Home arrow Theory versus Practice arrow How Miscavige changed FPRD.  
Saturday, 22 December 2012
How Miscavige changed FPRD. PDF Print E-mail

How Miscavige changed FPRD.
(Excerpts from an ESMB personal story)

I pulled out the FPRD Series out and I quoted it. It said that the FPRD was a RUNDOWN and not an ethics action, so the PRE-REQUISITES needed to be done. I demanded that I finish my Objectives and my Drug Rundown FIRST, which are the pre-requisites. I'd found an LRH Reference that said that anyone who was a drug case could ONLY be run on drug handlings FIRST, it was even a HIGH CRIME to do otherwise.

Erin showed me a "new" False Purpose Rundown issue. It was a pilot. She explained that the entire False Purpose Rundown Series was being revised right now by RTRC at COBs orders. One of the changes made, was that FPRD COULD now be used as an Ethics Action and therefore the pre-requisite case actions of Objectives and Drug Rundown were no longer needed IF the FPRD was being used as an ethics handling. Wow, what a remarkable change. And OH, how timely. This new FPRD Series 1 issue was hot off the copy machine.


After the session I went and I pulled out the HCOB Volumes, the latest ones in publication. I found the FPRD correction list on there. There were three questions missing off of the correction list that Erin had done on me, questions about "Has a drug incident been restimulated?" Or "an engram". Why hadn't Erin asked me those questions? She'd had to add her own question to figure out what was the trouble, it had made me have self-list in my own session to help her out. I didn't like that. I took this FPRD HCOB and I brought it to my next session with Erin.

I showed the reference to her and she said, "Oh, the FPRD Corrrection List as been revised, COB found out that arbitraries had been added to it making it too long, so there are several questions that are no longer on the FPRD correction list." Wow. That's interesting. I said to Erin, " Well, was LRH drunk the day he reviewed and OKd the FPRD Series issues that were compiled in the 80's? How could these things be 'arbitrary'? I knew LRH had OKd them! Wasn't he "Source" in Scientology?" Erin replied, "Well, there were SPs on his lines and DM has discovered..." I didn't listen to the rest of her robot rant.

Original Link

 
< Prev   Next >
Disclaimer: Dianetics and Scientology are trademarks of the Religious Technology Center (RTC.)
These pages and their author are not connected with the Church of Scientology or RTC, or any other organization residing under their corporate umbrella

Copyright 2008 Exscn.net. All rights reserved.