I’ve seen videos indicating that he feels that the effort to “clear the planet,” as well as idea of the Homo Novis, poses a real danger to society at large (see his address in Germany on YouTube (very informative video)). He further compares the idea of Homo Novis to the German Ubermensch (“superman” – see Nietzsche and Nazism).
    What are your thoughts on this? Do you see these things as threats as well? Do you advocate the attempt to clear the planet, or did you in the past?
    According to Jeff Jacobsen on p. 441 of Dianetics Hubbards envisions a world in which only clears can marry and have children. Is this true?

    • 2009-09-27 at 00:01

      I am opposed to any usthem scenarios. I am an advocate for equal opportunities.

      As for DMSMH, I’ll have to check (I’m in an airport, on my way home)

  2. RJ
    2009-09-26 at 05:54

    Geir

    Jason seems like a real cool person to me. He was great in the Tech Film the session!

    Jason this is from me I’m writing a book and if it ever turns into a screen play I think you’d be great in one of its leading roles 🙂

  3. Chris
    2009-09-26 at 06:08

    Not to sound dumb or anything by addressing the pink elephant in the room but…..
    Didn’t Jason Beghe stop utilizing the tech some time ago?
    Is he a scientologist again?!?!?
    Did he really go to Piere Ethier for L’s auditing and Marty Rathbun for a rehab from Miscavology?
    Did he get his misunderstoods regarding the state of Clear cleared yet(this from his scientology interview)?
    What are his views on OT abilities/phenomena?
    Is he back on the Bridge?
    Sorry for all the questions but this honestly comes as a huge suprise!

    • 2009-09-27 at 00:09

      I’ll let Jason answer these questions, if he wants to.

  4. Ackerland
    2009-09-26 at 06:31

    The image is broken 😦

    • 2009-09-27 at 00:10

      I’ll check it out when I get home.

    • 2009-09-27 at 19:20

      Fixed

  5. Jim Logan
    2009-09-26 at 12:51

    Sounds like a great visit Geir. If Jason likes to go fishing in pristine mountain streams for the pinnacle of game fish, salmo salar, the ‘leaper’, the Atlantic Salmon, I’ve got all the room and the time in the world for him. He can grab Marty too, yourself, and we’ll sit around at my campfire telling tall tales of the fish we caught. We might even turn our gaze to other areas, filling them with elan vital, and seeing them resolve before us. Yep, sounds like a good idea.

    • 2009-09-27 at 00:12

      Sounds great 🙂

      • Anonymous for a reason
        2009-09-27 at 09:39

        Hello again Geir and welcome back to your home country 🙂
        Looking forward to meet you again.
        Have a nice day

        – –
        E

  6. Margaret
    2009-09-26 at 15:31

    Jason, Thank you for speaking out! If we had more well-known Scientologists like you taking a stand against the Church’s abuses, we might be able to put enough pressure on Miscavige to step down, and bring about a reform.

  7. Nom de Plume
    2009-09-27 at 00:20

    It’s very theta news that the two of you spent some time together. I just know that each of you enjoyed the visit tremendously. Well done!

    Nom

  8. ExKane
    2009-09-27 at 05:49

    Let’s be honest. Hubbard intentionally wrote the us-them mentality directly into Scientology, with term “wog.” Hubbard defines a wog as: “common, everyday garden-variety humanoid.” The clear is a “Homo Novis” (should be Novus).
    According to experts a large part of cult mentality is to slowly, in gradient form, mentally separate the followers from normal society. If it is done too quickly, the follower wakes up and spots the absurdity. This is why Hubbard warned that encountering the secret of the OT3 level before going through the prior levels could be be fatal, that the result may be “to kill (by pneumonia etc.)” (Hubbard’s words) anyone who’d not completed the prior levels. He knew that anyone who received access to these materials before sufficient indoctrination/personal investment would probably laugh and walk away. Jason Beghe said there was a moment when he first read OT3 where he could have woken up (see his interview on YouTube with Mark Bunker) and nearly did so, but then the self-inflicted acceptance process began. I have read the original OT3 materials. Thousands of others have. Nobody dies. Just as clears can still catch a cold. (Heck, even ToryMagoo44 (youtube), on OT7, had life-threatening Grand Mal seizures as soon as Scientologists convinced her to try going off her epilepsy medication again. In other great news, John Travolta finally officially admitted that his son suffered from Autism and had epilepsy ever since he was born.)
    Back to the point: Hubbard knew that to make Scientology indoctrination a success, its members would have to be mentally segregated from society. To do so, he called the public at large “wogs”…those “garden-variety humanoids.”

    • 2009-09-27 at 18:51

      TL;DR (next=clip)

      • ExKane
        2009-09-28 at 02:55

        Short version: Hubbard wrote the us-them mentality directly into Scientology with the connotations of the terms “wog” and Homo Novis. The aim of this is to create a mental segregation between Scientologists and the public, making possible greater degrees of gradual indoctrination, which is how cults are known to indoctrinate: gradually, so as not to lose members through rapid indoctrination (hence the “don’t read OT3 or you may die of pneumonia” nonsense).

        • 2009-09-28 at 06:17

          “The aim is to…” is of course speculation.

          • Mr. TJ
            2009-09-29 at 02:36

            The whole Scientology philosophy is of course speculation.

            • 2009-09-29 at 05:36

              “… is of course” = Trolling. Careful now.

    • Jim Logan
      2009-09-28 at 13:46

      ExKane,
      You see, here in this post is a perfect example of a little bit of knowledge isn’t the way to go. Hubbard wrote and spoke extensively on the ‘us-them’ mentality and there are numerous processes to get to the bottom of it. For instance the entire body of materials on a Goals Problem Mass. You can look that up in the Technical Dictionary of Scientology. You would have to study the materials too though, as again, a ‘little bit of knowledge’ can be a dangerous thing.

      The point is that you’ve formulated a wonderful piece of ‘logic’ to support what you had as a premise. Unfortunately, it has abosolutely zero to do with either Hubbard’s intentions or the actual subject of Scientology.

      Nothing could be further from the truth of Scientology than what you’ve concluded. I can say that because, after all, I’m able to be ‘them’ and see how ‘they’ think. That’s what Geir’s blog demonstrates too, as you can see, and he’s a Scientologist, ‘indoctrinated’ in Scientology and he’s sure willing to toss that whole false notion in to the false notionland it arises from. Surely you can see that.

      • ExKane
        2009-09-28 at 20:57

        I never pretended that what I was stating wasn’t speculation. However, I think you’ll find that if you read the “Admissions of L. Ron Hubbard” (in its entirety), or Bare-Faced Messiah (a book that can be found online quite easily – very well documented and not based off the far-out claims of LRH’s son), then as far as Hubbard’s intentions go…well it might be enough to change your mind as to his true character.
        From the “Admissions”: “Material things are yours for the asking. Men are your slaves.” The Jack Parsons fellow he mentions repeatedly was his partner in the occult/black magic (Hubbard’s involvement in occult Satanic rituals happens to be well documented in Bare-Faced Messiah as well).

        • 2009-09-28 at 21:01

          You have delivered your point. A bit trolling, but it’s a narrow pass.

          • ExKane
            2009-09-29 at 02:45

            No trolling is ever intended in my posting, but that’s yours to judge. If you think my moves to expose people to the sides of LRH less known to most Scientologists are too upsetting/enturbulating, let me know and I will no long post such things here.

            • 2009-09-29 at 05:38

              Your comment is to my blog post “Breakfast with Jason”. It was irrelevant. I do not mind your viewpoints. I do mind the relevance.

        • Jim Logan
          2009-09-29 at 15:53

          ExKane,
          I’m very familiar with these two items you’ve proffered as ‘proof’ of LRH’s intentions. The ‘Admissions’ brought up by Mr. Armstrong, are from when? Mid 40s. Pre Original Thesis even. Are they part of either Dianetics or Scientology? If so, where might one find them?

          As to Russel Miller’s book. Well, that’s not even worth any further comments.

          Again, you’ve not done your homework aside from the ‘lurid’ bits which have questionable provenance. That’s not scholarship. That’s CNN or Fox, or People or Us, or National Enquirer. Tsk, tsk.

          • ExKane
            2009-09-29 at 23:02

            I find “tsk, tsk” to be a rather immature means of communicating.
            1. I said they may affect your view of his character, not his intentions. I never used the word “proof.”
            2. Miller’s book simply cannot be cast off and ignored. Its documentation is excessive. Care to explain your reason for declaring it not worth any comments?
            3. As far as being a busy medical student goes and not being a Scientologist, I’ve done my homework to the extent of my abilities. I’m no scholar, but have looked at both sides regarding LRH’s character and his life. As for Scientology, I protest two things: 1. The tech medical abuses, and 2. Current Church management abuses.

            • Jim Logan
              2009-09-30 at 17:07

              ExKane,
              Well, I’m reading your post and it sure does read ‘as far as Hubbard’s intentions go…’ so we won’t quibble here. My question went unanswered. Do you have an answer, yes, no?

              To further comment on R. Miller’s diatribe would be to further comment on it and it’s not worth further comment. That seems plain enough.

              Tsk, tsk, is not usually connoted as ‘immature’. Not sure where you got that one. It’s more of a gentle censure. Patronizing even, not immature though. Spkemit, gorf, dahlfotz. That’s more on the immature line, or ‘insouciant’ as I prefer.

              • ExKane
                2009-09-30 at 19:07

                1. “As far as Hubbard’s intentions go…” is to say, I’m not commenting on Hubbard’s intentions. Understand? Perhaps this seems paradoxical to you. Read it again. I said I was not commenting on his intentions but rather his character.
                2. Clearly the Admissions do not comprise any part of Scientology. How could they? My point is that Hubbard’s character – as documented by his own personal writings, and his eagerness for Satanic ritual magic (which, given the Admissions and his association with Jack Parsons and Aleister Crowley, and more testimony, is far from speculative), and the accounts of many Scientologists and non-Scientologists who knew him personally – is in question. How much does that have to do with Scientology or the Tech? That part is up to you.
                3. You have given me no reason to assume you have any objection that even comes close to bearing specificity regarding Bear-Faced Messiah. Thus, I will continue with my current opinion regarding the validity of that book and its many findings.

              • 2009-09-30 at 19:35

                On #2: The results of the tech is in no way diminished (or enhanced) by Hubbard’s intentions or character. It wouldn’t matter one bit for me whether the light bulb was invented by Hitler or Joan of Arc – the light bulb would work non the less. So let’s get off this adHom.

  9. jason beghe
    2009-09-28 at 01:17

    Thank you, Geir, for the kind and generous words. They left me moved and honored and inspired. What you are doing is beautiful…and you are doing it beautifully. Spending time with you has filled me with strength and purpose and energy. How fortunate I am to have you as a true, close friend.

    • Someone
      2009-10-11 at 12:25

      Hello Jason!

      I was so happy when I knew you left the Church! I was a staff member for 2,5 years and as you can imagine I saw a bunch of movies featuring you. You were the first influential person I got to know was out of the church and other great beings followed it. I loved your interview, I inclucing have it saved on my computer and this is definitely a new era for the world, for scientology and all the scientologists! The internet is so good and its power is key right now and in the future. Thank you so much for such a wise decision, it’s a honour to be speaking to you right now!

      • Someone
        2009-10-11 at 12:34

        including, not inclucing 😛 it’s AN honour 🙂 sorry for the typos.

  10. jason beghe
    2009-09-28 at 01:32

    Chris-
    I don’t honestly know how to answer you questions. I don’t really think in those terms—I am constantly reevaluating what I think. The only thing that I truly know is that I don’t know. Picasso was once asked how he planned his masterpiece painting “Guernica”. He seemed a bit confused by the question for a moment, then he replied, “I paint the picture to find out what it looks like.” I like that.
    Love,
    Jason
    (http://www.artquotes.net/masters/picasso/pablo_guernica1937.htm)

    • Jim Logan
      2009-09-28 at 13:36

      JB,
      When I was coming up the line in Supervisor training, a datum emerged from the Study Tapes:learning is a continuous process of fixing and unfixing data, aligning data and reevaluating data. As long as you do that, well, I can only see good things ahead.

    • Chris
      2009-09-29 at 02:03

      “The only thing that I truly know is that I don’t know”
      This reminds me of a certain quote by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to a friend regarding Religion,which seems to embody the questioning spirit of the Early Dianeticist Movement.
      “Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear.”
      Good luck on your journey Jason!!!

  11. Heather
    2009-09-28 at 07:29

    I just had the opportunity to see Jason in “Californication”, and it was an utter joy. That part was written for you, I’d say, JB. And you handled it with aplomb. I loved, loved, loved the setting. 😉

  12. Mr. TJ
    2009-09-28 at 23:34

    Chris :
    Did he get his misunderstoods regarding the state of Clear cleared yet(this from his scientology interview)?

    Why do you assume that he has MU’s regarding the state of Clear?

  13. jason beghe
    2009-09-29 at 01:13

    Thanks.

  14. jason beghe
    2009-09-29 at 13:13

    jason beghe :Thanks.

    I wouldn’t mind that point clarified either….

    • Chris
      2009-10-01 at 04:56

      I mean how in that certain interview you gave out(the one where you said “Show me a clear show me a fucking OT) you referred to how you were listening to the early Congresses and that LRH kept on “changing” the definition of Clear.
      Watching the interview I therefore assumed since you were in the CO$ that you got MU’s or the like.
      Also have you seen Marty’s new posting regards DM cheating on Shelly?
      It would be nice to hear your input on this….
      http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2009/09/29/eva-and-dm-part-iii/

      • Chris
        2009-10-05 at 03:27

        Unanswered query to Jason is unanswered 😦

  15. Alex
    2009-10-02 at 01:45

    Hi Geir,
    I wanted to comment on something that has been bothering me a bit. I want to put ethics in on the COS. I do not agree with everything that even lRH has said nor do I agree with all the apparent rules laid out for discipline within the COS. I do however feel that the rules laid out for keeping the upper level material confidential seem sensible and I have had a lot of wins from that material. It is my understanding that Jason revealed the upper data to his friend David Duchovny and then ridiculed the data. I wanted to get your opinion on how you separate your own own ethics and integrity on this issue. Do you feel what Jason did was ok or do you feel that it violated your own reality? If you could expand on any answer that would be great.
    Thanks,
    Alex

    • 2009-10-02 at 06:37

      I wouldn’t do what Jason did. But I have no grudges toward anyone for what they did – not even with DM. With the CoS and DM it is a matter of seeing a situation and go ahead and handle it. I let the past be the past. Worrying (about the past) is a very unproductive action.

      • Alex
        2009-10-02 at 15:59

        Good viewpoint. I do still believe in ethics conditions, they have worked for me too. To me it is not a matter of worrying about it, but helping a person to take responsibility for their acts. It looks like he is making ethics change and that is good. If he really does have the viewpoint of ridiculing the upper levels then he would not be part of the group that I want to be in.
        ARC,
        Alex

        • 2009-10-02 at 17:48

          I don’t think he is ridiculing the OT levels anymore.

          • Alex
            2009-10-02 at 17:55

            Thanks Geir!

    • Jim Logan
      2009-10-02 at 12:38

      Alex,
      I understand your concern on this point and I think it is valid personally. I’ve also read some of JB’s more recent communications and was struck by the one above where he says he’s learning and re-evaluating data all the time. For me, reading Geir’s write-up of the visit gave me more data too, to evalutate and re-evaluate other data.

      Presently it seems to me that JB is operating in PT from a different viewpoint. That indicates he’s been able to withdraw from his experiences and from a theta viewpoint, look over what he’s impinged on, take some knowledge from it, and he’s getting back at life. That’s the theta-MEST theory of Science of Survival. He doesn’t appear to be stuck in an idee fixe. That’s good for sound reasoning. You see what I mean, these are pluspoints and indicate a social personality.

      I know personally that under stress, any being, is hard put and can say and do things that are not what they’d say or do when not under that stress. The present scene under a real 2.5 % SP, David Miscavige, has led to lots of stress for lots of good people.

      Let’s say that the earlier video falls under a High Crime. Let’s also not lose sight of the LRH policy that a being’s worth and contributions can outweigh any such HC and that’s despite any evidence of that HC. That’s clearly stated in the SP Acts PL.

      In other words, there are no perfect beings. Those that take responsibility for their actions can get past them and move up and aid others in the same. The door is always open, even if just a crack, no matter what any body has done.

      • Jim Logan
        2009-10-02 at 13:12

        As an additional comment on the effects of suppressive duress, the thread on Ad Hominem, and those OSA guys robotically operating irrationally is another example. They are acting very poorly indeed. It seems to me the intent of Geir’s blog to point that out to them, with the postulate they’ll discover the source of the irrational acts, the suppressive reich of David Miscavige, and these OSA guys will get sorted out.

        Ethics/justice in Scn is used as an additional tool to get tech results. When those results are factually obtained, there is no need for external ethics/justice as a being natively is ethical and will operate rationally and with sound education and sufficient data the analytical mind is pretty darn good at coming up with sensible conclusions.

        • Alex
          2009-10-02 at 16:03

          Excellent points Jim. I see you have a fantastic duplication of the ethics tech. Very nice.
          Alex

      • 2009-10-02 at 13:50

        JB is one of the less fixed idea people I have met.

  16. jason beghe
    2009-10-07 at 01:46

    Chris :Unanswered query to Jason is unanswered

    sorry for the delay, chris. i am not a big blogger and i can’t type. i have become less and less interested lately in “new” incriminating data regarding dm and the current superstructure of the c of s. i don’t really need any more evidence to solidify my negative opinions of them. it certainly does not surprise me, though. frankly, i suspect that marital infidelity is perhaps the least of dm’s 2d indiscretions.
    regarding clear and my “mus”:
    i may be mistaken, but i think you misheard what i said in that interview.

    • Chris
      2009-10-08 at 03:31

      “sorry for the delay, chris. i am not a big blogger and i can’t type”
      Jesus Christ!!!
      So even the CELEBRITIES in the CO$ have been shielded from the internet!!!!!!!!!
      That in itself should be a High Crime 🙂

      “it certainly does not surprise me, though. frankly, i suspect that marital infidelity is perhaps the least of dm’s 2d indiscretions.”
      Though this doesn’t suprise me,could you elaborate some more?
      (brings out bag of popcorn)
      Though I think you’re a hero for learning to use that damn quote box.I gave up on that a long time ago and just use quotation marks on my postings here. 🙂

  17. jason beghe
    2009-10-08 at 15:53

    Chris :“sorry for the delay, chris. i am not a big blogger and i can’t type”Jesus Christ!!!So even the CELEBRITIES in the CO$ have been shielded from the internet!!!!!!!!!That in itself should be a High Crime
    “it certainly does not surprise me, though. frankly, i suspect that marital infidelity is perhaps the least of dm’s 2d indiscretions.”Though this doesn’t suprise me,could you elaborate some more?(brings out bag of popcorn)Though I think you’re a hero for learning to use that damn quote box.I gave up on that a long time ago and just use quotation marks on my postings here.

    Put away the popcorn, chris, I can’t elaborate for now.

    • Chris
      2009-10-09 at 06:04

      “Put away the popcorn, chris, I can’t elaborate for now.”
      Well I think it’s a bit too late for the popcorn……
      (burps)

  18. Someone
    2009-10-10 at 23:51

    If a supressive person is that arc full, then we have to redifine ‘supressive’ 🙂 hehe

    • 2009-10-11 at 06:33

      There is a big discrepancy between LRH’s definition of a suppressive person and a person declared suppressive by the church. I am not sure there is even statistical significance in the overlap.

      • Someone
        2009-10-11 at 12:19

        yeah, i was just kidding with definitions 🙂 words have to be plastic as long others understand the meaning we’re using. i think methods are good but they are to be left after as in a first instance they free but at a certain point they limit too much. it’s just a view point, pretty relative as all others! it’s been wonderful to be around here, great work Isene! I am need of friends like you, people I can trust in!

  19. Roadrunner
    2009-10-15 at 13:12

    isene :
    Continuation from: “Mary Jo has left the building”

    Guilt by association? Really now, that’s a known logical fallacy. See what he wrote in the comments section, read what I write elsewhere on this blog. We are individuals with our own opinions. We are also very good friends. I am being nice about your comment here (it’s late).
    Let’s get this comment section back on topic. Next comment you post on this: Do it under “Breakfast with Jason”:

    Sorry, you justify, you don’t clarify. For some reason you need to defend Jason Beghe. You can’t follow 2 paths simultaneously that go in opposing directions. If Jason Beghe has something to say or wishes to explain his earlier public statements to me, then I am willing to listen.

    You may notice that I too speak my mind.

    • 2009-10-15 at 18:03

      i am no defending Jason. And I cannot speak for him. Ask him what you want to know.

  20. Roadrunner
    2009-10-15 at 18:48

    isene :
    i am no defending Jason. And I cannot speak for him. Ask him what you want to know.

    About 5 times or so I have pointed out incongruities in how you fail to clarify matters in regards to Jason Beghe utterances in the media and the subject of Scientology. You persistently fail to respond to my exact inquiry. It was you that proposed that I email Jason Beghe instead. Either way we don’t appear to be on the same wavelength. As I see it you are trying to cope here while trying to find your way walking on 2 opposing paths.

    • 2009-10-15 at 19:23

      Listen, ask Jason. Please.

  21. Roadrunner
    2009-10-20 at 16:56

    isene :
    Listen, ask Jason. Please.

    Doesn’t LRH say: “Look, don’t listen”? I want to see a change in his behaviour towards the media, if there is, guide me to it. If there is none, then it stops right there.

    • 2009-10-20 at 17:32

      There is a change toward the media. Or did you see him do more in the media in the last year?

      • Roadrunner
        2009-10-30 at 19:24

        isene :
        There is a change toward the media. Or did you see him do more in the media in the last year?

        Does not suffice. He has not retracted anything either.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: