HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 11 APRIL 19821
SEC CHECKING IMPLANTS
(The end of auditors missing withholds while sec checking!)
An implant is an enforced command or series of commands installed in the reactive mind below the awareness level of the individual to cause him to react or behave in a prearranged way without his “knowing it.”
There are several methods of implanting.
IMPOSED SILENCE: The simplest and most common implant—and its light¬est but not least-deadly form—is the command to withhold. Implants could be said to be “methods of preventing knowledge or communication” and this can extend to the point of the person himself denying himself the data. The commonest “imposed silence” is probably the threatened child—an “if you tell, you will be punished.” Or simply ordering him not to tell. This tends to occlude his own memory and can be classified as an implant.
HYPNOTISM: This is without physical duress. Western hypnotism is effective on only about 22% of the people on whom it is attempted. It requires some coop¬eration from the subject and he often can tell you he has been hypnotized, even when he cannot tell you the content of the implant at once. It can be exposed and erased rather easily when found, often by simple recall of the content. Psychiatrists and psychologists use it and they are not very expert.
DRUGS: These are often used, by psychiatrists and psychologists, in connec¬tion with or independent of hypnotism to increase the percentage of effectiveness and to deepen the effect. Anyone who has been given psychiatric drugs—or street drugs—can be suspected of also having been implanted. For most of the drugs alone produce a trance state and environmental incidents can “go in” as an im¬plant. The intensity of a received engram is increased when the subject is on drugs. For example, an auto accident, on a drugged person, makes a heavier engram than if he were not on drugs. Any druggie who has also been in the hands of psychia¬trists or psychologists can also be suspected of having been implanted by them. Anyone psychiatrists or psychologists have given drugs to directly is a definite sus¬pect of having been implanted by them.
ELECTRIC SHOCK: Although they pretend it is the shock that is the “therapy” (their word for mayhem and murder), an electric shock was usually just a method of implanting the “patient.” The criminals usually accompany the shock with hypnotic suggestions to the unconscious person before, during and after shock. This is why persons who have been “electric-shocked” sometimes go out and commit crimes. It could be concluded they have been told to do so while being shocked. (There is no therapeutic reason for shocking anyone and there are no authentic cases on record of anyone having been cured of anything by shock.)
DRUGS AND SHOCK: It is stated by psychiatrists and psychologists that they have to drug patients before they shock them to prevent them from breaking their teeth and spines from the convulsions. This is a lie. The reason they shock patients (with electricity or insulin or other means) is, by their own texts, to produce a convulsion. (They do this because the Greeks did it, no other reason, and the Greeks did it because a convulsion is “evidence” the person has been visited by a god.) The real reason psychiatrists and psychologists give drugs before shock is to hide from the patient he has been shocked and to deepen the implant. One can find people who do not know they have been shocked—think they only have been drugged. Yet below that drugged state one can find, with careful search, one or a hundred vicious shocks and implants.
PAIN—DRUG—HYPNOSIS: Using administered pain, drugs and hypnotism, the psychiatrist, psychologist and other criminals, such as CIA or other government agents, seek to cause victims to become robots and commit crimes or act in an irrational way. “PDH” is the psychiatrists’ gift to the police state. PDH is not very effective but it is very damaging to the person.
BRAINWASHING: This is a wrong-use term to describe implanting by dep¬rivation and physical and mental duress. It is said to be based on the Pavlov dog experiments (but was not developed by Pavlov). The theory is that when a victim is subjected to enough punishment, he will forget his former allegiances and can be “reeducated” politically. Despite the usual advertising lies of psychiatry and psy¬chology (criminals seldom tell the truth), the workability of “brainwashing” is laughable. Dianetics can undo “brainwashing” rather rapidly when detected. To call the remedy for brainwashing “brainwashing” merely shows public ignorance of what “brainwashing” is.
NONEXISTENT IMPLANTS: Part of the criminal tricks of implanting is to give the person an “implant” that doesn’t happen. The motions are all gone through but the content is blank. It introverts the person and sometimes makes him pull implants up from his past where they may exist.
When encountering an implant in a session, an auditor may be baffled by not getting any reads on it. BUT there IS a needle manifestation that no implant, no matter how buried, can escape.
New research on this subject has revealed that
IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IMPLANT THE NEEDLE CAN GO STILL.
This is because of the hidden and withhold character of the implant.
One runs into a track area where “nothing registers on the meter.” Things which should register do not. Example: The question “How old were you then?” would ordinarily get some sort of read. In the presence of an implant, it does not.
The needle simply goes very still and unreacting. It is different than the normal needle reaction of the same pc.
The pc, too, can begin to go vague and unresponsive, very introverted and not reacting. But with or without this pc reaction, the needle goes quite still.
An auditor sometimes has to work like mad to get the needle responding.
It is VERY easy at this point to miss a withhold!
The auditor, faced with an implant in the pc he does not suspect, can see this still needle and suppose there is nothing there and write “clean needle” on the worksheet. And this is a mistake. For one thing, if you cannot get an area of track (or list) to F/N, there is something wrong. (One can, of course, have a false read or a Suppress or an Assert or out session ruds to prevent an F/N.)
This still needle will not respond. If one puts in ruds, asks for false reads, asserts, one may continue to get that same still needle.
If so, it means an implant—any one of the above listed methods.
One should work with various questions now that concern the possibility of an implant.
One could even draw up a prepared list that would cover all angles of an implant.
Confronted with a still needle that should react but doesn’t, one begins with “Is this something you are not supposed to tell?” and continues on with various approaches (“Ever see a psychiatrist or psychologist?” “Did anyone give you drugs?” “Is there something here that you yourself don’t know?” etc.). Sooner or later, as the auditor guesses and fishes his way through this, the still needle will jar loose and, slightly at first, begin to respond as he gets off the obscure trail and onto the main road of it.
The art is to GET THAT NEEDLE ACTIVE AGAIN.
It will only get active when you find out what it is that is making it so unre¬sponsive. Something there has frozen the person’s wits and comm and he himself may know nothing of it.
Oddly enough, the person is not likely to blow up on you as he will when you are missing a withhold he knows about. He just gets more and more introverted.
The end phenomena, so far as the meter is concerned, occurs only when the needle is no longer so unresponsive. It is now reading with small falls, falls and even blowdowns and, when you have it all, F/Ns.
One must beware of mistaking out-ruds for an implant, but in no case, once you have a real still needle before you that won’t react, is it anything but one of the implants listed above.
If you understand this data I am giving you and use it cleverly, there goes the danger of missing withholds!
Pretty good, huh?
L. RON HUBBARD
Hubbard, L. R. (1982, 11 April). Sec Checking Implants. Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology (1991 ed., Vol XII, pp. 399-401). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.
- Document studied on the Hubbard Senior Security Checker Course. ↩
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.