Mike Rinder's Blog

Something Can Be Done About It

More Reefer Madness

By 80 Comments

Following yesterday’s post by Terra Cognita (Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard and Reefer Madness), I thought some words direct from the horse’s mouth might be of interest.

It was published in Dianetics The Modern Science of Mental Health in 1950 and remains the word of God (Hubbard) to this day.

The chronic alcoholic is physically and mentally ill. Dianetics can clear him or even merely release him without too much trouble for alcohol is apparently not physiological in its addictive effect. With the whole range of chemistry to choose stimulants and depressants from, why the government chooses a superiorly aberrative and inferiorly stimulative compound to legalize is a problem for the better mathematicians, possibly these who deal exclusively in tax income problems. Opium is less harmful, marijuana is not only less physically harmful but also better in the action of keeping a neurotic producing, phenobarbital does not dull the senses nearly as much and produces less after effect, ammonium chloride and a host of other stimulants are more productive of results and hardly less severe on the anatomy: but no, the engrams, contaging unpleasantly along from the first crude brew which made one of our ancestors drunk, decree that alcohol is the only thing which is to be drunk if a person wants to “forget it all” and “have a good time.” There is really nothing wrong with alcohol save that it depends mainly on engrams and other advertising for its effect and is otherwise remarkably inferior in performance: that it makes such aberrative engrams is probably its main claim to fame and infame. Making one drug immoral and another one taxable is a sample of the alcohol engram in society. However, although it is immensely legal, it is doubtful if the auditor will find any use for it in therapy.
A couple of points of note.
Alcohol is apparently not physiological in its addictive effect. Really? I wonder what scientific information supports his assertion? Of course, all who believe in Hubbard accept this as truth, like every word he proclaims in DMSMH and anywhere else. But even Narconon claims they solve “Drug and alcohol dependency” and treat people with the Purif to “rid the body of the harmful effects of drugs.” I wonder if Mr. Hubbard ever dealt with a chronic alcoholic with the DT’s or a person trying a cold turkey withdrawal? Apparently not… The addiction of chronic alcoholism is not merely mental.
But more interesting is this.
…marijuana is not only less physically harmful but also better in the action of keeping a neurotic producing… OMG – quick, call the dedicated humanitarian scientologists campaigning against marijuana and tell them Ron say they should be campaigning FOR prohibition of alcohol. Ron decreed that marijuana is better than alcohol but all the scientology front groups apparently have not done The Basics?  If they were really on Source they would be on an all out, over the ramparts charge to stop the consumption of alcohol which, according to Hubbard, is doing much more harm than the evil weed. How can they be so off the rails?
Maybe they’re all drunk?

Comments

    • Seems Mike is “learning” from Terra. How to manufacture a story from a basis of nothing. Simple: all you have to do is take a few comments from LRH (preferably something from the 1950s as there is a better chance it may be “controversial”), twist it to suit whatever you feel can be stated about it, of course make out it is important, then chide the Scientologists for not following the twisted idea – who read the article and think “Jeez, how can anyone make a story up out of this nonsense?”

      Reply

      • So Dianetics is no longer Book One and the contents are merely “a few comments from LRH”?

        Which other parts of Dianetics are not to be followed? Te bits about engrams perhaps? Prenatals?

        So, you are proclaiming his “comments” are NOT to be given credence?

        Reply

        • Prenatals? I think you will find that such along with engram running fell out of favour with Hubbard himself which he mentions in many tapes from the mid-1950s as did many other aspects of the technology that he developed such as GPMs and running Dianetics on OTs etc. etc. But surely you knew all this? Surely you didn’t just open up DMSMSH, take a chapter and try to find an Achilles Heel by making a comment without knowing the whole scene? Surely you and your non-tech trained followers here cannot be so literally-minded?

          Well if so, I will ring Ron up on Target 2 and get him to send you an intergalactic email profusely apologizing for not creating the whole Bridge in the early 1950s, or indeed in the first month of its release (gasp from the audience at his effrontery). He will also apologize for creating the only workable technology of the mind and spirit in the whole of history and that he should have made it foolproof so that people don’t take things out of context and literally and without knowing a bit more about the developments of Dianetics and Scientology. He will address it specifically to “Admin Types who think they know what they re talking about” and “Literally Minded Persons (of usually ill-repute anyway”). Yes, I am sure Ron will send you an email shortly. Will all the other literally-minded folk here like to get such an email from Ron as well? I’ll ask him.

          Reply

          • But wait. The “science” and “tested” claims of Dianetics were not in fact science? Or tested? New “discoveries” showed they were NOT true when they were claimed to be? OMG. I guess you “tech types” are pretty easily fooled eh?

            So the only truly valid stuff is whatever the last thing Hubbard wrote about something? What if he has discovered on Target 2 that BT’s didn’t really exist and Incident 2 was just a false memory pretending to be an implant? What if he had said these things when he was still hiding out in his Bluebird motorhome but Miscavige had kept the. Secret in order to protect his income stream? He DID say to “pilot” skipping OT 3 and j7mping straight to NOTs.

            Wow, the whole provable nature of standard tech is thrown into doubt…

            You’re right FP. Apparently the only people that can actually make sense out of scientology are the “tech types” and pretty soon there will be none of them left. The only workable technology is doomed to die because nobody can seem to make it work and there are no new “tech types” being made.

            Reply

            • Stop waffling and trying to deflect, Mike.”What if” this and “what if” that? Your assumption and story is nonsense. You were just unlucky that I was there and spotted it otherwise the rest of the fawning fools on here would have nodded their heads sagely and thought you had provided some sort of inspired insight.

              Reply

              • ‘…whether or not you agree with or like Scientology or L Ron Hubbard, both have Indisputably contributed to social dialogue by generating important discussions on psychiatry, authoritarianism, holistic medicine, spiritual mythology, consciousness, unconsciousness, modernity, post-modernity, knowledge, beingness, reality, and (most importantly) what truly differentiates a cult from a religion and how social norms, biases, tribalism and fears of the UNKNOWN and the DIFFERENT contribute to how we make that determination.”

                That’s a quote from the About page of the website “Critical Neo-Hubbardian Studies — Sociology + Scientology,” hosted by a Sociology student at the University of New Brunswick, Canada. I would agree with what was stated. Here’s the context:
                —————————————-

                “I thought…why not do something different for once and approach the subject of Scientology and Dianetics from a sociological perspective? I wanted to challenge myself to look through the sensationalism and to consider Scientology’s unique place in our discourse on minority religions and social phenomena as well as LRH’s role as an abstract philosopher and key American intellectual.

                “Because whether or not you agree with or like Scientology or L Ron Hubbard, both have Indisputably contributed to social dialogue by generating important discussions on psychiatry, authoritarianism, holistic medicine, spiritual mythology, consciousness, unconsciousness, modernity, post-modernity, knowledge, beingness, reality, and (most importantly) what truly differentiates a cult from a religion and how social norms, biases, tribalism and fears of the UNKNOWN and the DIFFERENT contribute to how we make that determination.”

                — Anna

                “About me…Neither this site nor myself are associated with the Church of Scientology in any way.”

                https://www.neohubbard.com/about

            • Don’t worry Dave, you may keep yours – your reactive mind that is – I am sure it will comfort you in the millennia to come. You can have little chats with it when you’re feeling lonely, take it out for walks of an evening, take it on cruise ships with you, go to bed with it at night, play unconscious games with it – yes, there’s a whole host of activities you will get up to!

              Reply

              • Foolproof,

                As a PROUD, EXTREMELY-CONSERVATIVE SOUTHERN BAPTIST “Never-In”, who wants to see nothing less than the TOTAL DESTRUCTION of Scientology ( the CULT that it is ), I have a suggestion for you . . .

                Take the “cans” off your E-Meter, tie a string between them, pull the string tight, and have a “meaningful conversation”, maybe your first one ever .

                The “Clear Cognition” is the point when you finally realize how badly you have been SCREWED by Scientology !

                Got a question for you . . . So, where is Shelly Miscavige ?

                Dave F.

              • How Christian of you Dave! You’re a real devil eh? But surely you should be wearing a hair shirt and whipping yourself for your uncharitable transgression here!

                Mike, explain to him that I don’t give a hoot where Shelley is.

              • Foolproof,

                Read Psalm 26 ( Text below }

                Psalm 26

                Of David.

                1Vindicate me, Lord,

                for I have led a blameless life;

                I have trusted in the Lord

                and have not faltered.

                2Test me, Lord, and try me,

                examine my heart and my mind;

                3for I have always been mindful of your unfailing love

                and have lived in reliance on your faithfulness.

                4I do not sit with the deceitful,

                nor do I associate with hypocrites.

                5I abhor the assembly of evildoers

                and refuse to sit with the wicked.

                6I wash my hands in innocence,

                and go about your altar, Lord,

                7proclaiming aloud your praise

                and telling of all your wonderful deeds.

                8Lord, I love the house where you live,

                the place where your glory dwells.

                9Do not take away my soul along with sinners,

                my life with those who are bloodthirsty,

                10in whose hands are wicked schemes,

                whose right hands are full of bribes.

                11I lead a blameless life;

                deliver me and be merciful to me.

                12My feet stand on level ground;

                in the great congregation I will praise the Lord.

                Dave F.

    • No, the contradictions never stop coming as it takes TIME to review the heaping BIGsteaming mass of his verbal diarrhea while comparing it to what results-based SCIENTIFIC investigation has discovered. That review is impeded by how blithely he tossed off irrationalities as seeming afterthoughts in the middle of his endless stories.

      Reply

  2. As I see it, Hubbard linked most or all human aberration to engrams, whether my own or those of my passengers.

    I never used amphetamines but I got real speedy when I drank beer and smoked pot at the same time.

    AA says the true test of alcoholic drinking is if when you start drinking can you stop abruptly – try it a few times.

    Reply

  4. Sick SOB has been replaced by sicker COB! God bless marijuana and the legalization of all its benefits! And to all former and current non believers in CBD I say “Get behind thee Satan”. For only a fool, charlotten or idiot would doubt the obvious benefits! Come on FP bring it…..this is one subject I’d love to school $camology in!

    Reply

  5. I was given nitrous oxide once for a dental procedure. I remember that it didn’t do squat for the pain but I remember that I didn’t give a fuck.

    Reply

  7. And how about “Benzedrine” which “often helps a case run” as Hubbard wrote in “The Intensive Processing Procedure,” also in 1950? He continued to promote the amphetamine as part of his “GUK” compound, until it was made illegal later in the decade.

    Jon Atack talks about about “Hubbard’s Tangled Relationship With Mind-Altering Substances” here:

    https://tonyortega.org/2013/10/26/jon-atack-considers-l-ron-hubbards-tangled-relationship-with-mind-altering-substances/

    Reply

  9. Oh geezers… more “scientific research”.
    It dawned on me that just about everything Hubbard ever wrote had the definitive objective of being controversial. A, “hey, look at me, clever aren’t I? or, “didn’t think of that one did you?” His imagination in the above excerpt is akin to a child raining down excuses as to why cookies are bad for you, quoting the confusing evils of the difference between butter & sugar. (That kid has been stealing cookies for years). Hubbard’s strategic placement of the confusion created by lies and half truths along familiar human behavioral lines has become the gospel and business of Scientology. None of Dianetics or Scientology was ever designed to actually give anyone self-determinism, it can’t because it doesn’t work but it looks like it will. Then it was all heavily policed with policy, uniforms and a faux military facade, oh, and let’s not forget lawyers.
    To quote an old saying, “we was had!”

    Reply

  10. Possibly wouldn’t be so bad if you could say, “Oh that was long ago before Ron made some new discoveries” or some such thing…..But you can’t. You see there is a policy which states everything LRH ever said is still valid and always will be. And if you say otherwise, it’s a Scientology crime. The policy is called “Technical degrades”. It says that stating something is old, or no longer valid is a high crime.This pertains to everything LRH said. So everything LRH ever said is “policy”, and is to be followed.
    Gee, I wonder if this might cause a few problems? So fucking stupid

    Reply

    • Overrun in California: “You see there is a policy which states everything LRH ever said is still valid and always will be. And if you say otherwise, it’s a Scientology crime. The policy is called “Technical degrades”. It says that stating something is old, or no longer valid is a high crime.This pertains to everything LRH said. So everything LRH ever said is “policy”, and is to be followed.”

      No, it doesn’t say “stating SOMETHING is old…” It says:

      “Any CHECKSHEET in use or in stock which carries on it any degrading statement must be destroyed and issued without qualifying statements….These checksheets were not approved by myself; all the material of the Academy and SH courses IS in use.”

      With regard to earlier references about alcohol and drugs, there is also policy that says to follow the latest references whenever there is a conflict. The later references supersede the earlier ones.

      Reply

      • In the 1970’s you weren’t punished, disciplined, sent to ethics . . blah blah if you disagreed or weren’t sure of something. If you didn’t make a big stink about it so what. If it didn’t cause you to screw up a session you just got on with the show. Errors in session were cleaned up in Qualifications with references to the appropriate materials.

        There are numerous control mechanisms in scn but being forced to believe everything Hubbard said is nonsense. All scientologists believe everything Hubbard said is also nonsense. Maybe some do and some don’t.

        This morning I read the quote attempting to read it as I would have when I first entered scn. I would have accepted it as logical, similar to any other subject I might read which seemed logical and with which I had no previous background. Linking alcoholism to engrams would have been an unknown at that time and I would have regarded it as, “Well, maybe. It’s possible and maybe it’s true. I’ll find out as I continue my studies.” Things might be different in the Church of Miscavige.

        Reply

        • Richard: “There are numerous control mechanisms in scn but being forced to believe everything Hubbard said is nonsense. All scientologists believe everything Hubbard said is also nonsense.”

          There is truth to the idea that many (not all) Scientologists came to believe everything LRH said was true, based on the fact that they were so impressed by what the tech could do for them. However, the idea that they were FORCED to believe everything was a matter of either MUs or groupthink.

          A good example of how groupthink gets started is the above idea regarding the policy in “Technical Degrades” having to do with approved checksheets – by interpreting it to apply to everything ever written by LRH and then spreading that idea to others.

          In my view, those who spread groupthink – whether because of MUs or fanaticism – and those who accepted it, were a big part of the deteriorization of what was valuable in Scientology.

          Reply

          • marildi: “A good example of how groupthink gets started is the above idea regarding the policy in “Technical Degrades” having to do with approved checksheets – by interpreting it to apply to everything ever written by LRH and then spreading that idea to others.”

            Hmm…a tad specious considering how scientology is currently instructed. Hubbard made a whole host of “discoveries” that contradict earlier claims. Rather than update his work, the student must spend huge sums of money and waste several years before learning truths he really can’t be blamed for thinking are purposefully being kept hidden.

            If 1950 dianetic auditors are supposedly “bug-eyed at the fast results of NED”, then why is 1950 dianetics still taught? If “clears are made in auditing” there is no reason why the clear cog (and all related theory) cannot be disclosed right from the start.

            If much of Hub’s earlier guff on evolution was simply part of a “Darwinian implant” then why not go back and just say so? (HOM is hardly “a coldblooded and factual account” if the reader is only presented with half the “facts”).

            If a % of the past lives one encounters are actually those of one’s parasitic ancestral spirits, maybe it’s worth explaining that before hand so there’s no confusion. Perhaps, if their exorcism is so vital, the student should know of it from the off before he does much of anything else. To withhold such truths is cruel.

            Med students don’t learn to apply leeches anymore. Psych students don’t spend their first years learning how to build orgone energy accumulators or giving insulin shock treatments. They learn to apply what is known today.

            Hub never updated his “science”. He said it would get done at some point but clearly no one ever bothered. So practitioners continue to force their students through falsehood after falsehood, hoping each eventual “big reveal” will result in enough exhilaration and euphoria (as opposed to disgust and betrayal) to keep them interested. Considering the current state of the Co$ and the indie scene, I’m guessing it’s not working out too well.

            Reply

            • MWesten, most of what you wrote is either opinion or speculation – and too broad to get into, in any case. I don’t have that much time these days, besides. But I’ll answer the question you asked: “If 1950 dianetic auditors are supposedly ‘bug-eyed at the fast results of NED’, then why is 1950 dianetics still taught?”

              It’s still taught because it still gets results, even though the results take much longer than with NED. However, on the other side of the coin, training a Book One auditor takes a small fraction of the time it takes to train a NED auditor. Apparently, you’ve had little to no training? Otherwise, you should know this.

              You more or less summarized your comment with this: “So practitioners continue to force their students through falsehood after falsehood, hoping each eventual ‘big reveal’ will result in enough exhilaration and euphoria (as opposed to disgust and betrayal) to keep them interested.”

              Here you sound like you’ve also had little to no experience as a student – period. I’ve never heard a student refer to supervisors as “practitioners” – or even call auditors “practitioners.” This is something a never-in would say. And you seem to be confusing what students gain with what pcs gain. As for “falsehood after falsehood,” I get the feeling you were “trained” by the groupthink of blogs. 😉

              Reply

              • Huh? The dis/use of cult lingo has no bearing on the truth value of my comment. And your opinion of what you think I sound like is of no interest to me, sorry. Either there is truth in my argument or there isn’t. If you’re itching to appeal to an authority then I suggest you scratch it on your own. I prefer reason.

              • MWesten, I’m sure if you had been a student of Scientology you would have responded differently – not just with regard to your terminology but also the substance of what you wrote. But I understand how you could have come to the views you have if what you know is entirely, or even majorly, based on the so-called “common knowledge” of the internet. In any case, thanks for always being civil in spite of disagreements.

              • Therein lies the problem. You are “sure”. Cognitive bias. Your prejudice has caused you to err.

                If you believe there is nothing contradictory in scientology, that withholding “discoveries” from students of a science is both practical and ethical, that there is nothing inherently idiotic in how scientology is taught, why not simply say so?

                You do realise you have yet to make an actual argument.

                For someone without much free time, you’ve certainly wasted a chunk of it trying to put me in a box. I actually thought you were better than that.

              • NED is New Era Dianetics which is metered auditing which consists of ten or twelve auditing commands and questions. Book One auditing is auditing as described in Dianetics The Modern Science of Mental Health which wasn’t required to be learned.

                After an indeterminate number of hours of introspecting on the past, someone might realize that nothing in the past need affect one in the present, hence I mocked it up, being the effect of the past. It tracks back to initial thoughts or considerations which are brought forward into the present.

                It might be a transformation experience for some but not all people. It’s understandable that someone who never received any auditing would look at “I mocked it all up” as a stupidity.

    • The inquisition was meant to root out Heresy too. Scientology, being a new religion, had to catch up for all that history by mocking up something of the sort. KSW is kind of the inquisitor’s hammer.

      You also then realize, even as a preclear, that Ron said a lot to contradict himself. This faux pas was easily explained in, by staff, using the surrounding context of the chronology which the statement was made. If this were not yet confusing, word clearing the text and surrounding pages for hours might put you into a state of utter confusion to the point where you simply agreed mindlessly – To anything LRH wrote!

      This avoids the whole debacle subsequently. This is even before you get to the crime part that you mentioned Overrun! My understanding of any Scientology crime was that it was simply an aberration of the bank talking, for which more auditing, more word-clearing, or more clay demos were necessary depending on the engram from the bank. For endless hours if necessary!

      Reply

  11. Like a friend told me: ‘you have to read LRH with a magnifying glass”, meaning there are many statements that do not make sense at all, besides the point of them having no scientific proof whatsoever.

    That many of us have departed the bubble and are doing very fine is commendable, specially after having studied some information that is not true at all.

    Reply

  12. More ElWrong twaddle that takes fracturing syntax to new heights. This and his other delusional “research” brought us Narconon, a Co$ marriage of science fiction, larceny, and outright murder that, per Dear Leader’s business model, targets the disabled, ill, and distraught, both addict and family, solely to fill cherch coffers and swell their ranks.
    Those of us engaged in the challenging, often heartbreaking work of helping addicts using legitimate, outcome-based resources, along with the well established self-help groups noted in posts here, humbly thank the ex-sci’s posting here, on other blogs/websites, and participating in media presentations, for revealing the horror of what they’ve escaped, the dire need to eliminate the cancer of Co$, and genuine compassionate caring for each other. Heroes of the Heart all!

    Reply

  13. BK Mole, so true! And I am just sick that I gave birth twice with no drugs, thinking that that made me a better Scn. It hurt like hell and I should have had the help of drugs. I was stupidly drinking the KA then.

    Reply

  14. Huh, so the cirrhosis I developed from my alcoholism is an aberration? Well, I’ll just clear that right up.
    I’ve been sober now for 9 years (one small relapse for a few days in that time) and alcohol is no doubt addicting. To me anyway. Medicinal marijuana has been very beneficial in my treatment. (I live in CA) and have no plans to alter those benefits.
    I remember the local mission holder here Tom Steiner went through a few livers from all his drug and alcohol abuse. Why didn’t auditing handle that??

    Reply

    • “A few” livers? How many transplants did he receive, and how on earth di,d he receive them?

      Given the often-fatal shortage of transplantable organs, because people in the US have to opt in rather than opting out, this should have been impossible.

      Reply

      • Tom and his (MegaBitch) wife Kathy took over the BR mission. I recall seeing him suffering from the worst case of jaundice due to his liver failure ….his eyeballs were piss yellow. IIRC he got somebody to donate 1/2 of their liver to him in the early 2000’s . He wasn’t the first OT that I saw dying from shit that Hubbard said we had the “cure” for…….there were OTs in Miami dropping like flies from cancer. So much for “Homo Novis”.

        Reply

  15. Ron does like run-on sentences. I had trouble reading the whole passage, which was only 4 sentences long.

    Reply

  16. OK everyone, light up a joint and get your day moving. Unfortunatly again i do not see all the references to the years of testing results. Just another-trust me. How many people have fallen for those words. Oh well, time for a magic mushroom as i never really got the hang of inhaling without coughing.

    Reply

  18. Wow. Unfortunately the still-ins will invalidate this. Even though from the scripture, it is in proximity to an SP and the mysterious hidden third. I am saddened to hear that they have front groups against marijuana as the public consensus has changed and actually agrees with Ron’s analysis.
    Unfortunately, Ron does not see the tie between drugs and crime, the real reason for their illegal status in my opinion. Safe consumption and proper taxation tend to prevent the criminal element.

    Reply

  19. “How can they be so off the rails?
    “Maybe they’re all drunk?”

    They wish! Because not only is marijuana better for you than alcohol, alcohol is better for you than scientology. But like an alcoholic a deluded cult member has to hit his or her own rock bottom to do something about it.

    Reply

  20. I think they are all went stupor numb from in love of and addicted to Hubbard & its Volumes & Volumed away of blab. Scientologists can’t see and don’t want to see any better. They are all unconscious to that degree & hypnotized. I wonder how the SRD is opening their eyes to see the they are part of a truly cult and rambled tech to realize that Scientology for each one of them is history and at the point, leave to never come back. No need for SP declare from them. And with all the hard work of different people to expose them, they are exist not for long. Not for long.
    In May 30, 2018 I used the same tech that they are using to destroy entire family and people: I declared them this May 2018, SP declare and used the same tech to leave them for good.

    Reply

  21. I am an Alcoholic and has been a member of AA for sometime now. I’m also a prior member of this Cult/quasi-religion, which claims Alcoholism is treatable with Purifs, Drug Rundowns and OT levels and by eradicating those pesky BT’s. Well I’m here to squash that crazy Cult Scientology and L ron’s remedies. After many, many years and numerous Purifs (5); Drug Rundowns (3); and all these OT Levels, I was still an out of control drinker and was punished every time I turned myself into Ethics for my drinking. I wanted to stop and needed help, but all I was ever given was lower conditions, lots of auditing and and re-do’s of The Bridge (what a joke). I finally left and asked a former Auditor to audit my compulsions of alcohol away; to which she stated – “Scientology Auditing does not help Alcoholics”. She suggested AA. I was very surprised but I did what she said and many years later I’m clean and sober. Oh yeah, I share a lot in my meetings about this and you cannot believe all the prior Scientologists or friends and family of Scientologists who are in AA. they all say the same thing – Scientology does not work for Alcoholics but AA does. I’m living proof. I’ve been clean and sober over 10 years (and it’s free). I spent $100s of Thousand of Dollars in Scientology only to feel like I was a Piece of Shit who could not control their drinking. I’m so very So grateful for Mike for printing this article and showing what a sham/scam/flim-flam artist LRon really is.

    Reply

    • Rock on Foolmeonce.
      I had the same revelations. I too have been in AA now for 7 years. Even as a former scilon and agnostic, AA absolutely works if you work it.
      I did two purifs, life repairs etc… and AA was free and effective.

      Reply

    • I had the same experience with drinking. I drank too much and did the whole Bridge, Purifs, etc… and nothing changed except I could drink more.

      Reply

      • Laughter! – At cause over MEST. At cause over Life and Thought maybe somewhat lacking.

        One time I decided to cut down and bought a six pack of “near beer” which only had a 3% alcohol content. It was “lacking” so I went back and bought a six pack of high test ale.

        Reply

  22. More total confusion by Hubbard. I recently looked into the history of Prohibition in the United States and found some facts which Hubbard ignores. Frances Willard was one of the pioneers of the movement. Men drank Rum and Whiskey because they claimed that the water was polluted! So water bubblers were constructed in all of the major cities by funds donated by mostly the ladies. Once Prohibition was passed, the bootleggers supplied more than enough alcohol. One reason Prohibition was repealed is because the government lost out on the lucrative taxes. As a former alcoholic, I cannot accept any of Hubbard. Alcohol comes in many forms. Having smoked Marijuana in Amsterdam, I cannot see how Hubbard can say it is less harmful. More nonsense by Hubbard. What can you expect from a worshipper of Lucifer or a re-incarnation of him? In “Paradise Lost” by John Milton, Lucifer is taken out by a Seraphim, somewhat like a modern helicopter gunship, with OT powers. Hubbard is driven ten steps back and falls to one knee. Is anyone surprised that Hubbard never produced one electron of OT powers?

    Reply

  23. All I can say here it that I prefer my Macallan’s neat. Here’s to you Capt’n Miscavige and all that you do as the ecclesiastical leader of the world’s fastest slowing and coolest religion. You are a tribute to the Founder and really just a chip of the ol’ block so to speak.

    Reply

  24. I just listened to Jesse Prince’s interview with Jeffrey Augustine. I read a bunch of other things written by others who revealed L Ron’s Crimes.

    WOW! To learn what a crazy asshole L Ron Hubbard was – a criminal hiding from the law – a drug addict suicidal nut bag – it is shocking. It should be against the law to LIE like Scientology does about him.

    There is no state of Clear or OT – only delusions of grandeur. OSA – you really deserve to stay in Scientology if you can’t see the truth through all of the reports.

    SHAME ON YOU!

    Oh yeah – you don’t “emote” so you don’t feel normal human emotions and reactions.

    OSA bots who refuse to accept the truth about Scientology – I hope you go OT and waste your life and your money going up the Bridge to no where.

    You are a bunch of ASSHOLES to Keep Scientology Scamming!

    Reply

  25. Mike I seem to remember some letter by LRH to one US President or another where he proposed legalizing marijuana. This was circa 1970’s or more likely 1980’s. This ring a bell with anyone?
    Also, reams of scientific evidence is mounting up on the legitimate medical and health benefits of marijuana, including protecting the body against various cancers. Yet Scientologists are even railing against the legalization of medical marijuana which is produced from different compounds in the plant than those that produce the psychoactive effect. That is a perfect example of the members not thinking for themselves, not really thinking at all, just reacting. In any event their anti-marijuana campaigns are total losers, and the legalization of both medical and recreational marijuana will continue to be approved throughout the US and elsewhere in the world.

    Reply

    • And while railing against medical and recreational mj, they push the purification rundown and toxic ingestion of niacin – both of which really are harmful. Deluded morons.

      Reply

  26. My earlier DMSMH copy had this quote: “marijuana is not only less physically harmful but also better in the action of keeping a neurotic producing…” but in my later copies, this was missing. Presumably edited out by the master of finding/creating lost LRH tech: David Miscavige?

    Reply

    • Robert, at the end of Dianetics or near the end he has a blurb about alcoholism and how it is so much worse for you than even opium and heroin and it is easier to get off the latter than the former. I would quote it word for word for you, but I dumped my Dianetics book.

      Reply

      • Hubbard would have known. From accounts, he must have been a bottle a day drinker for a couple of decades. Various people around him have attested to his rum drinking – not to mention the letter to his wife that talked about “pinks and grays” as well – or at least the empties that had to constantly be cleaned up afterward. According to his mistress Barbara he was drinking a bottle of scotch a day at the end of 1950, and the Richard de Mille attests that when Hubbard fled to Cuba with Alexis, he switched to rum.

        Reply

      • Well, why do you think Miscavige edited out of DMSMH all the negative references to alcohol? Were talking about the man who probably guzzles more scotch than anyone.
        Yes, including you, OSD!

        Reply

      • Speaking of addictive substances dear to the hearts of Scientologists, more than one friend of mine has told me it was easier for them to quit heroin than it was to quit smoking cigarettes.

        Reply

  27. Happened to me:
    Had a couple of drinks couple of times too many after OTVIII.
    Solution:Pay for and do the purif again.
    “But how does fermented grape juice lodge in the tissues? i mumbled.”And even LRH wrote after 24 hours a person is sessionable after some drinks”.
    “No backflash and C.I.” i was told.
    Maybe LRH was writing this when he was popping lots of reds and drinking lots of rum.
    Maybe scientology is the master in IQ after all.Goes down by about 1 point per 2 years in.

    Reply

  28. Mike, thanks for the quote. Ron was good at self medicating and of course did practice the use of drugs in his last years. Of course the rest of us were forbidden to use any medications.

    Reply

    • Hubbard used drugs from his early days – read his Affirmations, for instance. He also talks somewhere about being on nitrous oxide “laughing gas,” and on close reading the reference is typically ambiguous if not misleading about whether he got it when he went to the dentist for treatment, or from people who had access to dental supplies. That was apparently what lead to his writing Excalibur, and the description of the possible effects of recreational use of nitrous oxide certainly sound like such an experience might have provided a basis for Dianetics and Scientology:

      “During the 19th century, William James and many contemporaries found that inhalation of nitrous oxide resulted in a powerful spiritual and mystical experience for the user. James claimed to experience the fusing of dichotomies into a unity and a revelation of ultimate truth during the inhalation of nitrous oxide. Memory of this experience, however, quickly faded and any attempt to communicate was difficult at best. James described a man who, when under the influence of the gas, claimed to know the secret of the universe.”

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recreational_use_of_nitrous_oxide

      Reply

      • I have info on Hubbard’s final years that’s pretty amazing. And yes he obviously did some serious early experimentation. He was such a hypocrite.

        Reply

          • A few years ago I attended a small psychic fair. The lead speaker was a fellow named Christopher DiCesare who had experienced a well documented haunting. It’s unlikely that he could be convinced that his experience was hallucinatory.

            All transcendental experiences might be the result of chemicals or chemicals being released in the brain – might be.

            Why LSD and it’s effects disqualifies everyone from joining the sea org might be an interesting topic.

            Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *