One opened, more to go... Operation Clambake & Joseph Cisar present:

Appendix D

Home | Glossary | Introduction | Methodology | Findings
References | Bibliography | Inventory | App. A, B, C, D

Miscellaneous issues

Volume 2 (a)

[1955, ca. mid-March]

In this manual Hubbard wrote that members of his client's organization should "know the contents of this book, and the substance of this book" concerning the method by which information was to distributed, which he called "the dissemination of Scientology." For this purpose he described "Scientology" as

the science of knowing how to know answers. It is an organized system of Axioms and Processes which resolve the problems of existence.

He then cautioned his readers that an audience that received answers which were not intended for them might become confused. He stressed that "knowingly or unknowingly" confusing an audience did not contribute to "the greatest good." He also listed ten "communication lines" upon which information could flow. These included: public to public, Scientology member to practitioner, Scientology organization to public. Hubbard's words of advice to his client's customers included:

We are not interested in sensationalism, personalities, or the complexity of Scientological methodology being discussed by the general public. As a subdivision of this, we do not want Scientology to be reported in the press, anywhere else than on the religious page of newspapers. It is destructive of word of mouth to permit the public presses to express their biased and badly reported sensationalism. Therefore we should be very alert to sue for slander at the slightest chance so as to discourage the public presses from mentioning Scientology.

He summarized his position by writing

Scientologists should never let themselves be interviewed by the press. That's experience talking!

Rather, the press was to be used to create "embarrassing publicity" for anyone who legally opposed the official practices of the client.

Should you ever be arrested for practicing Scientology, treating people, make very sure, long before the time comes, that you have never used drugs or surgery, and that you have never prescribed a diet, or vitamins, and when that time might come, make very sure that you immediately and instantly, within two or three hours after your receipt of the warrant, have served upon the signer of that warrant, a personal civil suit for $100,000.00 damages for having caused the arrest of a Man of God going about his business in his proper profession, and for having brought about embarrassing publicity and molestation.

In doing this, Hubbard wrote, the person arrested was to

[c]ause blue flame to dance on the courthouse roof until everybody has apologized profusely for having dared to become so adventurous as to arrest a Scientologist who, as a minister of the church, was going about his regular duties.

Hubbard used an analogy to explain the above method of operation:

And I call to your attention the situation of any besieged fortress. If that fortress does not make sallies, does not send forth patrols to attack and harass, and does not utilize itself to make the besieging of it a highly dangerous occupation, that fortress may, and most often does, fall.

Apparently the end result was to create the impression in the public's mind that members of the client's organization never failed. He expressed this by writing

The DEFENSE of anything is UNTENABLE. The only way to defend anything is to ATTACK, and if you ever forget that, then you will lose every battle you are ever engaged in, whether it is in terms of personal conversation, public debate, or a court of law. NEVER BE INTERESTED IN CHARGES. DO, yourself, much MORE CHARGING, and you will WIN. And the public, seeing that you won, will then have a communication line to the effect that Scientologists WIN. Don't ever let them have any other thought than that Scientology takes all of its objectives.

The above was in good keeping with the client's regulations, which Hubbard said included, as "Article 4 of the Code":

"I pledge myself to punish to the fullest extent of my power anyone misusing or degrading Scientology to harmful ends."

Hubbard wrote that use of the law as he prescribed above upon people who were "not authorized" could easily cost the person being targeted his career. Hubbard wrote of this possibility, "If possible, of course, ruin him utterly."

In the matter of religion, Hubbard advised his client's customers to avoid any discussion of the topic. In order to avoid discussion, Hubbard advised getting the outsider who wanted to talk about religion

to tell you exactly what HE believes, get him to agree that religious freedom is desirable, then tell him to make sure that if that's the way he believes, he should keep on believing that, and that you would do anything to defend his right to believe that.

Hubbard wrote that discussions could be "unseemly." He advised public speakers who were confronted with "an unseemly upset" that

it is rarely difficult to have the person removed from the group. In other words, either ignore him or remove him. Don't engage in a debate with him.

The reason scandal and untruth were so prevalent in public communication, Hubbard wrote, was that truth did not exist below a certain emotional level. An example of this, he wrote, was "newspapers, which themselves offer little but untruths." Those who attacked his client by telling untruth, wrote Hubbard, most likely were "criminally liable for other things." Hubbard nevertheless reassured his readers that attacks on his client did "relatively little damage," and that very little time was spent worrying about it. He again stressed, however, that history had shown that "a criminal record" had preceded each attack. The greater the publicity, the greater the confidence that a crime of some sort was behind the attack. Even if the attackers were not known to be criminals, Hubbard wrote, the ones who made the serious attacks were.

As a result of this, Hubbard wrote, all his client's customers would have to do, in the event they received negative publicity, was to have either the police or private investigators find the crimes of the person who was the source of the negative publicity. The motivation of people who were negatively inclined toward his client, Hubbard wrote, lay in disgraceful deeds that they wished to keep hidden. Taking action against people in this manner, Hubbard wrote, was a "moral duty." In this regard Hubbard wrote:

It might be felt at times that by becoming possessed of a greater wisdom, a greater freedom, an individual has to some degree separated himself from the human race. True enough, he has separated himself from the more stupid elements of the human race, but it is not true that he has divorced himself from the foremost and fundamental drive of man. He has, quite the contrary, come much closer to it and the truth of living by being in Scientology.

Regardless of actions, according to Hubbard, it was the intent of a person that mattered. The person with a "purer intent" represented civilization. For a contrast, he mentioned those who existed for no other reason than personal profit. Hubbard related the lack of action to the decline of American society as follows:

America was civilized by a militant ministry, and when that ministry ceased to be militant we saw on every hand the decay and decline of civil government. We saw a rise of crime and a lowering of public morals.

Hubbard wrote that his client was neither a secret organization, nor did it use secret materials. He said that reporters had a problem with this in that they supposedly could find nothing "sensational or bad" as they had been ordered to. Hubbard wrote that "the press," in general, formed conclusions before it did an interview. Hubbard wrote in this regard

all the interview could do was to convince the person he couldn't write the story he had planned to write, and so that prevented him from writing any story at all. In other words, the moment a reporter discovered that he could not write a bad story, he did not want to write any story. And this applies to reporters who are "friendly," who promise faithfully all good intent and good press, and who have even been processed successfully. They wrote knowingly inaccurate libel, whatever they said.

Hubbard wrote that it was better to avoid interviews altogether, and noted that, historically, his client's progress had been hindered because of what appeared in the press. He said that the press did not create or represent public opinion. The press allegedly only came alive "to completely blacken a person or an action." The few pieces of favorable press, Hubbard wrote, had "been completely lost in an avalanche of misinformed and inaccurate material appearing in the press."

In closing Hubbard wrote that rather than preach about Scientology, ministers of Scientology should use Scientology.


170. Volume 2 (b)
13 December 1955


In this bulletin, Hubbard recommended that files be put together that would satisfy public desire for information. The files were to put in the "grey file case," which he mentioned in the following:

We are getting along fairly well right now on our policy of no communication with the press but this sooner or later may trip us up, and I think such means of communication as simply insisting that the only thing that talks around there is this grey file case, might possibly become a press gimmick which would be appreciated and taken up. Permit them to bring in any experts to examine these files.

He recommended that, instead of talking about Scientology to members of the press, to just let them examine the files prepared for them. This bulletin also introduces a publication called the "Brainwashing Manual." This section is presented in full.


The brainwashing manual which came into our possession so mysteriously is being released, not with any intent to unmock psychiatry, but as a necessary piece of information for auditors who are confronted with the problems of brainwashing. Some of these cases are now turning up, and unless the basic philosophy of the brainwasher is understood, they are more difficult to handle. SLP Issue 6 or 7 will very undoubtedly handle brainwashing -- 7 by the way is not yet released, but 6 will do until it comes along. Therefore there is no point in writing an additional manual to handle this as a specific problem.

Some of the mystery concerning the manuscript on brainwashing which came into our hands in Phoenix was resolved when it was discovered that a book called Psychopolitics (spelled with a K) is in the Library of Congress. It is in German. It was written by a man named Paul Fadkeller, and was published in Berlin in 1947. Although I may be misinformed, and I definitely do not read German, this book is probably the Russian translation.

It is simply our intention to make the book available for 50 cents a copy to people in Dianetics and Scientology so that they can be informed as to the actual character of brainwashing and the mechanics of it. To that degree it is a technical book. There is no intention of handing it around into official quarters since I am sure official quarters must know about it since the book is apparently on file at the Library of Congress, and naturally if it is on file at the Library of Congress, officialdom must know about it. Thus there is no point in beating the drum concerning it.

If I am asked by press or persons in authority concerning our release of this, which I may well be, I will have to reassure them that there is no political significance attached to it. We couldn't be less interested, but brainwashing happens to be a facet of the human mind and it has been necessary to make available to our own people any and all texts which exist on the subject. We probably should get hold of the book at the Library of Congress and translate it in full, but we do not have the money or the time to do this just now. Thus Don has been asked to mail a copy of the manual as printed to our various professional members, and to make other copies of it available through Box 242 Silver Spring, Maryland, for 50 cents a copy. This is certainly reasonable enough. I don't think there is any point of any kind in placing it in official hands, as I have said, since even the U. S. Army and Air Force must be fully cognizant of brainwashing, since, as I have noted, a copy of it is on file at the Library of Congress. It could also be noted at the same time that there is a general movement among psychiatry to correct their own profession and to do something to those psychiatrists in it who are hurting and killing people with electric shock and surgery, and thus this is no concern of ours.

I repeat, our interest in this is professional not political. Brainwashing has become so much of a subject that it is very well for anybody having to do with the field of the human mind to be able to understand the intentions behind it and how it is done. This is the only work we have on the subject. If there are any political repercussions to be expected by us, I would consider that we are being very self-conscious, since obviously if there were any political repercussions to be expected, they would have come before this since, as I say, this book has evidently been in very wide circulation already and is on file at the Library of Congress so far as we know. I think the general reaction of the public is that they couldn't care less.

Copyright 1955
by L. Ron Hubbard

171. Volume 2 (b)
19 December 1955

The title of this bulletin might reflect Hubbard's evident satisfaction with a press interview. He wrote that John Hall of the London Daily Mail interviewed him on December 13, 1955, and that a friendly story was published as a result. Hubbard said he investigated the reason why a friendly story was written. He wrote that the friendly story was due to the fact that John Hall had found accurate information. Finding accurate information about himself was difficult, Hubbard wrote, because he found that it was in "extremely bad taste" to talk about himself. Since few people existed who were able to find this accurate information, Hubbard wrote, he would have to "release some accurate biographical information to supplant some of this rumor and hodge-podge which has been spread around in the name of information." He added that "There is plenty of authenticating and documenting material if one cares to look for it." In any case, "the tide has turned on the subject of press."


In our studies of brainwashing it has been necessary to procure what information existed on the subject. Fortuitously, in Phoenix there came into our hands two manuscripts on the subject; as well as I can recollect, they were left there at the front desk with the request that they be mailed back to their owner. We are not sure exactly from whom these came, but we understand now that this is unimportant since the subject is broadly rather well known in a book on Psychopolitics. It is to be found in the Library of Congress. It is in German, but we suppose it is the same manual. As we needed this material for research, we read it off onto a tape, compiling the two manuals and removing from them some of their very verbose nomenclature, substituting for it more common English terms, and we have had a few copies of this struck off for use in our research.

It is necessary if one is confronted by a case of brainwashing to understand the motives and general procedures of the people who did it. I must say an inspection of this manual does not make for much respect for the motives of people who brainwash other people. In the early pages of this manual, there is a letter from the person who purportedly gave these manuals to the organization, "Charles Stickley", supposed to be a professor at Columbia University in New York City. This letter, included in the manuals as printed, makes it definitely and adequately clear that these manuals were reprinted for study by research workers. However, in handing out a copy of one of these manuals to one of our own people who had not heard of it, he made several wrong estimates of the manual itself. At first he thought it was a piece of communist propaganda. Then he thought it was something the organization had composed. Then on further inspection, he did not know what to think and it had to be pointed out to him very specifically that this was a synthesis of a Russian instruction book on the subject of brainwashing, and it had to be pointed out to him that it was reprinted for the benefit of people working to remedy and heal brainwashing. It had to be pointed out to him additionally that there was a cover letter in it which explained these things. Thus if you have one of these copies and it gets away from you which it might, you may find it necessary to explain exactly what it is.

We certainly have the right to have in our possession materials covering something as intimately connected to mental research as brainwashing. We have the right to know why and where and who. Furthermore, this material is evidently well known to various governments and is not classified, since the subject "Psychopolitics" (which is the technical name for brainwashing) is to be found in the major libraries of the world.

In the original text of this book there was a warning to psychopolitical operatives that they must stamp out Dianetics, Christian Science, and practical psychology, as these alone represented a menace to the brainwashing programmes. This reference in the text to Dianetics (which has been known to the Russians since 1938) makes the matter very much our business, quite aside from research. Yet if most of the vagaries and upsets from which we have been suffering have stemmed from a desire on the part of some political group attempting to accomplish a political coup and in the road of which we have been standing, then we certainly have the right to know why we have been knocked around by press and governments to the degree that we have been. Hardly a word uttered against Dianetics and Scientology has had any truth in it. The prevalent official but not the public opinion regarding Dianetics and Scientology is that they are phony sciences, tricked up to hoodwink people. Contrast this with the fact that in Dianetics and Scientology alone in all the world of mental healing lie the answers to increased intelligence and ability, and not very incidentally, in Dianetics and Scientology and in Dianetics in particular, we have the total antidote for the eradication of brainwashing. In other words we could unbrainwash them with Dianetics as fast as they are being brainwashed, given enough staff. Furthermore we can put troops and persons in a condition where they cannot be brainwashed. This we can do in Scientology.

Thus if brainwashing is being counted upon heavily to accomplish a great deal inside and outside the nations under attack, there would be only one organization which would be standing thoroughly in the road of that programme, and if that programme inside a country had advanced to a point where officials could be influenced, then you would discover of course this odd official opinion of Dianetics and Scientology, that they are quack sciences.

We are not planning to use this reprinted manual for purposes of propaganda. However, to prevent any misunderstanding from occurring, the highest police in England and America have both received copies and have been told that this is a reprint manual, and that we do not wish to cause them any extra labor in case another one of them falls into their hands. Actually, however, it is my belief that they have had the original, which is to say the communist version of these manuals, in their possession for years, and have simply been unable to credit it or unable to do anything about it. Thus our reprinted version should come as no shock to them.

It has been my experience with Anglo-Saxon governments that where idea propaganda line attacks were concerned they couldn't care less. They do not believe that propaganda is effective. Otherwise they would themselves engage in more propaganda activities. The Anglo-Saxon traditionally depends upon force in order to accomplish his ends.

This is one of the reasons why communism has made such vast progress across the face of the world. It is an idea advancing against arms, and the arms of course will never be able to stop an idea. An idea will be necessary to stop the idea. We may very unfortunately be those persons in possession of the idea that will stop the other idea. Certainly the way things are going, if we don't use our ideas to stop the incoming ideas across the face of earth, we are going to wind up one of these days in the middle of a total communism, living in a totally brainwashed society, the way I look at it.

Copyright 1955
by L. Ron Hubbard

172. Volume 2 (b)
17 January 1956


Washington has recalled the brainwashing manual from all those to whom it was issued on request from the government. The manual is not to be issued in general to the public but is to be let out only to our most trusted association members, so that they can aid and understand and further their studies on curing brainwashing. This manual is an exact text on how brainwashing is done. The manual itself had to be written into much more obvious English from the very poor translation which it was originally and thus reads fairly well but is no less deadly for the change.

Copyright 1956
by L. Ron Hubbard

173. Volume 4 (a)
24 APRIL 1960

A person named Richard M. Nixon will enter his name this Fall at a convention as a citizen aspiring to the Presidency of the United States. Many Scientologists think he is all right because I once quoted him. This is very far from the facts and I hasten to give you the real story why Richard M. Nixon must be prevented at all costs from becoming president.

Two years ago in Washington this man's name appeared in a newspaper article as uttering an opinion about psychology. I called attention to this opinion as a matter of banal interest in an article.

Shortly two members of the United States Secret Service, stating they had been sent directly by Nixon, entered the establishment of the Founding Church of Washington, D.C., armed with pistols, but without warrant or formal complaint, and with foul and abusive language threatened the girls on duty there.

Hulking over desks, shouting violently, they stated that they daily had to make such calls on "lots of people" to prevent Nixon's name from being used in ways Nixon disliked.

These two men stated they were part of Nixon's office and were acting on his express orders. They said that Nixon believed in nothing the Founding Church or Scientology stood for.

Their conduct before the ladies present was so intolerable that Mary Sue, having heard the shouting and curses from her office, had to come and force these men to leave, which they finally did, but only after she threatened to call the police.

As Scientologists were present, much information was obtained, of course, from these agents as to their routine activities. These were not creditable. Nixon constantly used the service against the voteless and helpless people of Washington to suppress the use of his name.

I am informing you of an exact event. It convinced me that in my opinion Nixon is not fitted to be a president. I do not believe any public figure has a right to suppress the use of his name in articles. I do not believe a public figure should enforce his will on writers or organizations by use of the Secret Service. I believe a democracy ceases to exist when deprived of freedom of speech. I do not believe any man closely connected with psychiatry should hold a high public office since psychiatry has lent its violence to political purposes.

Would you please write your papers and tell your friends that Nixon did this and that his actions against private people in Washington cause us to defy his cravings to be president.

It's my hope you'll vote and make your friends vote. But please don't vote for Nixon. Even his own Secret Service agents assure us he stands for nothing we do.

I do not tell you this because Mary Sue came close to serious injury at Nixon's hands. I tell you this because I think psychiatry and all Fascist- Commie forces have had their day.

We want clean hands in public office in the United States. Let's begin by doggedly denying Nixon the presidency no matter what his Secret Service tries to do to us now in Washington. It is better, far better, for us to run the risk of saying this now, while there's still a chance, than to fail to tell you of it for fear of reprisals and then be wiped out without defense by the Secret Service or other agency if Nixon became president. He hates us and has used what police force was available to him to say so. So please get busy on it. I am only telling a few friends.

Copyright 1960
by L. Ron Hubbard

174. Volume 4 (a)
25 APRIL 1960

In this bulletin Hubbard asked that organization representatives send him all clipping files. He wrote

People have been sending and giving you clippings for a long while. They may have been filed under various headings. If it is a mag or newspaper clipping, please send it.

Copyright 1960
by L. Ron Hubbard

175. Volume 6 (a)

Hubbard outlines his position that a group of people exists that "oppose violently any betterment activity or group." This group perpetuated crime and suppressed civilization and caused financial hardship. For that reason, he wrote, it was important to keep an eye on the government, the police and those who worked in mental health to make sure this group did not gain a foothold in these fields. Included in this minority of "truly dangerous" people were Adolf Hitler and Napolean Bonaparte.

Hubbard took this a step further by saying this group was "inevitably" found to be the cause of businesses failing, of families breaking up and of hardship in general. He reasoned that if only this group could be clearly defined, that others would be able to recognize the danger and thus save themselves "much failure and heartbreak."

This group consisted of individuals, Hubbard wrote, who practiced actions, 12 types in all, which included: spreading bad news, suppressing good news, generalizing, embellishing information, creating false information, making trouble for others, selecting a wrong target, and supporting destructive groups.

In the event that anyone identified themselves with this list of characteristics, Hubbard wrote

However, the list given above consists of things which such a personality cannot detect in himself or herself. This is so true that if you thought you found yourself in one of the above, you most certainly are not anti-social.

The reason this group behaved in the above fashion, Hubbard wrote, was that it members believed that everybody they dealt with were their enemy. Hubbard reported that the members of this group exhibited "no outward signs of insanity. They appear quite rational. They can be very convincing." Weeding out this sort of person from one's own life, Hubbard wrote, would give a person a tremendous sense of relief. In addition,

if society were to recognize this personality type as a sick being as they now isolate people with smallpox, both social and economic recoveries could occur.

If was not fair, according to Hubbard that this anti-social minority be "permitted to dominate and injure the lives" of other people. The only problem was that this alleged group would refused to be helped and "would not respond to treatment if help were attempted."

Hubbard wrote that government was dangerous when it was being used by this anti-social group of people. He gave past examples of this type of thing as "the resultant collapse of Egypt, Babylon, Rome, Russia or the West."

He wrote that intelligence was not a factor in being anti-social. Neither was ability, importance or ambition. Hubbard wrote that everyone experiences some of these alleged anti-social tendencies, but that a real anti-social person practiced a majority of them regularly. Appearing to balance the situation, he wrote,

Thus one must examine the good with the bad before one can truly label the antisocial or the social.

He then listed characteristics of a social person in terms opposite of those he listed for those of an anti-social person.

Copyright 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard

176. Volume 8 (b)
7 APRIL 1961RA

In the original policy letter of April 7, 1961, this was called the "Johannesburg Security Check." The subject is to attached to an electronic device called an "E-meter." This is a device that measures skin electrical resistance. The person asking the questions and recording the meter readings is the "examiner."

In the introduction, the subject is told that the answers given will not remain secret, but that they will not be turned over to the police. In addition, one way the person would fail the test would be to not truthfully answer the questions. Another way the person could fail the test would be by "being a member of a subversive group seeking to injure Scientology."

A few test questions are asked to determine the persons "reaction pattern" that include:

A. Are you sitting in a chair?

B. Are you on the Moon?

Questions are then asked as to the commission of certain types of actions. These include the following. The numbers to the left are retained from the original sequencing, therefore missing numbers indicate questions not listed:

4. Have you ever stolen anything?
5. Have you ever forged someone else's signature?
6. Have you ever blackmailed anybody?
8. Have you ever smuggled anything?
12. Have you ever burglarized any place?
13. Have you ever embezzled money?
14. Have you ever assaulted anyone?
16. Have you ever told lies in court?
18. Have you ever committed Arson?
21. Have you had any dealings with stolen goods?
23. Have you ever raped anyone?
30. Have you ever practiced Sodomy?
32. Have you ever slept with a member of a race of another color?

The list of questions goes on to ask about "culpable homicide," bombing, murder, kidnapping, illegal possession of firearms, and continues as follows:

43. Have you ever been a spy for an Organization?
44. Have you ever had anything to do with Communism or been a Communist?
45. Have you ever been a newspaper reporter?

Other questions include:

53. Have you ever been a spy for the Police?
86. Have you ever had unkind thoughts about LRH? (L. Ron Hubbard)
88. Have you ever had any unkind thoughts about Mary Sue? (Mary Sue Hubbard)
90. Have you ever had any unkind thoughts about Scientologists?

The confessional/security ends with:

96. Are you upset about this Confessional List?

Passed / Failed



Signed by Examiner


Copyright 1961, 1972, 1975
by L. Ron Hubbard

177. Volume 12
Also issued as
HCO PL 7 Aug 79
Product Debug Series 8 Esto Series 36 FALSE DATA STRIPPING

Hubbard indicated that he believed false data was responsible for a variety of ills as follows:

There is no field in all the society where false data is not rampant. "Experts," "Advisors," "Friends," "Families" seldom go and look at the basic texts on subjects, even when these are known to exist, but indulge in all manner of interpretations and even outright lies to seem wise or expert. The cost, in terms of lost production and damaged equipment is enormous. You will see it in all sectors of society. People cannot think with the fundamentals of their work. They goof. They ruin things. They have to redo what they have already done.

There were many sources of false data, according to Hubbard. He wrote,

Advertising, newspapers, TV and other media are packed with such material.

One way to avoid false data, wrote Hubbard, was to read the texts written by the "original discoverer of the subject." If there was any doubt, "interpretations of somebody else's work" should be avoided. In this way the reader would experience only the "basic facts of the subject."

If "False Data Stripping" was used on a person, Hubbard wrote, it was possible that person would suddenly realize that whole textbooks contained false data. Examples of false texts given by Hubbard: "Lord Keynes treatises on economics; John Dewey's texts on education; Sigmund Freud's texts on the mind; the texts derived from the "work" of Wundt (Leipzig 1879 -- Father of Modern Psychology)."

False data stripping should be used as frequently as possible, according to Hubbard, so that people would be "able to learn useful data that will enable them to understand things and produce valuable products in life." It did not require extensive training.

In the introduction to the method, Hubbard explained that false data was shed in layers. By that he meant that the method might have to be applied repeatedly. False data stripping, wrote Hubbard, was "based on the Socratic thesis-antithesis-synthesis philosophical equation."

Socrates, according to Hubbard, had a theory that involved an assertion called a "thesis," which when reacted upon by an opposite, an "antithesis," formed a new idea. This, wrote Hubbard, may have been fine for logic and debate, but in the field of learning it had a disastrous effect, which he stated as follows:

Where the person has acquired a false thesis (or datum), the true datum you are trying to teach him becomes an antithesis. The true datum comes smack up against the false datum he is hanging on to, as it is counter to it. In other words, these two things collide, and neither one will then make sense to him. At this point he can try to make sense out of the collision and form what is called a synthesis, or his wits simply don't function. (Synthesis: a unified whole in which opposites, thesis and antithesis, are reconciled.)

The end result of the above, according to Hubbard, was a person who either was trying to use a "false, unworkable synthesis he has formed," or a person who could no longer think. In both cases, Hubbard wrote, the person would be impossible to train.

This could also happen to people, wrote Hubbard, who glibly regurgitated answers without really knowing what they were saying. People not able to accept ("confront") truth possibly possessed false data. For that reason, they had to be "stripped" of their false data. Hubbard wrote that people who had committed criminal acts were particularly prone to possessing false data.

In the actual procedure, Hubbard warned,

You may not easily be able to detect a false datum because the person believes it to be true.

The procedure basically consists of using a list of fourteen questions to search for doubts or weaknesses the person has on the subject in general. Then the subject is asked if he has "been given any false data regarding this?" When the allegedly false datum has been identified, the subject is asked a for the exact conditions under which the alleged false datum was received and where it originated; that "could be a person, a book, TV, etc." Once the person seems to be smiling and no longer worried about having a false datum, the process is done. The result of this process, according to Hubbard,

When the above procedure is done correctly and fully on an area the person is actually having difficulty with he will end up able to duplicate, understand and apply and think with the data that he could not previously grasp.

This procedure is particularly important, Hubbard indicated, because "[m]an's texts and education systems are strewn with false data. These false data effectively block someone's understanding of the true data."

He concluded by writing:

So let's get to work on stripping away the false data which plagues Man, clogs up his ability to think and learn and reduces his competence and effectiveness. Let's increase the ability of individuals and the human race.

Copyright 1979
by L. Ron Hubbard

Brought to you by:
Operation Clambake