Русская версия

Search document title:
Content search 2 (exact):
ENGLISH DOCS FOR THIS DATE- Sad Tail of PDH - AB-129-610600 | Сравнить

CONTENTS The Sad Tail of PDH Cохранить документ себе Скачать
Ability
Issue 129 ca. June 1961
The Magazine of
DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY
from Washington, D.C.

The Sad Tail of PDH

L. Ron Hubbard

Every time we get up to a high roar, such as now when we’re clearing people as never before, we measure our progress by the violence of reaction in squirreldom.

They come down from the trees and start looking for nuts to convince how we’re all wrong. If they weren’t paid to do it I’d be happier.

The latest brainwave to greet our highest peak of helping Man is rumors of “PDH.” This is Pain-DrugHypnotism as practiced by the Communists. Brainwashing, in fact. It is interesting that when the Commies fight you, they try to convince people that you’re guilty of their own overts. It is also fascinating that a Commie rumor line is international in scope. The same rumor bursts out in a dozen quarters around the world, spread by paid agents at the same time.

This rumor of PDH started in Australia, where Scientologists laughed at it, went to South Africa where Scientologists got mad about it and then sprang up in the U.S. where some Scientologists “didn’t know.” Well, disregarding the fact that such don’t know anything anyway, we now know who is helping the little red brothers with the sickle in one hand and the hammer in the other to make trouble in the U.S.

Anyway, I’m not writing this article to scold. I’m really laughing at the idiocy of it.

I’ve been showing the students here at Saint Hill who’ve come for special

briefing and clearing (and who are getting clear) how to convince a pc, by flagrant meter reaction, that the cat has “PDH’d” him. It’s very funny. But you’d have to know how an E-Meter works to appreciate the joke.

Here is the drill:

You put anybody on an E-Meter and say, “Have you ever been a victim of Pain- Drug-Hypnotism?” The meter reacts strongly. So of course the test subject on the meter is startled. He begins to gape. The meter action is so strong. It’s so convincing.

“Now,” you say, “who did this to you? Was it?” and name some person the subject knows or knows of. And we see another fall. The subject gapes, astounded. Has dear old Frank been giving him PDH’s? How horrible. He never would have thought this of poor old Frank. And you leave it at that and your test subject now believes he has been brainwashed by his best friend. But you don’t leave it at that. “All right,” you say, “do you know of any pets?”

The test subject says, “Yes. I have a cat.”

“Well!” you say, “did this cat give you a dose of Pain-Drug-Hypnosis?” And the meter falls!

The test subject is bewildered or ridiculing now. But there it is.

“Did your cat make you a victim of Pain-Drug-Hypnosis?” you insist. And the meter reacts!

“What date?” you say. And the meter reads for midnight 12 July 1960.

Our subject now has horrible visions of his cat sitting on his chest while he sleeps PDHing him.

Why?

Well, people who believe bad things instinctively often aren’t capable of learning.

But you are capable of learning so here’s the explanation:

You say to the test subject, “Is this meter falling on the word: PAIN?”

The subject wriggles. Giggles. “I sure don’t like pain,” says the subject. The meter clears up on it.

You say, “Is the meter falling on the word: Drugs?” And that fall comes off as the person says, “No, drugs are pretty bad.”

“Is the meter falling on the word: Hypnotism?” And that fall comes off because the subject realizes that he doesn’t like hypnotists and says so.

“Or did the meter fall on the word: VICTIM?” The subject now laughs or responds.

The meter is cleared up in this way.

“Now,” you say, “have you ever been the VICTIM of PAIN-DRUG HYPNOTISM?”

The subject laughs. You repeat the question. The meter doesn’t react at all.

“Now how about this cat?” you say. (Or J. Edgar Hoover or whoever.) “Did you ever kick this cat? Do you have overts on this cat?”

“Well, yes,” says the subject. “I didn’t kick the cat. I drowned a cat once.” “When?”

And after dating it on the meter, “Midnight 12 July 1960!!!” The exact date of the “PDH” (or one should say, the overt on the person [cat] ).

For the meter reacts on any person or thing on whom the subject has committed overt acts !

And when these things are inquired into, the question, “Have you ever been the victim of Pain-Drug-Hypnotism?” draws a nul meter. If it were really true, the meter would still respond.

You have to compartment any meter question to get the truth. The E-Meter never lies. But you can ask a sloppy question. When a question, the basis of which is false, contains restimulative or charged words, one has to break the question down to phrases or words, get the charge off them and then ask the question again. Now if the fact is true the meter reacts on the question not the words in the question.

Example: (asking a pc about a goal) “Do you want to be a freeman and climb ladders and rescue beautiful women?” The meter falls madly. What is it falling on? To sort the goal out one must know. The whole goal is true or part of it or none of it. So one asks, “Do you want to be a fireman?’’ Meter is nul. “Do you want to climb ladders?” Meter is nul. “Do you want to rescue?” Meter is nul. “Beautiful women?” Meter falls off the pin. “Do you have a goal to have beautiful women?” Meter falls off the pin again. It was Beautiful Women, not Fireman that made the meter fall.

Meters are accurate. But sometimes people are sort of stupid.

L. RON HUBBARD

PS: If there were any advantage in Brainwashing (which there isn’t) and if anybody were really PDH’d, it will clear up in a few minutes by assessing the PDHer on the Pre-Hav Scale and running the person off the bank. Takes about 30 minutes by the new processes. It takes the Russians 70 days to lay one in.

We’re winning.

LRH

PPS: If the meter falls only on Overts, won’t somebody please tie these squirrels down for a Johannesburg Security Check? Their PDH screams rather point the bony finger! Certificates must be in clean hands. Any HCO will give any certified auditor a security check, with or without witnesses. And any HCO can now stamp certificates “Clean Hands 1961.” Personally I wouldn’t let myself be audited by people who haven’t had security checks. Every person in a Central Organization is security checked. There you are in clean hands. And don’t try to tell people otherwise after all the work I do to keep orgs clean for you or I’ll revoke not only your certificate but your Thetan, too.

LRH