Possibly Helpful Advice

Including what we found in Scientology before it became a cult

Miscavige’s knee-jerk SP declare miscalculation (Part 3)

In Part 2 of this series, I promised an insight into how Miscavige’s knee-jerk SP declare program was part of a campaign to ensure planetary clearing didn’t occur. So let’s dive in and sort it out.

The basic notion behind non-clearing of the planet is to take people who were Clear or OT or going Clear or OT and apply reverse Scientology to ensure they wouldn’t make further Bridge progress.

If you read Steve Poore’s tale of stalled Bridge progress, you’ll see the tell-tale indicators of Miscavige’s campaign to anti-Clear the planet.

ARC Breaks

When one of Scientology Inc’s top-secret declares appears in your local org’s Ethics office, it usually does so as part of Scientology Inc’s shock and awe approach.

You’re taken aside and shown the declare order, which paints your family member or acquaintance as a scheming conniving rabid drooling-at-the-mouth criminal.

The information in the declare doesn’t match what you know about the person (it being all fabrications and exaggerations designed to produce the shocking effect…not on the declared person, since he’s not allowed to see it…but on the still-in-the church parishioner.) The shock of this can hit a person with engramic intensity.

The engramic intensity comes, of course, from the sudden restimulation of a real engram (or secondary).

As a crass example, hand a Scientology Inc declare order to someone who in a previous lifetime had involvement with the Holocaust or Inquisition (including the Catholic Church’s persecution of the spirituali). There’s plenty of stuff to be restimulated in those kinds of incidents, and they’re only Earthbound incidents.

The restimulation bypasses charge, since the restimulation reactivates the original incident(s) but there’s no auditor or other action to make sure it’s discharged or erased.  Remember HCO PL 7AUG 65 I SUPPRESSIVE PERSONS, MAIN CHARECTERISTICS OF? “4. AN SP DEALS ONLY IN RESTIMULATION, NEVER EASING OR ERASING.” Sounds like DM to me.

See these questions from the  L1C correction list:

● 12 (Has something been misunderstood?)

● 13 (Has someone been misunderstood?)

● 14 (Has an earlier misunderstanding been restimulated?)

● 18 (Has there been some situation you haven’t grasped?)

● 20 (Has the wrong reason for an upset been given?)

● 26 (Has an engram been restimulated?)

● 27 (Has an earlier incident been restimulated?)

● 28 (Has there been a sudden shift of attention?)

● 30 (Has a perception been prevented?)

● 36 (Has data been invalidated?)

● 37 (Has someone evaluated?)

● 39 (Has an action been unnecessary?)

Question 22 of the L1C can be particularly troublesome: Has something been done other than what was said?

If the person being shown the declare order has any familiarity with Scientology justice procedures, they’ll notice that no committee of evidence was held, that the accused was not confronted with the reports about him or the people accusing him of things.

It means something was done other than what Ron said should be done. (refs: HCO PL 24 February 1972 I INJUSTICE: It is injustice that destroys discipline. … When you accuse wrongly and punish unjustly, the group caves in. HCO PL 24 February 1969 JUSTICE: The basis of all really troublesome and third party activities is then FALSE REPORTS. There can also be FALSE PERCEPTION. One sees things that don’t exist and reports them as “fact”. … After a lot of experience with ethics and justice I would say that the real source of upset in an area would be FALSE REPORTS accepted and acted upon without confronting the accused with all charges and his or her accusers. An executive should not accept any accusation and act upon it. To do so undermines the security of one and a.. What an executive should do on being presented with an accusation or down stats or “evidence” is conduct an investigation of false reports and false perceptions.)

It also means that the person now reading the declare order realizes something he didn’t realize fifteen seconds ago: that his continued presence in Scientology Inc can be severed in secret, by a “kangaroo court”*, without using Scientology’s justice procedures.

Then, the parishioner is told he can have no more communication or connections to this person, or he will be declared himself.

This is a sudden sundering of Affinity, Reality, and Communication and Understanding, as found in the Tech Dictionary: ARC BREAK, 1. a sudden drop or cutting of one’s affinity, reality, or communication with someone or something. Upsets with people or things come about because of a lessening or sundering of affinity, reality, or communication or  understanding. It’s called an ARC break instead of an upset, because, if one discovers which of the three points of understanding have been cut, one can bring about a rapid recovery in the person’s state of mind. It is pronounced by its letters A-R-C break. When an ARC break is permitted to continue over too long a period of time and remains in restimulation, a person goes into a “sad effect” which is to say they become sad and mournful, usually without knowing what is causing it. This condition is handled by finding the earliest ARC break on the chain, finding whether it was a break in affinity, reality, communication, or understanding and indicating it to the person, always, of course, in session. (LRH Def. Notes) 2. an incomplete cycle of some kind or another. It’s a lowering of Affinity, Reality and Communication, so we call it an ARC break. It’s a sudden down curve. It’s a highly technical term. It means exactly what it says but its incept and so forth is an incomplete cycle of action. (6507C27) Abbr. ARCX.

Scientology Inc drives into its students, preclears, and auditors that ALL ARC BREAKS STEM FROM MISSED WITHHOLDS (ref: HCO B  3 May 1962 R ARC BREAKS, MISSED WITHHOLDS)

So if a parishioner gets upset about a family member or friend being declared, and stays upset, Scientology Inc knows just what to do: find out what overt the parishioner committed that is resulting in their ARC Break.

This is an introverting procedure. (Introversion is an anti-clearing process.)

And since the parishioner is looking for nothing (a missed withhold of nothing), the parishioner can go out-list and self-flagellate because they can’t find the overt that their ethics officer or trusted auditor is telling them they now have.

The problem is that Scientology Inc auditors and the GAT procedures only teach one way of dealing with a persistent ARC Break: missed withholds.

But tech later than May 1962 exists to address ARC Breaks.

Per HCOB 29 March 1965 ARC BREAKS An ARC break occurs on a generality or a not there.**

If there’s anything involved in Miscavige’s knee-jerk declare orders, it’s generalities, because the lack of specifics, the lack of named terminals making the accusations, the lack of the actual reports from those individuals, are all generalities.

Add to the pile of generalities that the parishioner cannot contact the now-declared person to sort out what in the declare order is falsehoods or exaggerations, the parishioner is left with a not-there.

The declared person is now not-there. The answers are not-there. The accusers are not-there.

And the tool that might correct it, the Ethics Correction List, very likely will not see the light of day and be used on parishioners, as it would permit individual parishioners to cognite as to Scientology Inc’s role in the bypassed charge they’ve been experiencing…and have tried to audit over…for years or decades.

Since the Church is insisting that treating parishioners in this way is right by making the now-declared person wrong, the Church also makes the complaining parishioner wrong by resorting to incorrect handlings to address the parishioner’s ARC Breaks.

The parishioner quickly learns, as their purse empties, that trying to itsa off the ARC Breaks around the declare is useless because the Church refuses to budge on the “you’ve got withholds” point. This sticks the parishioner with ARC Breaks that won’t vanish.

But the Church will try to audit him over those ARC Breaks anyway.

Auditing a person over ARC Breaks is dangerous.

In C/S Series 1, AUDITOR’S RIGHTS, in the section SESSIONS FAR APART, LRH warns that auditing over out-ruds can develop mental mass.


Yet, the Church is auditing people over out-ruds, sometimes in “perfect form”, all the time building up the parishioner’s mental mass. That is, for all practical purposes, NO AUDITING (Tech Dictionary).

And the Church is making money off the parishioner while doing it.

Read Steve Poore’s tale again. You’ll see the glaring indicators of auditing a preclear…at theMecca of Technical Perfection…over out-rudiments.

So Miscavige’s knee-jerk declares are having an anti-planetary-clearing effect.

No matter how they’re justified.

More coming in Part 4.

— written by Plain Old Thetan

*kangaroo court, 2. any crudely or irregularly operated court, esp. one so controlled as to render a fair trial impossible.

**Here’s HCOB 29 March 1965 ARC BREAKS in full:


Number of views:18459


elizabeth hamre  on October 11th, 2012

David..”part of a campaign to ensure planetary clearing didn’t occur. ” Now my dear you have to admit that he is with his program… he still has his postulates in..
Too bad he do not have the understanding that you have..in the form the tech…

Bitter Defrocked Apostate  on October 11th, 2012

Hot shit – you’ve been putting up some great articles lately but this one is out the roof! Keep em coming, please!

Hapexamendios  on October 11th, 2012

Awesome article and what a great reference! I feel like I blew some charge just from from reading this.

Marianne  on October 11th, 2012

That was simply AWESOME. Thank you very, very much!

looking4myself  on October 12th, 2012

I love your articles most that point something out and then back it up with source data. It will more times than not be a learning experience for me.
This is one of those type of pieces.
Very well done!

StatPush  on October 12th, 2012

Wow! An excellent analysis. This has been going on for some time. When was the last time you read an SP Declare that actually blew charge? I don’t know if I ever have.

And, of course, sitting behind all of this is the basic lie that these individuals ARE NOT SPs.

Roger From Switzerland Thought  on October 12th, 2012

Your best post ever written and the best reference ever posted ! :)

It’s very funny somewhere on the Internet David Mayo talks about that he was totally shocked by LRH on the Ship as LRH told him and somebody else something like ” People don’t blow because of O/Ws but because of ARC breaks, but keep this data secret or I’ll lose control of the people” and Mayo and his friend were shocked and thought LRH isn’t honest as they were missing the sarcasm of the Joke !

This reference shows how people can come to idiotic onclusions when they don’t know the tech.

Thank you ! You made my day !

PlainOldThetan  on October 12th, 2012

I would love reading the original post of that. Can you locate it? Please?

Marianne  on October 13th, 2012

It wasn’t David Mayo. It was “a story from Bill Franks.” I ran into this info last year at this web address: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?22265-Bill-Frank-s-story-about-brainwashing-(thread-merge)&highlight=bill+franks

Even on the thread itself, there is a question of whether it is really from Bill Franks or not as it is posted by a user named gwells. Then it’s picked up and spread by a user named alanzo and an anon to other boards. I never could verify if Bill Franks actually wrote the story or not.

Roger From Switzerland Thought  on October 14th, 2012

Thank you Marianne for posting the link. If it is true They didn’t get it !

Roger From Switzerland Thought  on October 14th, 2012

seems it’s from bill frank. it’s a year long thread and bill franks acknowledges its from him !

Leave a Comment

9 − = four