SYNOPSIS OF THE SOLO NOTs RUNDOWN, BULLETINS AND PROCEDURES

Pierre-Ethier-Class-XII-FSO

SYNOPSIS OF THE SOLO NOTs RUNDOWN, BULLETINS AND PROCEDURES

(This write-up contains no “OT only data” and may be read by anyone)

 

What follows are verifiable facts written by someone who in addition to having fully studied and  trained on the all of the original NOTs and SOLO NOTs materials, has audited many thousands of hours on nearly 1000 different Solo NOTS pre-OTs, including over 400 Solo NOTs EP checks.

It is meant to supersede numerous speculations and fantasies that can be found on the Internet that were uniformly composed by people who for one reason never had access to first hand information.

HISTORY

 

The release of Solo NOTs was announced on October 1981 by Snr C/S Int, David Mayo to a full auditorium at the Flag Land Base in Clearwater. I was there, as a NOTs Review auditor at the time.

A full copy of the Briefing is available the Source Magazine (Flag Service Organization semi-monthly Magazine) that was published subsequently.

Being a NOTs auditor at the time, I was privileged to attend additional NOTS Personnel ONLY Briefings (for NOTs auditors, Case Supervisors and Directors of Processing only).

Solo NOTs was created and designed by LRH, as it was discovered that all NOTs case completions were unstable. Barely months or even weeks after attesting, they were found to still be loaded with NOTs type phenomenon and charge. LRH was the first person to pilot the level and it was found to be a very long level. LRH himself had just completed it successfully.

CONFIDENTIAL SOLO NOTs ONLY BULLETINS

 

Three CONFIDENTIAL SOLO NOTS ONLY HCO BULLETINS were released and available to SOLO NOTS Review Auditors and C/Ses ONLY.

The first bulletin was not truly confidential and included mainly the details on the administration of the level, in particular details about the additional administrative steps required because people would be auditing it mainly at home. People were required to audit daily and send a weekly report before Thursday (Florida time) at 2PM. Worksheets were to mailed in every other week in AIRMAIL First Class envelopes without any confidential markings.

The Second Bulletin dealt with procedures and actions specific to SOLO NOTs only: essentially minor changes and refinements over the routine NOTS procedures found in the regular audited NOTS Bulletins.

The third Bulletin was for C/Ses ONLY and explained what the true END PHENOMENA of SOLO NOTS was expected to be and delineated the steps to follow to verify and validate that END Phenomenon if and when it should occur. It was normally never shown to NOTS auditors, even those doing SOLO NOTS reviews. The bulletin gave details from LRH Solo auditing including how many hours LRH had actually audited to completion on that level.

A fourth Bulletin came less than two years later called ADVANCED PROCEDURE and gave a new technique designed to find and run out charge faster and more effectively. I would subsequently compare moving from the Routine to the Advanced Procedure to trading a hunting rifle for a high Speed machine gun. The Advanced procedure has been fully tested and has been found to run well on advanced cases (cases that have spent at least one month worth of Auditing Solo NOTs and were properly prepared by a full run of the audited NOTs program). Not everyone runs well on it.

The fifth Bulletin describes a startling new approach to addressing the charge found on Solo NOTs.

When applied correctly and CORRECTLY UNDERSTOOD, it is extremely powerful and directly deals with some of the most fundamental philosophical questions such as: “Who am I?”, “What is the meaning of life?”, “Why am I here?” “Why do I behave the way I do?”

SOLO NOTs EP CHECK

 

In early 1985, in order to properly authenticate and validate SOLO NOTS completions, a HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL SOLO NOTs EP check (in three parts) was handed out to ONLY 6 people at the Flag Land Base: only those selected few directly involved with verifying the EP of SOLO NOTs were allowed to read it: the Snr C/S Flag, the Deputy Snr C/S for NOTs and SOLO NOTs, all three Solo NOTS C/Ses, the SOLO NOTS EP check Auditor and the Chief Cramming Officer. Everyone else was strictly forbidden access to those. After repeated failures by the Solo NOTs EP Check Auditor (Rick Sheehy), I was ordered by the Deputy Snr C/S to replace him. Two Class XIIs were also shown the SOLO NOTS EP check, for public requiring a German speaking auditor (a language I know the rudiments of and have audited in, but lacked the expertise for a fully fluent check) The Solo NOTs EP check contains the CONFIDENTIAL EP of SOLO NOTS. That EP is written in no other bulletin and so far, I have seen plenty of evidence that those who routinely assert making Solo NOTs completions in the FREEZONE, DO NOT KNOW IT and per their own statements simply do not achieve that EP. Worse, the C/Ses (in the cases that use one) omit numerous vital steps in the programming of such cases. As a result most FREEZONE Solo NOTS completions (and most of those currently being done in the Church) are being robbed of a significant part of the wins, abilities and attributes they would have had a right to expect from completing Solo NOTs. This is the Sixth and final SOLO NOTs ONLY set of issues. When I left Flag in 1991, only 11 people at Flag, including myself, had read those highly confidential issues.

EARLY SOLO NOTs COMPLETIONS

 

Each of the first 100 people the FLAG SOLO NOTs C/Ses (as approved by the Flag Service Organization Snr C/S) had to be approved by RTC before they had the permission to attest. The first 20 proposals were all denied and came back with extensive Cramming Orders. Eventually in early 1985 Betty Filisky was allowed to attest as the First Solo NOTS completion. From Solo NOTs completion Number 300 (1986) to 900 (1990) I did approximately two third of the Solo NOTs EP checks: approximately half of them on Wednesday Nights and Thursday Mornings.

None of the six set of issues above were revised in any way or form from its moment of issuance until sometime after the advent of the “Golden Age of Tech” (1996).

Over the past few years, I have been shown copies the Solo NOTs bulletins that were revised under the guidance of David Miscavige and RTC. Each one of those “revised” bulletins contains serious out-tech such as the introduction of arbitraries, the violation of fundamental rules on recognizing the END PHENOMENON of a procedure or process, or seeking to restimulate new charge before the one at hand is fully addressed.

SHARING THE DATA

 

Paradoxically, a number of the current opinion leaders of the FREEZONE who are always hungry for “NEW TECH” before they have even mastered how to apply properly what they already have, apply without qualms those altered and out-tech issues because it is the ONLY THING THEY HAVE. Their motto, as professed by the self-appointed Freezone PR (and their professed friends) is that ANY TECH is better than no Tech (something L. Ron Hubbard has vigorously rebutted in dozen of Saint Hill Briefing Course Lectures made since the original statement made in the 1950s and states clearly that such a rule only applies to introductory auditing: IT IS SPECIFICALLY DENIED IN UPPER LEVEL PROCEDURES AND OT LEVELS).

In my conversations with him, the aberrant ideals promoted by that Flim-Flam artist that calls himself the FREEZONE PR is that “SQUIRELLING is better than NO AUDITING” and that as far as tech is concerned 1- If you don’t have it, but must either properly train or pay for it: Try to steal it. 2-If you can’t steal it: deny it even exist, and accuse those who do have it of being con-men by widely repeating the Church Enemy lines about those individuals. 3- If it is proven it does exist, incite poorly trained auditors to fill any gaps with processes of their own manufacture while pretending it is “PURE LRH”. Too many, otherwise well meaning FREEZONE practitioners have fallen prey to that false propaganda that appears to be designed to serve the interests of the Church and discourage anything but unprofessional and unethical standards for the Freezone.

REFUSAL TO PROVIDE POTENTIALLY HARMFUL DATA TO THE RECKLESS

 

One may ask why don’t you give Advanced Tech (Solo NOTs or otherwise) it to them?

The answer is very simple: it can be said about each and every one of the individuals that complains that I did not give Advance tech to them:

1- Except for three persons, they have never even asked me, deciding to malign me first as soon as they perceived that I knew something they did not, or could possibly become more popular than they were, as a threat to their income.

2- They have repeatedly openly defamed me, and sometimes even used their own public to spread the Church Enemy lines about me and secretly preyed on my clients with false promises. All but one of those individuals who bitterly complains, directly tried to extort materials or money from me, using the threat that they would be “running a Black PR” campaign directed me until (they vainly hope) they created my professional decease and in their very own words “get me run off the Freezone”. One of them even incited his pc to noisily threaten me and my family with an entirely vexatious Lawsuit (complete with Lawyer letters and threats), while gleefully broadcasting that they wished through the proceeds of their “lawsuit” to see me, my wife and autistic child penniless on the street, while that FREEZONE auditor, his pc and his support group shared among themselves the spoils of my postulated demise, which represent everything I have ever worked for and earned honestly.

In all cases, because of their own poor products and their obvious lies, the black PR campaign only managed to seduce the gullible or those already prejudiced. It gave me a lot of Free Publicity and increased the number of friendly inquiries always to a new plateau after each of those “OSA style” PR campaign apparently instigated by individuals in the FREEZONE. (It is my opinion that the Freezone individuals promoting the Church Enemy lines or engaging in those failed Black PR campaigns are wittingly or not acting as stooges or agents of the Church and OSA)

3- Perhaps most importantly of all, Experience from hundreds of practitioners with thousands of individuals, as testified at nauseam in Discussion groups all over the Internet has conclusively shown that Incompetent or reckless auditing or delivery of OT Levels and procedures can create insanity, Mental Insatiability, Introversion or even Suicide.

Contrarily to the Freezone and the Church of Scientology, I refuse to brush these off as trivial.

SIMPLE REQUIREMENTS

 

As stated above, the Advanced Procedures and OT Levels of Scientology are like a bottle of Nitro-glycerine: the inexpert handler can seemingly get away with it often enough to eventually become utterly reckless and bring about an unavoidable disaster for all those unlucky enough to be close by.

Therefore as a matter of Integrity and Ethical standard, I feel obligated to demand that:

1- The practitioner applying to apply those materials must demonstrate that he has the minimum amount of skills and competence to deliver those actions correctly. In the case of demonstration of competence, I use the rule of common sense where examination is required rather than accepting silver-tongue PR. (Following similar ideas to those in Hubbard’s Policies on “LOOK, DON’T LISTEN”). Also when an incompetent individual produces a bad result from his own recklessness or mistakes, he/she tend to blame those who tried to help. In other words, the handful of complainers that I did not give them the Tech they wanted, solely view me as a Cash Cow to be sacrificed or butchered the instant I fail to raise their private Income.

2- The second one is that I receive proper and just compensation for my time and effort in teaching. Based on results, End Phenomena and the amount of work actually performed, I actually charge less than over 50% of the Freezone auditors who criticize me.

Apparently it is OK for them to charge their High prices for delivering or teaching in turn anything I would have taught them , yet feel that I am morally obligated to service them FOR FREE (or better yet, at my own expense) , like if I somehow were their personal servant or slave.

3- That they do not try to entrap me by trying to seducing me into forwarding (they hope) is copyrighted materials. (I do not provide materials that copyrighted to anyone except those On which I own the copyright. I provide guidance and correction to those seeking them. In several instances individuals working for a Freezone practitioner have tried to ensnare their enemies by soliciting Copyrighted materials and quietly reporting the matter to OSA, while all along advertising itself as an Ethical Freezone or Independent auditor.

LRH FREQUENTLY MISQUOTED

 

I am still at a loss to comprehend that type of logic, except that it might be the result of mis-duplicating L. Ron Hubbard most misquoted statement:

“The work was free.

Keep it so. ”

That quote from the original Clear procedure Booklet refers to the Tech being “FREE FROM BEING CONTROLLED BY MONOPOLIES OR SELF INTEREST GROUPS” Too many believe it means that the Tech is GRATIS for all. Note that grammatically, the expression “THE WORK WAS FOR FREE” should have been the more proper way to say it for someone with the writing skills of L. Ron Hubbard. It is also well documented that Hubbard himself charged got paid handsomely paid for every bulletin, piece of writing or rundown he released.

HOW TO COMPLETE SOLO NOTS

 

The following rules are primarily based on common sense and professional standards.

Those who disagree tend to do it because they see producing Quickie products as financially beneficial to their practice

A- Individuals seeking to do Solo NOTs should do it under the guidance of a competent individual only

The competent individual applies the following rules:

1- GET PROPERLY TRAINED: Getting trained is far more than reading a few bulletins on a computer screen. At least one of the practitioners in the Freezone movement openly admits studying the NOTs pack while consuming beer and smoking cigarettes. A number of others skip any form of Solo course and instruct the student verbally (often through skype) on how to do Solo NOTs. Besides reading the materials, it is simple question of Integrity to ensure one has been checked by a PROPERLY TRAINED AUDITOR on the numerous procedures to be certain one does it right.

2- GET PROPERLY APPRENTICED: Apprenticeships or Internships are vital for the professional auditor:. Advanced Levels were never conceived for delivery by the lone Field auditor, as they are vastly more complex to supervise properly and require a high enough level of expertise to deliver them properly. Without guidance, the field auditor auditing a complex rundown is certain to develop bad habits, to quickie various steps and to mishandle (or ignore) a number of bad indicators whenever they occur. The typical answer to problems by an auditor operating without a C/S or a C/S operating without a Snr C/S is resorting to unusual solutions.

3- DO NOT AGGRANDIZE YOUR KNOWLEDGE OR SKILLS: It is a great temptation for the poorly trained auditor facing financial hardship to exaggerate his credentials. The Freezone has a plethora of poorly trained Class IVs that never interned, or even if they did, have self-awarded themselves Class VI, VIII and in some cases XII. Some auditors go as far as inventing the steps of Rundowns created by L. Ron Hubbard on which they do not have documentation, (such as New Vitality Rundown or the Ls) falsely professing they have the “PURE LRH ORIGINAL, when they have boot-leg grossly altered versions. In at least one case a Freezone practitioner that has publicly advertised having Evil Intentions toward me and sold for a profit Upper Level issues that are forgeries and has apposed by name on them. A Freezone Entrepreneur proceeded to train for his own financial gain “Ron’s Org staff using those same forgeries, mixed with other forgeries and boot-leg bulletins.

The end product of auditors who pretend training not attained is quickie products and impaired thinking for a greater or smaller number of their clients. It is dishonest. They eventually, follow suit themselves in that dwindling spiral by eventually becoming thoroughly messed up and delusional cases themselves.

4- ASK ASSISTANCE FROM SOMEONE WHO TRULY KNOWS AND IS TRULY TRAINED (as opposed as from a Flim-Flam Artist): Too often auditors or C/Ses will accept the verbal and false incompetent advice by those who pose as Authorities. Someone accepting such advice is a fool, just like someone with alarming symptoms seeking advice on the Internet from non-doctors and self medicating instead of seeking the help of a true Physician.

5- ENSURE THE PERSON DOING A MAJOR OT GRADE OR LEVEL IS PROPERLY SETUP PER EXISTING CHECKLISTS, C/S SERIES AND MATERIALS. Often violated for convenience or because the auditor or C/S could not face the task of writing a proper program, this is the reason for delusional people after the Upper Grades or their dramatizing Evil Intents and being plain “Crazy”.

A- Successful completion of Solo NOTs is largely dependent upon being properly set-up for it (and therefore having reach the proper reality for it)

B- The person auditing SOLO NOTs must audit regularly, (daily is preferable), must refer to the materials and have an open communication line with someone competent to supervise his case.

C- The criteria to establish overall progress on the Level is not the number of month or years spent on the level, but the cumulative number of hours audited on it. An individual doing less than two hours a week will only audit 100 hours a year. In 5 years, he will have audited barely 500 hours. But, another one doing 12 hours a week, will have audited 600 hours in the first year and will be therefore more advanced than the one who has been doing his 2 hours a week for 5 years.

D– DOING ALL THE STEPS OF AUDITED NOTS CORRECTLY IS CRUCIAL TO THE ATTAINMENT OF THE FULL EP OF SOLO NOTS. Many of the steps of audited NOTs are not designed to be done Solo. It is a violation of both the Solo C/S Series and HCOB 11 September 1970 to audit Solo (or skip) the early step of the NOTs program. LRH himself calls such an action, one for the “dickey birds”

Someone cannot honestly claim to have achieved or having made another achieve the full EP of Solo NOTs if some of the steps of audited NOTs have been either quickied or omitted without at the very least making an honest effort to ensure the person gets run on them.

A few know-best individuals, whose common denominators are never having trained under anyone on NOTs routinely tell people that audited NOTs is “unnecessary” or that “from OT III onward, the entire Bridge is Solo” These false data explicitly conflict not only with LRH data above but with common sense as well.

E- Once a person has done all the actions on Solo NOTS and feels done, a FULL Folder Error Summary must be done. It should have been done of previous available folders before someone starts or continues Solo NOTs. The Solo Folders should be FESed. I know of no one, except for me who has even done that outside of the Church.

F- Since SOLO NOTS is “SOLO NEW ERA DIANETICS FOR OTs”, it would seem obvious to someone trained as a Senior C/S that the SOLO NOTS completion, in additional to those specifically related to the Solo NOTs procedure or technology, should have those expected of a DIANETIC PC. The Health Form (renamed Original Assessment for NED) has many of questions the C/S should ask himself about the case before he proceeds further at this point. Attesting blindly someone who glibly asserts they are done, when they still have compulsions, fears, somatics, aberrations or some form of out-ethics is not merely foolish, it is suppressive. It not only falsely validate the individual, it will make him harder to handle for the auditor and the C/S that will try to do his next step. The person will be a bad example and damage the repute of the Freezone and the credibility of Scientology as a subject. By actual statistics, within 5 years at least 50% of those quickie products will abandon the belief that Scientology has any workability at all. A further 20% will engage in all forms of squirreling, still desperately trying to handle their ruins that the prior auditors and Case Supervisors found convenient to ignore.

One could ask the question to the PR artists that promote that kind of product by fanatically validating those who produce them, what is their true intent. It cannot be to help individuals achieve personal freedom or enlightenment. It can only have to with immediate self-gratification, either based on financial gain or Power or worse the seeking of the same False High as the one achieved from Drugs or an adrenalin rush.

G- There is a significant of technology that has been either partially developed or released concerning NOTs. NOTs, by its very nature allows a quasi-infinity of commands to address any condition or case aspect the person receiving may need to handle. Under the most competent of Case Supervisors Tailored questions were formulated to address any and all conditions. The two most common conditions found in people are PTSness (being the adverse effect of someone dramatizing Evil Purposes) or having Evil Purposes, and Negative or Succumb postulates on one or more dynamics.

Additional steps exist to address any form of earlier practices, recurring case conditions and hidden standards. There are also catch all actions, somewhat like the prepared assessment rundown, identity and disability rundowns found on NED, but tailored to NOTs that can be added to ensure completed cases stand out like a shining jewel in all of its glory.

THE NOTS STABILITY RUNDOWN

 

H- Originally issued with a lone question and a single command procedure, the original NOTs PTS step issued in 1978 was a very rudimentary and simplistic approach to addressing NOTs at the case level. It could miss on individuals who have a significant amount of charge or aberration connected with the subject.

In 1991, the LRH compilation unit formulated a precise and thorough procedure for addressing PTSness at the NOTs case level. The procedure was based on LRH research, primary the one done during the Special Rundown in November 1975, where the theory and key concepts of the procedure are outlined. The lone question was complemented by a total of 83 questions in order to cover all facets of PTSness. My own research and search within the totality of LRH writings and conferences for every single characteristic, symptom and attributes connected with PTSness led me to expand the list of 83 question to a possible 169 questions, plus many additional questions for running out over 100 attitudes, emotions and symptoms typically associated with PTSness. While not all may be required for all cases, some may require them all.

In 1991 to incite people to come to Flag for more auditing, the newly developed steps were broadly promoted as the STABILITY RUNDOWN (PTSness step as described above) and HELD DOWN SEVEN RUNDOWN (based on the Evil Purpose step below). The FIXATED PERSON RUNDOWN was added some time later.

FULL NOTS FIXATED PERSON RUNDOWN

 

Fixated attention on one or more individuals is a symptom frequently found in PTS individuals.

A full and stable handling of the condition requires many more questions that the two or so questions already published on the subject. Over two dozen questions, each with its own subset of questions completes that Rundown.

THE HELD DOWN SEVEN RUNDOWN

 

I- A Flag C/S coined the expression “Held down Seven Rundown”. When told to attest someone to the “New Rundown”, the examiner queried the C/S for a proper non-ambiguous name, Using the simple logic that a Rock Slam (Evil Purpose) is based on a fixated aberration and that a held down Seven is such a computation, the name Held Down Seven Rundown was born. The approach to handle Evil Purposes and Rock Slams as presented in the new 1991 is simply taken verbatim from a set of handwritten LRH L-10 instructions written back in 1971. Since I have read and studied those handwritten instructions during my Class X course, I hope to put to rest those Nay Sayers who dramatize their own Held down Seven by falsely claiming that NOTs was not designed by L. Ron Hubbard. In 1984 David Mayo in his Advanced Ability Center issues written in Santa Barbara wrote the procedure and commands of that step in full details. Since it has been proven that David Mayo had no access to the NOTs materials after he left the Church in 1981 and he took no NOTs materials with him, the only plausible conclusion is that in 1991 the Church while it broadly promoted that the “1991 NOTS COURSE PACKS” had removed the last remnants associated with David Mayo, actually plagiarized him.

J- Once the person has gone through all steps above and the properly trained C/S and Snr C/S agree that there is no more to handle. The person is returned to SOLO, as entire areas of case may have now opened up that were simply not available or confront able. Either of two phenomena will occur: the person will find a significant amount of case and therefore will be returned on SOLO NOTs as before OR the person finds or nothing and still has the metered manifestation of the End Phenomenon. At this point, the person is sent to do the SOLO NOTS EP check.

SOLO NOTS EP CHECK

 

K- The Solo NOTS EP check that I did on many hundreds of different people (including such celebrities as Karen Black, Amanda Ambrose, Mimi Rogers, Priscilla Presley. Bobby Lyons, Susana Gonzales,…) consisted of three steps and was very simple. The first two steps are done by the auditor in session in two separate sessions. The third step is done at the examiner. The first step consist of a set of questions to ensure the person is clean case wise and ethically. The second step is a unique form of rehab specific to that level. The entire action would rarely take more than 45 minutes. SIMPLICITY was the key word. But as with everything RTC touches, things become complicated.

In the Church, the Solo NOTS EP check has grown to a monstrosity lasting several intensives. The original 12 or so questions of the first step have grown to nearly 100.

A Freezone auditor who per his statement to me, did some of those aberrant “Solo NOTs EP Checks” in the early years of the 21st Century, spent several intensives on a single question. Each of the new questions has already been asked at nauseam on previous sec-checks and videoed. False reads were explored for hours until the auditor decided to accept what a good auditor should have seen as obvious within minutes. A Cheese Maker from a small Swiss town who could not speak a word of English and had never been to America except for SOLO NOTS at Flag was interrogated for nearly 10 hours about a “read” on having connections to the CIA before the question was finally dropped. Years later, when I ran out the session, it became evident; the person still did not even understand what the CIA was. yet the auditor who did such an atrocity is happily auditing away boasting having done a fantastic job on his Flag pcs and with the greatest of insouciance is reportedly auditing the same action on his current pcs without once considering he may have a need to face correction (or Ethics)

THE SHERMAN TANK SCENARIO FULFILLMENT SYNDROME

 

The Scenario Fulfilment Syndrome refers to a scenario where people are indoctrinated so thoroughly to expect a hostile act from their enemies that they see it when it is not occurring. Such an event occurred in 1988 aboard the USS Vincennes where the crew mistook an Iranian Airbus airplane on a routine flight for a jet fighter on an attack dive. It cost the lives of nearly 300 innocent civilians.

In the Church people are indoctrinated to keep looking for the Sherman Tank: the Suppressive who solely derives pleasure from sabotaging “the most Ethical group in the Universe”. Therefore they will plough on and on until they find (or more correctly said: invent) an explanation to the “down statistics”, low income, or other organisation ill.

For each and every dirty needle caused through one of the numerous auditor code breaks that the new auditors in the Church are taught to commit, a fanatical and ruthless search is on looking for the HUGE HIDEN OVERTS committed by the person holding the cans. This is especially true at Flag where auditors are now being brainwashed into the belief that they are perfect simply because a failed auditor who never got products himself says that no auditor at Flag ever errs. (David Miscavige and his Golden Age of Tech)

Obviously, those responsible for the application of the Tech at Flag do not believe that it works. How else can one explain why they expect tons of reads on sec checks that were already found clean by previous auditors that were deemed to be flub-less. They either do not believe Man is basically good, or they correctly view their brand of auditing as highly destructive because according to their actions, the more “Man” is audited the less trustworthy he becomes and the more he/she is prone to unethical behavior and contra-survival acts. This lead the casual observer convinced that the “technology” they are using is unworkable or false, just like a person using the same brand of detergent to wash things that left them dirty would very promptly switch brand, if he had any sense.

THE INFAMOUS SIX MONTH CHECK

 

In 1984, shortly after Robin Scott reached fame (or infamy depending on the viewpoint) by impersonating a Sea Org Missionaire and stolen a NOTs pack from Copenhagen Advanced organization, I was personally ordered by the Snr C/S FSO to do a very difficult sec-check. The woman whose identity I have chosen to keep private stood accused of having just robbed a SOLO NOTS course pack from the Solo NOTs that very day. Never in my career, have I seen someone holding the cans being so nervous and evasive. It is one of the very few times in nearly 40 years of counselling that I had to resort to METER INTERROGATION as described in the HCO Bulletin of the same name. The meter do the talking: “Did you take something from the course room?” LONG FALL. “Was it, somebody else belongings? (no read) A Book? (no read) A Solo NOTS course pack? LFBD… Complete certainly, control and excellent TRs are required for this procedure to be successful. The course pack was recovered that day from the woman’s apartment. The Sea Org Executives at Flag were unwilling to wait for the session results and ordered someone to break into her apartment. The course pack was recovered and returned to the Class Room.

This incident caused turmoil within the SOLO NOTS HGC and led the FSO Supervisors and Snr C/S Int Offices to completely revamp the Security standards used in Scientology. The standards used today on the Freewinds are largely based on that incident.

As part of the Security improvements, the policies on OT Eligibility in the OEC volumes were scrutinized and a series of OT Eligibility sec-checks and “OT Eligibility Verification” were instituted. This included 6-month check to be done on all those doing Solo NOTs twice a year.

The order to start performing the 6 month check came in long before any 6 month check or Eligibility confessional were ever prepared by RTC or for them (They were seemingly too busy suppressing Mission Holders and running a Terror Campaign to intimidate anyone who did not sheepishly submit to them).The Snr C/S FSO ordered the Lead SOLO NOTS C/S to write it up. A 40 question sec-check was this born, with the usual expected questions; “Since you were last here, any out ethics? out-2D? connection with Squirrels? etc.

I started doing those sec checks on SOLO NOTS pre-OTS as soon as the sec-check was unofficially issued. In the vast majority of cases, the sec check, including rudiments was done in less than an hour, especially for those that were doing well. Those who found it too difficult to come twice a year (Europeans and Australians for example) would normally petition successfully the SOLO NOTS Director of Processing for an extension or to only come once a year. Things were simple. Everyone was happy. Nobody complained. Another benefit of significance was to allow those returning for the 6 month check to refresh the materials for the benefit of their memory as people on Advanced Levels in the Church are strictly forbidden to have any handwritten notes. Nobody was charged an additional amount for the refresher in the Classroom or using Qual facilities

I have always viewed the policy forbidding people on SOLO NOTs to have access to a course pack or even handwritten notes to be impractical and unrealistic. A thorough count of every technique available to the Solo NOTS auditor show there are at least 79 different techniques, many with multiple commands (as many as 12 steps for the more complex ones). Expecting someone who has only been exposed to those only for a few days in a classroom and never had the opportunity to apply ore than a handful in his apprenticeship sessions at Flag is nothing short of absurd. I am even convinced that people from the Freezone or Independent field that read about the existence of those 79 techniques will be surprised to hear there are so many and even get into a KNOW-BEST type of denial, especially if they are involved in quickie completions. Yet there are, and I am far from being the only one who came up with that count. It is even written in the SOLONOTS Hating pack that is now given to people who enrol on Solo NOTS at Flag.

As the years passed the 6 Month check evolved into a highly complex ritual. The average length of the check went from less than one hour and a single day to one intensive or more and a full week. It eventually grew to several intensives and multiple weeks and a complex off-line actions. Entire rundowns were introduced in the middle of the current program of Solo NOTs. To justify this obviously violation of the fundamentals of the C/S Series the Bulletin “The Non interference zone” also known as C/S series 73 was revised in 1983, then in 1985 and finally in 1990. Each revision grossly contradicting the previous one and each one entirely attributed to LRH as its one and only source. Seemingly, it has yet again revised in the XXIst Century, I am told. Yet the Bulletins were each time signed “L. Ron Hubbard” without the signatory mentioning any assistants, helpers or compilers. Since both the style and the application greatly vary from one issue to another, the only logical conclusion is that each of those bulletins was written by different individuals. The Church insisting that the same writer authored is willy-nilly insinuating that the purported writer suffered from Multiple Personality disorder.

SUMMARY

When I announced the first SOLO NOTs entirely made in the Independent field (from beginning to end), his success story was instantly denigrated and I was viciously attacked by the same” FREEZONE practitioners” who take umbrage to any insinuation they are not the best and the most perfect of all auditors, One of them keep repeating the same lie that he fabricated accusing me of having been trained exclusively in the Golden Age of tech and being a purveyor of false tech. My repeated replies that the Golden Age of tech was created in 1996,a full 4 years after I left the Church, were always answered by the same lie and slogan. He finally had to drop the earlier slogan he had created in order to protect his financial interests accusing me of being “solely RTC trained”. When I proved that the day RTC was incorporated in 1982, I was already far more trained and had done more internships than he had in present time, nearly three decades later, he simply went quiet.

In a way, it saddens me to see that a group of Freezone practitioners routinely “attest” their public on Solo NOTS with less than 50 hours of Solo NOTs auditing, often when the entirety of the audited program has been omitted (such as people going directly on Solo NOTS auditing and never receiving, the entirety of the steps involving PTSness and Evil Purposes having been skipped/ Worse some of their completions have rampant out-ethics such as being a Dead Beat parent reneging on Child support, embezzling or stealing money from their partners, secretly cheating on the sexual partners, or having stolen funds from their previous auditor. What else can be expected from people who are too lazy to train and never did a NOTs course, and are adamant at never allowing someone more trained read their session reports? What else can be expected from people who make false claims about their training and routinely lie to their public by delivering processes and rundowns they created or know were created within the Freezone by the Freezone,yet look their pc straight in the eye tell him it is the “genuine LRH article”.

LRH kept saying that auditors and Organizations should be in the Leica or Rolls Royce Business. Yet those auditors are producing YUGOs (the worst car ever made) insisting they are as good as Rolls Royces.

EPILOGUE

 

It takes a lot of work to produce a shiny product such as an authentic Solo NOTs completion. It requires a lot of expertise and experience. Producing authentic full products, conflicts with ideas of Auditing in Mass-Production mode and auditing for maximum profit.

Getting a Full Product on a complex rundown, like Solo NOTs is not a job for the lazy individual, the one who finds “no time to train”, nor for the one primarily interested in financial gain.

It requires an extraordinary amount of care. So much that few people are willing to go through the effort, since there are no true financial rewards for it, only the knowledge that it was the right thing to do and the knowledge that the receiving individual has truly moved that much closer to authentic Spiritual Freedom and Enlightenment

Pierre Ethier

Class XII

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

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