Skip to content

Post Game #4 – Whoa, Dial It Back

April 2, 2010

Well, what is there to say? The same lies about Disconnection – “No, it doesn’t exist, there is no such thing, Scientologists are not required to disconnect from anyone.”

The only upside is that any Scientologist watching the program knows they are lying. And they may well conclude, as Paul Haggis did, “To see you lie so easily, I am afraid I had to ask myself: what else are you lying about?”

I was amazed at Catherine Fraser’s response to my simple account of how we divorced. I was presented with divorce papers, already signed by her, and a Security Guard stood over me while I signed them. I was declared Suppressive and I have not heard from Catherine since. That’s a fairly simple and straightforward account of what happened. Her response? She virtually screamed:

“That is a lie! That is an absolute, utter, total lie! He paid for the divorce. He knew exactly what was happening. This is astonishing! He is a liar to the core! That is so not what happened!”

This response was so not like Catherine. It was as if a different person was speaking, someone shrill, abrasive and harsh. Catherine is none of those things. It was very obvious to me that she was coached and goaded into this type of behavior.

Secondly, she provided no specifics, other than “He paid for the divorce.” Of course I did, I paid for everything in the marriage – she had no money. I did. But we never discussed it.

Really, a more dialed back approach would have been more convincing. She could have calmly said, for instance, “no, that’s not true – we discussed it at length and agreed to divorce.” The only problem? We didn’t. Or she could have said, “No, that’s not true, we’ve spoken several times since he left.” Except we haven’t, so that would have been a lie too.  Maybe the reason they are coached to be so shrill and strident is they really have no real facts to present. So they are coached to make it up with volume and intensity, and a lot of words like “absolute,” “total,” and “utter.” Sounds to me like a David Miscavige tactic.

As I say, it is very much against Catherine’s nature to act that way. After she made her statement, above, Anderson Cooper informed her of what I had said, that she had a heart of gold. Hopefully that reminded her of who she really is.

  1. Redneck Thetan permalink
    April 2, 2010 4:18 am

    Once again, you are being pure class, and I feel sorry for you both because no one likes to discuss such a painful thing on national television. I’m sure that Anderson telling her what you said after her little tantrum was like a punch in the heart, and if she hasn’t been completely shut down emotionally she’ll feel really guilty for a long time. I truly hope that someday you are able to talk this out, because this is nowhere near the closure you deserve. Many hugs and much love.

  2. lunamoth permalink
    April 2, 2010 4:32 am

    God, Jeff, that is heartbreaking. I know what you’re talking about when you say it’s not the behavior of the woman you were married to. She’s in a truly supressive situation.

    It occurs to me that it’s likely a simple matter of having been drilled on the “appropriate” tone level by someone who “knows best” but really isn’t in pt enough to know anything at all. That journalists are 1.1 is a scientology cliche. Dm is undoubtedly convinced of this “fact,” judging by the abundance of inappropriate and obviously drilled responses in the tone level of anger that his rep’s make to journalists. The problem here was that Anderson Cooper is not 1.1.

    I was shocked and repulsed by the contemptuous rage in Catherine’s response. It was just so inappropriate. I’d seen Ann Archer do the same thing to an interviewer once. Sitting in a chair in a room in CC Int under the watchful gaze of tommy, Ann responded to a question by putting one hand on her hip and saying to the interviewer ” HOW DARE you?” SO theatrical, so over-the-top, so out-manners. Inappropriate. False. Drilled. Journalist = 1.1 = respond in anger/antagonism.

    Unfortunately for the church, the average viewer doesn’t know the tone scale and doesn’t know that LRH is” never wrong,” so they just see and hear what’s in front of them, and this response from Catherine, like the one from Ann Archer a few years ago, looked and sounded weird and way out of
    proportion to what came before it. Dm expected 1.1, so the wives got drilled on anger. Anderson Cooper was not 1.1, but the answers got delivered as they were drilled.

    • Fidelio permalink
      April 2, 2010 10:10 am

      what an astute analysis of the crashing MUs of the desperate ex-wives’ coaches and the complete shut off of ANY obnosis by these women on stage and their robotic ingrained in, dyed in and thus incoherent answers to AC’s statements. Heartbreaking indeed.

    • Mickey permalink
      April 2, 2010 1:15 pm

      moonmoth 🙂 …….. I think you’re on to something here in your observation about coming at AC with this feigned anger/antago tone. It’s obvious once you see it was carried out previously with TD using the same tactic on John Sweeny in the BBC Panorama piece of several years ago. The specific point the feigned anger statements begin are around 3:30 mins into this YouTube video.

      Did TD look angry to you? Or were they empty words? No matter. The datum of all journalists being 1.1 has become a “held down 7” and so a sort of robotic practiced response gets delivered as we saw Catherine do as well. Like Jeff said, it wasn’t her at all, but some put up and practiced “tone level” delivered set of words that did not fit the situation. Both TC’s and Catherine’s responses with two different “1.1 journalists” came across way out of sync from normal behavior, yet followed the same handling agenda as you indicated.

    • Jeff permalink*
      April 2, 2010 6:34 pm

      Luna, I think you’re right on this. I believe they have a fixed idea that “all reporters are 1.1” and therefore the “correct tone level” to apply is 1.5, Anger or 2.0, Antagonism. I am sure this is being drilled and drilled and drilled into them. I can imagine them practicing and drilling delivering their lines in Anger. “DO BIRDS FLY!!!” Of course, it’s not true, anyone actually observing Anderson Cooper can see that he is bright, intelligent and open. They seem to be blind to this, and blind to the fact that they ALL come across as shrill, abrasive, over-the-top fanatics.

    • sherrymk permalink
      April 2, 2010 6:41 pm

      Lunamoth, you hit it on the nail. I had not even thought about the tone scale as the reason why these lunatics are using Anger to “communicate”. Spot on. Of course scientologists all “know” that journalists..and gay ones on top of that..are all 1.1 so of course, the “appropriate” tone level is anger when trying getting ones point across…and we all saw just how effective this bit of “tech” is! Perfect example. Yup…I’m sure Anderson Cooper was brought right uptone by these displays of insanity and of course, went right into good communications by these “angry” responses. What a crock.

      I was so disappointed by Catherine Fraser’s venomous outbursts. She is obviously completely out of valence and does not wear the “cult identity” well. If she has a nervous breakdown, I would not be surprised.

      But mostly, for Jeff, you continue to present yourself with grace and compassion. I know this all has weighed heavily on you. Fortunately, you have the best support group anywhere! Whatever you need, we are all here for you.

      Love ya dude,

  3. Rebecca-Tribecca permalink
    April 2, 2010 4:44 am

    Editor ~~
    This could not have been easy on you. To see Catherine shrill, abrasive and harsh (your words) acting out like that.
    What a great testimony to what years in the SO produce.

    As this might be tough on you, I will say no more.

    Except, you ought to take a win on the fact that DM who acted so superior to you, and bashed you so many times, is now the laughing stock of comedians. He cared so much about his IMAGE and the standing ovations and the INT events and he is now a caricature of beatings.

    On the Colbert Report (it is obvious Colbert must be watching CNN) Colbert teased RNC by asking “Can the Republican Party be compared to a dangerous cult?
    No and anyone who says so should be beaten by David Miscavage.”

    I hope that you are even more determined to reveal the TRUTH of Scientology today.

  4. Anonymous permalink
    April 2, 2010 4:52 am

    Hi Jeff, here is a question:

    I’m wondering what would the treatment be for the ex-wives and the guys that were brought out of SP hall to do these interviews. Would things get individually better for them? I’m asking because I would think that after making these people lie on national tv now Miscaviage would want to do whatever he can to make sure these people do not wan to leave. We all know that should any of them eventually leave, sooner or later they will contact ACooper to let him know they lied and what went on behind the scenes. Then again, I guess I’m expecting Miscaviage to do something that seems reasonable which we all know he is not capable of. What do you think will happen to them?


    • Jeff permalink*
      April 2, 2010 5:03 am

      That would be a rational course of action, but Miscavige rarely does what is obviously rational. I think that these people will probably be raked over the coals by him when they get back for every perceived flub.

  5. Mary Jo permalink
    April 2, 2010 5:13 am

    Jeff, Catherine did not even let AC finish the sentence before she went into a “GAT-type” say-it-to- the-wall drill of “it’s a LIE!”! It was amazing to watch! And Jenny smiled proudly while Ann looked uncomfortable and kept looking at the floor.
    They are all robots. It is very sad, really. But so many are suffering due to the lack of courage of women and men in positions of “power” in the C of S that it makes it really hard to be compassionate for these people. They know better.
    Wow, imagine trying to sleep with your own conscience after offering a show of lies and deceit like this — yikes! You have enough time all night to inspect every inch of your body
    OK…you have to have a laugh, this is all too high drama stuff!

  6. Tom permalink
    April 2, 2010 5:31 am


    I know this has been hard for you. There were truly some major facepalm moments, but it is obvious that your ex is under intense pressure to “make this go right”. Well, I have to give the gold star for The Supreme Test award to you. Your candid composure, and straight up honesty are greatly appreciated. I’m proud to be on your team.

    – Tom

  7. April 2, 2010 5:51 am

    Hi Jeff,

    The other night, when Anderson forwarded your “heart of gold” comment to Catherine, I don’t know if anyone else caught it but she kind of froze and melted all at the same time for a split second. The ARC kind of grabbed her and she looked instantly less rabid. It was all very fast but I can see that she is a tender being who has ultimately and unfortunately made very poor decisions about her direction in life. It’s all so awful. We enter into this religion hoping to solve the mess of our lives and this universal trap we’re all in. We have the best intentions. We survive the verbal attacks from non-believers for years. We stick up for LRH at parties, in coffee shops and even in the bedroom. We confess the most humiliating things in session with the hope of getting better. And then this little fucker comes along and torments us? And in your case, beats you? I guess freedom isn’t quite here yet but it will be soon enough. If this lifetime sees the reformation and freedom of the tech for all mankind, it will be a lifetime for the long-term history books. It will have been worth it! Let’s keep going!

    • April 2, 2010 8:47 am

      Good point IO.

      I noticed the change in Catherine’s demeanor too when AC conveyed Jeff’s message. I also noticed that the poor woman was starting to get very ill at ease at that point.

      Don’t blame yourself for what happened.

      You can’t hurt anyone with kindness, though they may hurt themselves because they feel they don’t deserve it.

  8. Ceileen permalink
    April 2, 2010 6:52 am

    It finally came to me tonight who your ex-wife is. I hadn’t recognized her before then. I know Cathy from the D.C. and early ship days, when she was married to Bob. You are correct about who she really is. I liked her very much. Used to know her well, but haven’t seen her for at least 20 years. Took care of the kids for a couple weeks when they were both out of town. To see her and listen to her tonight was quite a shock. She has a lot at stake, a lot to lose if she does the “wrong” thing in lil hitler’s eyes. Are her kids still on staff there somewhere…married, grandkids? That could be tough, but personal integrity still applies and I am disappointed in her, thought she had more balls than that. However, I do not know what pressures are being brought to bear and it is easy to say when I don’t have to live it. Whew! This must be hard for you. Sorry. Makes what you have done and continue to do all the more important, doesn’t it? Good on you.

  9. April 2, 2010 12:38 pm

    Jeff — your interview was understandable to anyone without a background in the subject. By positioning the unwillingness to come forward to the same syndrome that abused women (or men) experience with abusive partners – everyone could say — ohhhhh I get it (more or less of course).

    To watch Catherine rail against you is truly heartbreaking.

    I continue to hope that in the not too distant future, the gates of INT will be flung open (metaphorically if not acctaully) and all those captured there will be allowed to walk free. My feeling is that many will be utterly overwhelmed with having to walk in the world. Not unlike prisoners who when given their freedom who want to return to the known “comfort” of their cells.

    It will be up to all of us – in our own way – to be available for them.

    Transitioning into the world isn’t easy even WHEN the decision is made by oneself – having your cocoon cracked open by an external force (police intervention or whatever may come) will be shocking.

    I’m glad Catherine will have you to help her, as I’m sure you will.


  10. Jim Logan permalink
    April 2, 2010 2:07 pm

    The day Wendell Reynolds and Ken Hoden put the divorce papers in front of me and my wife to sign, just before I was escorted off the base by two HCO staff, Gary Conley and Jackson, we were both shown the issue on disconnection and made to read the paragraph which states: “To fail or refuse to disconnect from a suppressive person not only denies the PTS case gain, it is also supportive of the suppressive — in itself a Suppressive Act. And it must be so labeled. ”

    We signed.

    Two weeks later she called me and told me she did not want to be divorced. Neither did I. She forwarded papers to me to cancel the action and said she would be coming out to be with me.

    Within a month Annie tried to come and was stopped at Logan airport in Boston and taken back to the base. She was then sequestered at Happy Valley for almost two years to prevent her leaving.

    I have not spoken with her since. I have every bit of the documentation.

    I have slept on last evening’s AC show, and this morning I have a new catch phrase for Sue Wilhere. Davic Miscavige = disconnection.

    • sherrymk permalink
      April 2, 2010 6:50 pm

      Heartbreaking story Jim. It is obvious you still carry the candle of love for Annie in your heart. One day soon, this will all be over.

      Perhaps you might send in your docs to Anderson. I have my own docs I’m going to send in about the “non existant disconnection policy”.

      The arrogance and ability to bald faced lie on national TV just floors me speechless. Who they think they are kidding is anyone’s guess. Certainly not one Scientologist that watched last night’s segment will be left with any shred of doubt on who the liars are.

  11. April 2, 2010 4:16 pm

    Prior to this series airing I was thinking that it might just be a repeat of ABC’s Nightline two nighter that aired back in October of 09′. That said, I certainly did not consider that as a negative as it was the Nightline report that was key in sending me to the internet to start looking for more info on what was going on with my church. But, I was hoping for more from Anderson and more I got. Anderson Cooper delivered!

    Being able to observe and compare the two groups, those representing the church and those who have left the church was of tremendous benefit. In the Nightline report there was only Tommy Davis representing the church but with Anderson’s 360 report we had a group of exwives and small group of church execs. Then for a bonus, we had a cold, calculating, condescending attorney and Tommy Davis. And watching individuals from the two different groups responding to Anderson’s queries was tantamount to observing insanity on one hand and sanity on the other. It was that black and white. Also, as a side note, thank you Anderson for not once bringing up Xenu and volcanoes.

    Every person who spoke from the group of those who have left the church group did a wonderful job of being there comfortably and demonstrating excellent TRs. All appeared healthy, bright, rational caring and sensitive. And, though the TRs were in, one could look into the eyes of any one of these beings and see the veritable pain, hurt and disappointment that comes with having lived such a saga.

    Jeff, you were without question the anchor for your group and Anderson did well in giving you the most air time. The exchange between you and your exwife, Catherine, via Anderson was incredibly powerful. And, like others have already pointed out, when Anderson read to Catherine (after her rabid invalidation of your character) what you had to say about her…the valence was for an instant disabled and “I” caved-in then the valence quickly picked up the reins and went back on the attack. That moment, as breif as it was, IMPINGED! And, IMO, that moment was not “accidental” timing on Anderson’s part. He knew exactly what he was doing and he set it up.

    The group representing the church was a pitiful display of humanity. These individuals did not look healthy, were not comfortable, were not sensible, were obviously not in control and they were all about force. Indeed they reminded me of a pack of dogs that have been confined in a small pen, kept in a constant state of hunger, never allowed to rest and continually, in some way or another, antagonized. Then a day comes that requires their keeper to take them out of their pen, put them into their cages on a truck and deliver them all to the CNN studios to be interviewed by Anderson Cooper. Now how could that not go well?

    Tommy Davis and the attorney chick are in their own category. Those two are a couple of reptilians posing as human.

    While I am unable to say for sure right now, my sense is that this 360 series on the history of violence in CoS is going to have far reaching ramifications. IMO, it is the biggest alarm clock going off to date.

    Much thanks to you Jeff and, of course, Marty, Tom, Steve, Amy, Paul, Chrissie (hope I’m not leaving anyone out). You are each courageous beings of high integrity who are willing and able to confront and expose evil. And I have no doubt that your actions reverberate way beyond the confines of the CoS.

    All labels aside, I am very proud to be associated with this group of incredible beings. It is my group and I don’t have, nor do I need to have, a label for it. That said, there is a word. The word is COOL. My group is way COOL!

    • lunamoth permalink
      April 3, 2010 12:16 am

      I loved this, Monte. Especially the part about not needing a label. You’re pretty cool yourself.

      I’m curious. Within the group who regularly lurk or post here, if you’re an artist, please raise your hand.


      • John Doe permalink
        April 3, 2010 4:46 pm

        hand raised.

      • whotenanny permalink
        April 3, 2010 5:18 pm

        My hand is raised.

      • lunamoth permalink
        April 4, 2010 3:08 am

        AHA! Two more!

      • April 4, 2010 6:54 pm

        I apologize for the comm lag. Hand raised.

      • lunamoth permalink
        April 5, 2010 4:12 am

        Hey, Monte! Cool!

    • Mickey permalink
      April 3, 2010 3:34 am

      Monte….my friend, you do have a keen talent for wordsmithing and summing up your journey through these blogs in this Indie community.

      What you wrote here puts period to the CNN AC 360 week of an amazing display of completely opposing perspectives. I think the work done by Anderson will indeed have long legs and represents a sea change in the willingness of the Scn public still caught up in the PR illusion and bastardization of Scn, to look FOR THEMSELVES without being told what they should or should not believe or to whom they can and cannot talk and listen.

      This summation post of yours, along with the calm intelligent and HONEST bearing of truth from the heart and soul of all those interviewed by AC and all the followup posts by commentators, collectively has been….well it’s been one hell of a ride this week. A LOT has been accomplished.

      Thanks to everyone.

  12. Sinar permalink
    April 2, 2010 7:49 pm

    It really amazes me how these Desperate Xwives don’t really recall what was stated in public or published earlier.

    Right after the St Pete Times did their article of the Truth Rundown, a “Freedom” mag was published exclusively for sending out to residents of 3 counties where the paper is circulated.

    Cathy Bernardini: “I was married to hjm for almost 35 years….”
    … “In January 2004 when [Kingpin] beat him up,I thought
    he was going to kill [him] and I was hysterical. [He] had
    cuts on his ears and face, his lips were swollen, his face was
    bruised, he had bruises on his chest. He was a mess. Those
    injuries lasted for days. It was a nightmare. …”

    [Kingpin] = Marty in “Freedom” code.

    To Anderson Cooper, Cathy says something different, though in “square inch” detail. It’s as if screaming it out or saying it aggressively would make it “the truth” as the other Cathy demonstrated.

    Perhaps, the increasing quantity and higher piles of BS in delving into the subject of Disconnection is supposed to make it a good ending to the series. I think not. AC definitely nailed it with Paul Haggis and the Indie’s stellar spokesperson – Christie.

  13. Sinar permalink
    April 2, 2010 7:52 pm

    Can’t wait for tonight’s rebuttal by the ex husbands!

  14. April 2, 2010 11:04 pm

    Question — has Catherine (Hawkins) Fraser remarried?

    I found a picture of her, tommy davis, jennifer linson dated 12 March 2010 in the LA Times (google Catherine Fraser and you’ll find it) and it certainly appears that Catherine has a wedding ring on.

    If she’s remarried, why does she use her maiden name (not traditionally done in the SO) and if she hasn’t — what ring is she wearing and why on her left hand?


    • Fellow Traveller permalink
      April 3, 2010 1:33 am

      A good friend of mine referred to HGB as Sauron’s Tower. With Int Base it is the 2 Towers.
      However, 3 is the prevelant number in scientology philosophy, so with Flag, we have the 3 Towers. So the ring is the ring.

  15. whotenanny permalink
    April 3, 2010 1:01 am

    One of the things that was really jaw dropping to me was how incredibly arrogant the church’s statements lies were. Any Scientologist who’s been paying ANY attention in the last decade knows not only who Marty is but exactly how important his position is in the church hierarchy.

    And of course we know about disconnection, too Many of us first hand. As I watched this, there was a voice in my head was screaming for somebody to grab one of the Introduction to Scientology Ethics books they worked so hard to make sure everyone has a copy of. Yeah, right there under Suppressive Acts (along with “Any felony.” Ahem.) is “Failure to handle or disavow and disconnect from a person demonstrably guilty of Suppressive Acts.” Somebody send AC to the library. If management is to believed, they’ve got this book.

    I guess they’re really counting on all Scientologists being good little girls and boys and stuffing their fingers in their ears like they’re expected to. To bad that’s not what’s happening. I was sure watching, and as far as they’re concerned I’m a great Scientologist. And even if I hadn’t been following 360, you better believe I record The Colbert Report.

  16. A wonderer permalink
    April 3, 2010 1:27 am

    I don’t understand.

    You say, “Secondly, she provided no specifics, other than “He paid for the divorce.” Of course I did, I paid for everything in the marriage – she had no money. I did. But we never discussed it.”

    However, on the CNN program you said you had no money, no friends, etc.

    What gives? Did you have money or didn’t you? Did you lie at the show, or now?

    Please, clarify.

    PS: I am expecting you won’t post this and if you do, you will change the text.

    • Jeff permalink*
      April 3, 2010 5:14 am

      Wonderer, you are welcome to ask questions. When I was married to Cathy, I did have a bit of money – family money. It was enough to take care of Cathy’s needs, and yes, I did pay divorce fees. By the time I left the Sea Org , that family money was nearly gone, and I had to find a job fast, which I did. The “severance pay” from the Church, after 35 years of service, was $500.00. I hope that clarifies for you. Please, continue to read and think and ask questions.

  17. ExVet permalink
    April 4, 2010 2:43 pm

    As an ex-scientologist it was obvious to me why the scientologists were so angry. They were using Tone Scale tech in PR. Anderson is gay = he is 1.1 (covert hostility). You have to handle 1.1 with a half to full tone above, which means be (1.5) angry and/or antagonistic (2.0) in response to Anderson’s “1.1” questions. But, but, but … it made them look CRAZY! Draw your own conclusions about the tech.

    • April 4, 2010 6:48 pm

      You know ExVet, that’s an interesting point you have brought up. Especially the idea that gay = 1.1 on the tone scale. Is that always the case? Are there exceptions? Personally, over the years I have done more than a few remodel jobs or new construction jobs for gay couples (both men couples and woman couples). And never once did I have any problems in working for them (no ARCXs) nor did I ever have any problems with getting paid. However, as I got to better know each of these couples and individuals, their social comm cycles were most definitely 1.1 on the tone scale. That said, I never felt the need or saw a need to ever be angry or antagonistic to them. In fact, I found that operating at 3.5 or above was very workable.

      These apparent contradictions in personal experience and the tech always puzzled me and I concluded that there was more to the understand and that at some point I would come to understand. BTW, this approach became my SOP in dealing with any contradictions I encountered with Ron’s tech i.e., I don’t understand now but I will later as I progress up the Bridge. My primary stable datum as a scientologist was that ALL questions would eventually be answered as long as I kept getting trained and audited.

      Back to the gay and 1.1 issue….while living in Clearwater I had a very good friend who was OT V and he told me about another good friend of his (a man) who was OT III and gay. Talk about a reality adjustment! That story left me dumbfounded as it just didn’t fit anywhere within my illusion of Scn.

      Yeah….I definitely still have many puzzlements regarding the 1.1 designation on the tone scale. Perhaps others reading here can bring some understanding to this matter.

      ExVet, did you see Anderson being 1.1 at any time in this interview? Personally, I did not. Socially, I put him moving between strong interest and conservative. In any case, he certainly appeared as did all those who spoke that had left the church, to be much more in control, uptone and sane than anybody did who was there representing the church.

      Speaking of the 1.1, can’t end off before I leave behind this tribute to the that tone scale designation:

      • Ceileen permalink
        April 7, 2010 6:41 pm

        Monte, exVet, et al
        I have found that as I go through life my tone level changes, it is not stuck at one point on the scale. Perhaps that could also be true for others?? I have different tones for different social situations and sometimes I react without inspection. However, I am aware of having a fairly steady and overall tone with which I view life and circumstances in my life.
        Part of my previous post duties was to recover ARC Broken and PTS public, otherwise known by IGNW Bulletin jargon as Category C & D public. Once I was helping an OT V, a very well known Choreographer who was honored with a Lifetime of Achievement Award. He is a lovely man and was gay in his choice of lifestyle. He had not participated in sex for over 20 years because that would prevent him from receiving auditing. His wins and gains thus far in Scientology had been such that he agreed to that in order to continue. But it was not without its penalties. At the FSO he had been denied auditing and told he would probably not be allowed on OT VI & VII because he had a heart attack and was taking a 1/2 baby aspirin daily, but there had also been allusions made, by a quite young MAA, that his lifestyle was not acceptable. To say he was embittered is an understatement. My hatting and personal study over all my years in the S.O. had provided me with the idea that this was not just and violated HCOBs and HCOPLs. In the end, I arranged for him to receive the assists he needed following such a serious medical situation, which FSO would not provide, at AOLA. It should not have, but it took me several weeks to get this arranged due to slows all over the lines at FSO.
        Ninety percent of the slows were money related, but that is another story. Finally, I got him in session with Joan (who was one of the most standard and competent auditors in the world in my opinion is why I made sure he was audited by her) and was there when he came out to ensure all had gone well. He was radiant. As we walked up LRH Way to his car, he stopped to greet a little baby in a carriage. The baby was delighted and responded charmingly as only babies can. We kept walking and talking about when he was next scheduled for session. Just as he was about to drive off in his car, he looked directly at me and said, “That is the first time I have touched a child since I was a child”, he had such a big smile on his face and drove off. Later he originated to me that he would not change his lifestyle, was too old to get into all that, besides he had his friends and stable datums. Don’t know what all that meant, can only conjecture, but I hope he is happy wherever he is and whatever he’s doing. I’m glad I had that contact with him and was so sorry that I was not allowed to attend the event where he was presented with his award.
        My point is that Tone Scale is a fluid thing, not set in concrete. IMHO

      • April 9, 2010 12:49 pm

        Ceileen, thanks much for sharing your perspective and for sharing the story about the OT V gay choreographer. Your story makes wonder even more about the mechanics of homosexuality and the tone scale. And that’s a good thing! For so long I felt I had to run a supress and inval on the things I wondered about and questioned about Ron, his tech or the church that it’s now a real freedom to splurge on wonder, query, even rejection. After all these years I’ve finally become a skeptic of anything having to do with scn! And doing so has certainly pulled me out of the spiritual doldrums that I some while back slipped into.

        Re homosexuality….

        Is homsexuality an actual aberration of a being? If it is an aberration where on the Bridge can one expect it to be handled? Why would a homosexual be prevented from accessing the Bridge beyound OT V? What else did LRH have to say about the condition beyond what he wrote in SOS? Were there policies about auditing homosexuals? Is it possible for a homosexual to be knowingly fluid on the tone scale? Or, are homosexuals always fixed at 1.1 and therefore pose a very real threat to any community they are a part of, indeed, to society at large?

        Ceileen, I agree with you…the tone scale is a fluid thing and is not set in concrete. but that said, it is my experience that at any given time one is either knowingly and causatively moving on the scale or one is unknowingly moving on the scale as a stimulus response. Or, one is quite solidly fixed at some wavelength on the scale and can’t move at all i.e., stuck in the stimulus response.

    • April 4, 2010 6:51 pm

      Okay, I couldn’t resist. Here’s the other anthem to the 1.1

      • ExVet permalink
        April 5, 2010 4:16 am

        Thanks, Monte. To answer your question, no I did not consider that AC was “1.1” in his behavior. I thought he was quite straightforward and professional. I believe that the scientologists prejudicially considered “he is gay so he is 1.1.” and let loose with the anger and antagonism and made themselves look like a bunch of loonies.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: