Subject: SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 59 - JUNE 28, 99 PILOT POSTS TO ACT
Date: 28 Jun 1999 04:00:23
From: pilot@soda.csua.berkeley.edu (The Pilot)
Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology

POST59.txt

SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 59 - JUNE 28, 99 PILOT POSTS TO ACT

These went to ACT only.  I felt obliged to respond to some
of the topics under discussion immediately.

==========================================

Contents:

 subj : Super Scio - TO SAFE ON MARCHING
 subj : Super Scio - FREEZONE LIBRARIES
 subj : Super Scio - To Safe, MegaSquirrel, Casper, Tom, Etc.
 subj : Super Scio - Continuing The Mensa Discussion
 subj : Super Scio Tech - On Self Clearing and CCRD
 subj : Super Scio - To R. Winn on Self Clearing
 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Homer on Clear OT
 subj : Super Scio Tech - To Joanne On Spotting Points In The Body
 subj : Super Scio Tech - A Great Statement (Attn Rogers)
 subj : Super Scio Tech - To Aaron on Continuous Creation
 subj : Super Scio Tech - To Th8an on Between Lives
 subj : Super Scio Tech - HELPFUL HINTS ON TRS AND METERING

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - TO SAFE ON MARCHING

TO SAFE ON MARCHING

First, I want to validate you for standing up and fighting.

Second, I want to ask you to ease up on trying to push
the old timers into motion.  Many of them stood up and
fought very hard and lost.  Especially Enid, who stood up
there as a direct target, attempting to create a reformed
church of Scientology in plain view and fight off CofS on
the grounds of Religious Freedom and got smashed badly
back in the 1970s.  I don't know the entire story.  But
she is somebody to respect and to learn from.

You cannot expect direct support from any organizations
in Southern California.  If somebody is actually operating
a group and delivering service and getting people trained
and audited, they are not going to stand up and ask the
CofS to come and smash them.

Having a group is different from operating as an individual.
They have to have cash flow to operate, so there is money
changing hands and they do not even have the slight protection
of non-commercial status.  They are a visible target, easily
counter-picketed.  They are already infested with OSA agents
and subject to dead agenting and black PR.  And they are
easy targets for lawsuits.

And frankly, we need those groups to stay in operation and
keep delivering.  You don't even dream of sacrificing one
for the sake of a picket unless it is the ultimate picket
with tens of thousands bringing the house down.  Because
if you risk them, you have to win, completely, then and
there.

Do not sacrifice your Queens and Rooks unless it is a forced
sequence that leads to immediate checkmate.  And as a
wise chess player once said, "I prefer to sacrifice my
opponents pieces."

If you make a strong showing, you can expect covert support.
And it will be covert.  Individuals showing up and grabbing
signs as individuals rather than as representatives of
the various groups.

But that is only for a strong showing.  A march of a hundred
would seem too dangerous because the groups want to call
zero attention to themselves.

My best guess is that a thousand is the right number to
draw covert support.  That swells the ranks considerably.
If you started an hour long march from CC to the complex,
showing signs as you walked along Hollywood Blvd. and
then Sunset, I think that huge numbers would peak at you
from cars and around corners, decide that this was it,
and swell your ranks.  Maybe I'm dreaming, but I think
that you would have five thousand by the time you surrounded
the complex, because the others would know and be watching
and making go/no-go decisions.

That would not just be the covert groups but also many
fence sitters.  And to set that up, one of the things
you would do is buy a few big newspaper adds and put
up signs in shop windows so that the fence sitters who
were out of comm knew to come and look.  But they would
not be part of the initial crowd and they will be too
scared to join a small march.

If you do a march of a hundred, it is for the purposes of
PR and your target should be to get press coverage of
the religious freedom issue and to promote fza.org so
that some of the fence sitters will begin lurking here
and starting to wake up.

Your real target should be to build up the potential for
that march of a thousand.

Your evaluation of whether to do the 100 march or not should
be based on whether or not it is the best move towards bringing
about the bigger march.

My own feeling in the matter is that promoting fza.org
is less risky.  That is something that everyone can do
covertly without putting their ass on the line, and so
it can be done immediately even by those who are afraid
of the CofS.  Shy people can even palm an fza.org sticker
and leave it on a lampost while waiting for the light to
change.

Imagine if everyone around CC and the complex saw a sticker
every time they crossed a street.  Of course they would be
continually scrapped off, and continually put back on again.
And if the fence sitters saw these continually around LA,
they would eventually get on the net and look.

And it could be "Save Scientology" or "Stop CofS Squirreling"
or "Reform Scientology" or "Save The Tech" as an alternative
to "Free Scientology" on the line above the "see www.fza.org."
Really many different ones should be used so as to hit different
people's realities.

The real problem is comm lag.  It was a great disappointment
to me that things moved so slowly when I dumped Super Scio
onto the net.

Although Super Scio is unitelligible to new people, it is
right where Scientologists live and I expected it to act as
an immediate indicator and bring about big changes fast.

I talked about "if the Catholics copyrighted the bible" and
indicated the religious freedom issue.  I repeated that
occasionally in my posts and it was a YEAR before it started
echoing back.

I talked about points for reform.  It was ages before others
started spreading it around.  And yes, I know you were one of
the ones who picked it up, that is very much appreciated.
My point is that it took TIME.

I indicated what I feel are key tech points such as the
grades being basic and needed again after OT.  People comm
lagged.

I pointed out the ease of doing everything solo.  Again I've
picked up lots of agreement, but it took time and many are
still Q & Aing about this.

I talked about the need to both retain LRH in unadulterated
form AND to extend the tech and the research line and -
well you see what its like right now.

And yet the mountain did start moving.  Cornelius (ARS) and
Homer had the book online immediately.  Many said nice things.
Even Roland wrote a nice message to me.  Critics gained
respect for Freezoners.  More tech and less LRH bashing happened
on ACT.  Paul setup fza.org and had a huge impact - but again
his work spread slowly, taking months to pickup support.

It is a snowball rolling down hill.  Eventually it will
sweep the fanatics away like an avalanch.

But everything is taking an order of magnitude longer than
I initially expected.

Based on previous experience, in a year everybody will be
screaming for a march of a thousand.  That was in the back
of my mind when I first made the comment.  I felt it was
time for people to begin to kick the idea around.  As you
can see, only a small number will accept such an idea
immediately.

You have to keep your enthusiasm up during that period and
keep repeating the communication and pushing without going
down tone and without getting into arguments or inval.  Think
of it as doing TR 4 until the pc does the command.

And we have to promote outside, there are not a thousand
active on this newsgroup.

I certainly wouldn't oppose your march of a hundred if you
want to try and speed things up that way.  I'd be rooting
for you and certainly do a drive by.  And if it turned out
that a thousand came out of the woodwork and swelled your
ranks, why I would too.

But in the meantime, don't piss off the people who might
help when the time is right.

Think of it as changing the course of history.  Big things
change course very slowly.

PS. If you do have a march, the right hat for the critics is
to come and film you and act as witnesses.  That provides you
with extra protection and support and yet they are not really
in the march, and I'm sure they'd love to have pictures.

ARC,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - FREEZONE LIBRARIES

FREEZONE LIBRARIES

As various people have pointed out, there are legal dangers
to practicing our religion freely in the face of CofS copyright
terrorists.

If CofS made ALL LRH works available in an UNCENSORED form to
all Scientologists, even if they have been declared as squirrels
and enemies or belong to unorthodox sects going by other names,
and if they did so at normal book and tape prices, then it would
indeed be their right to collect reasonable royalties on
copyrighted materials.

But instead they:

1. Will not sell to unorthodox Scientologists, especially those
declared as "suppressives".

2. Will not sell supposed "confidential" materials or materials
of limited distribution even to members in good standing.

3. Exercise censorship in removing and altering materials.

4. Do not make all materials available.

5. Issue these at exhorbinant prices in the range of five
times or more higher than is normal in the publishing and
recording industries.

Since these materials are a matter of religious practice,
these inhibitions are a violation of Religious Freedom as
guaranteed by the constitution and any legal attempt to
protect these by copyright under these circumstances would
be constitutionaly invalid.

However, the copyright laws are on the books and are valid
under normal conditions.  Therefore it becomes a matter of
RELIGIOUS PROTEST to ignore these in this case and demand
a Constitutional Interpretation by the Supreme Court that
would recognize our right to practice our religion under
the Bill of Rights.

This is not meant as an attack upon the copyright system.

If the CofS would agree to a royalty of ten percent on
the sale price of any non-orthodox publications of LRH
works, and did not censor, control, or inhibit the production
and sales of such works, there would be no religious
persecution and no grounds for violation of copyrights.

However, the copyrights ARE currently used for RELIGIOUS
PERSECUTION and thus are being used in violation of our
consitiutional rights.

For this reason, I support Freezone Bible's RELIGIOUS
PROTEST whereby they make religious materials available
outside of the control of the Orthodox Fanatics who
attack all other practicioners of the Scientology Religion.

For those who believe in this, the most important part
is The Availability of the Religious Scriptures.

Therefore, the first target is to get everything posted
to the net via the newsgroups in easy to handle text format.
This ensures that uncensored complete copies of all
materials will exist all over the world, saved by any
individual who wishes to ensure the free practice of
the Scientology religion.

That is the first target, and once it is achieved, no
attempt at suppression can fully succeed because the
materials will be everywhere.

But we have not reached that point yet.

It would be better to get this done first before starting
fights that might make it more difficult to complete this
task.

It is more improtant to be true to our faith and get the
job done rather than to make martyrs.

It would be good if there was a web server from which
believers could download zip files of all the Fzba posts
and also those files of religious materials such as the
tech volumes that were posted by non-believers who have
come to our aid.

But such a server, even if legal, would be a target for
the CofS fanatics who will use any means, fair or foul
to prevent this.

The right action, if there is a legal location, would be
to bring up a server for a short period occasionally,
only leaving it online for a few weeks and removing it
before CofS has the opportunity to infiltrate it or dead
agent and ruin the operators, for we are well aware that
they will use illegal means if necessary to stop us.

This should be a simple thing, possibly just an HTML
index page and a huge collection of zip files that can
easily be carried on a CD Rom and transfered to different
ISPs without a lot of work.

On a periodic basis, perhaps once every three months,
it could be brought online for a few weeks, each time at
a different location and removed before CofS brings its
heavy guns to bear.

Whenever it comes online, the address could be advertised
here and all supporters, especially new supporters, could
rush to complete their tech collections up to the level
currently achieved by Fzba.

The biggest problem, which this would solve, is that a
freezoner, discovering the net for the first time, has
no easy way to pick up the megabytes of material that
were posted last year.

I doubt that fzba itself would get involved in such an
activity because they already have the enourmous job
of getting these materials onto the net for the first
time.  Whomever is doing this obviously has enourmous
libraries of materials and they should not be risked
until their entire contents have reached the net.

Anyone who is directly involved in bringing up a server
like the one described needs to remain secret because CofS
will certainly send agents from its Office of Special
Affairs (OSA) to ruin them.  If someone chooses to do
this, please do not involve any visible targets such as
openly practicing freezone groups in this endevor.

But please do support Fzba in its efforts to end the
CofS suppression of the Scientology tech.  There are
three thousand tape transcripts, many of which still
need to be posted.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - To Safe, MegaSquirrel, Casper, Tom, Etc.

TO SAFE, MEGASQUIRREL, CASPER, TOM, KGB ETC.

Hi guys,

See the separate posts I wrote on Marching and Libraries.

I wanted to thank you again and to encourage you to keep
your enthusiasm up.

If there were a dozen for each of you, we would do it.

Just imagine that everything that was being talked about last
week had ten times the response.  That would start a feedback
which would bring more on board.

When you tip the scales, things begin to escallate fast.

We've got to get more people on the net, especially fence
sitters who are ready to make the jump.

Give old friends a call.  Don't try to sell them or handle
them, just ask them to take a look at the reformer's home
page and see what they think.  Talk with them later after
they've had a chance to read and to think about it a bit.

I think that your selection of targets was excellent, just
not enough troups to take the hill.

I am getting tired of staying out of sight.  The trouble is
that I only feel that I have one shot to make an open push
for reform.  After that they start fighting dirty, I get
pissed, and I end up as a super version of Perry Scott or
something like that.  Not exactly the role I want to play.

I would like a real reform, but the minimum is a truce
where they let the freezone have the materials too and
get out of their way.  That allows the research to move
forward.

I would not care if they labled me a suppressive and squirrel
as long as they stayed out of the way and did not object
to the materials being spread around.  I would spout LRH
and insist that I knew better and they would spout LRH and
insist that they knew better and we'd all have a lot of
fun and maybe find our way to real OT someday.

But I think Homer is right and they'd launch everything
they've got against me.  I do not even want to speculate
in public about how I'd handle that, I don't want to put
it out there as a mockup that might gather agreement.
There are already too many people who want to see them
in ruins.

So you might say that I'm being careful for their sake.

On a positive note, there have been a lot more new people
coming on recently.  We may have gone over some sort of
hump.  Give it a little bit of time and try not to get
your ass blown off meanwhile.

PS. I've noticed two different Megasquirrel email addresses.
Are you using two or is somebody playing games?

PPS. I've rushed trying to get some posts out quickly
because I think this business you started was very important.
Hopefully I haven't written anything too hastily.

All the Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - Continuing The Mensa Discussion

CONTINUING THE MENSA DISCUSSION

On 24 Jun 99, VoltR@ctinet.net (RDucharme) responded to my
post on "Super Scio - Scientologists in Mensa"

> Excellent points made on the subject of mensa-narcissism-intelligence.
I'm
> saving it to show certain people who are incessantly fixated on their
looks.
> (I'm glad Christine isn't reading this)
>
> I know one of the great cognitions of my pre-Scn era was how desolate
> intelligence by itself was as a character trait.  Wisdom (the ability to
see
> things from a perspective that encompasses more than just the obvious) is
so
> much more desirable.  A high IQ does not guarantee the latter.
>
> The thing that has kept me from joining up with Mensa all this time was
the
> narcissistic image they project.  They're like body builders who are into
> that for the sole purpose of showing off their muscles and constantly
> compare themselves with others via their bodies.  That's a death trap - a
> make-others-wrong-and -self-right mechanism.  I wonder how many Mensa
> members compare I.Q.s as though they were muscles or sex organs.  I wonder
> how many Mensa members are emotionally balanced.  As it stands now, their
> image is that of a group of self-absorbed, elitist intellectuals, showing
> disdain for the other 98%, while accomplishing nothing of any value as a
> group (who ever heard of any project of any worth being backed by a group
of
> Mensa members?).  Aside from that, I wonder how many artists, musicians,
> authors, public speakers, managers, successful businessmen, and opinion
> leaders are excluded on the basis of a test that measures left-brain
activity.
>
> If Mensa had a valid purpose beyond self-reflection (as identity), then I
> might have been more inclined to seek them out.
>
> Robert

Typically the really smart people join it because it puts a stop
to any invalidation of their intelligence.

The "passed Mensa's tests and used to be a member" looks great on
resumes.  And the card is a lot cheaper and easier to get than
collecting university degrees.

But most of the active membership are busy stroking themselves.

So the really smart people drop out as soon as they have the
membership card.

The real status button is to be so smart that you get in and then
you snobishly drop out because they are too dumb.

One of the famous Mensa dropouts was Issac Asimov.  However, at
some point he let them talk him into reactivating his membership
when they promised to fill a hall with a crowd of adoring high
IQ fans.  Typical Asimov.

I really liked Christine's idea of setting up a Freezone Scientologist
in Mensa SIG.  That would be worth reactivating my membership for.
But I can't be the organizer or have my name plastered on it
openly for obvious reasons.  I don't even know what it takes
to get one of these SIGs created (I didn't stay in long enough),
but if somebody wants to create it needs votes or something,
just post it on the newsgroup.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - On Self Clearing and CCRD

ON SELF CLEARING AND CCRD

On 23 Jun 99, "Michael Hunsaker" <mike@fza.org> forwarded a message
recieved at fza into the newsgroup on subject "(Fwd) Attn: Pilot"

> I cant't get the moment when I actually went Clear, one moment
> indicates when it seemed I lost "all" my abberations(on NED).
> The fact is that after NED I could keep key out my case. I wasn't
> depessed anymore for no reason, just got pissed when I got
> really hit. But I'm still not sure that I'm fully cause on doing it
> fully aware and be able to do that eternally. Maybe David Mayo is
> right on gradients of Clear? Don't you have a self clearing CCRD?
> What should I run now, engrams, or continue with the next processes?
> I hope to get an answer soon, as I'm bogged. Self clearing was such
> a relief after being continously bogged in the CoS for money reasons,
> group abberations and probably my own case(but one goes to the
> Church for handling the case, not for being blamed for it, especially
> if one pays a fortune for it!!!!!!!!And I paid sums with a lot of
> zeros, without getting what I was promised.) My question when to
> stop engram running or when one can consider oneself Clear with
> certainty might be also interesting for others who are doing self
> clearing(I've seen too many attesting Clear for MU's and probably
> money reasons, it's so easy to attest Clear immediately instead of
> selling all your properties or working the whole year your ass
> off for going into session a few hours!!!!!!!). Thanks for your
> fantastic work, it might be a milestone in really clearig the planet.

I would say that there are distinct and stable states that one
attains.

The state generally achieved on Dianetics is confront of the
force in mental image pictures and awareness that one puts the
force there.  An easily observed side effect is that incidents
of big impact to not seem to have any more kick or importance
than incidents of minor impact.  It is other factors besides
the force involved which make an incident seem significant
or trivial.

It is not the end of abberation.  There are other states to be
attained and other things to be confronted besides force.
The thetan was already very abberated when force began to
effect him.

It didn't occur to me to put in a CCRD because I think it is a
side effect of having heard too much sales hype on "clear"
which gives wrong data.  Maybe I'll have to reconsider that
and talk more about states attined etc. as well.

Incident running still works after clear.  There are other
non-confronts besides the non-confront of force which will
still run out of incidents and there are the postulates etc.
which are still there to be looked at.

However it would be the wrong approach to use immediately after
clear or right after any of the more advanced states like
clear OT.  And it is a slow technique, so it is something
that one uses occasionally when it feels like the right time
to dig in that manner.

I would say that you should

a) rehab the last big win on incident running (it might or might
not be clear or a further state subsequent to clear, or even a
preliminary state.  Don't worry about it, just rehab the win).

Then, b) check if there is a clear state (confront of force) and
rehab that (whether or not it is the same state as above), and if
it is not there yet, again don't worry about it but recognize that
you will come to it eventually.

It sounds likely that you have reached clear, but even if you
haven't, the gains on dianetics sound big enough that you
should move on to something else.  So do the rehabs and
then continue on with the book.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - To R. Winn on Self Clearing

TO R. WINN ON SELF CLEARING

On 18 Jun, 99, Zero <pthorn1@pacbell.net> responded to
R. Winn's message on "SelfClear: INTRO"

> Welcome:
> If you survive, you will survive it as a clear.
> tom
>
> R Winn wrote:
>
> > HI,
> >     I'm located in Southeast Michigan, USA and was very interested in
> > Scn in the mid 70's. Have read a great many Hubbard books but not all.
> > Did the Student hat, TR's, and a partial study course. Wanted to become
> > an Auditor, but found the Org to be to "cultish" and decided to leave. I
> > am very pleased to see that clearing is not being left to one group and
> > was very surprised to know that there is a great number of others with
> > similar interests! Also looking for training in Auditing-like
> > activities.
> >     I'm am currently in the first 2-3 chapters of  SelfClearing. Working
> > on spotting spots.
> >
> > Thank You for this space.

Hi and welcome.

Hopefully Tom only meant that in the sense of "survive" as you
might "survive" a tough class in school.  It does take some
determination to get through it on your own.

But as you've probably noticed, the freezone and the ACT newsgroup
are full of wild and highly individualistic people who are just
learning to be themselves without external restraints.

If you take a group of kids and over control them and march them
around for too long, they run a bit wild when the controls are
released.  Things will settle down eventually.  It just takes
time for people to learn to live with each other without a slave
driver cracking the whip over them.

Anyway, I expect that you'll have a great deal of wins with the
book.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering Homer on Clear OT

ANSWRING HOMER ON CLEAR OT

On 25 Jun, 99, Homer Wilson Smith <homer@lightlink.com> posted
two responses to "Super Scio Tech - CLEAR AND THE TIME TRACK"

Since they are short and related, I'm including both his messages
even though only the second is a question.

> The Pilot (pilot@soda.csua.berkeley.edu) wrote:
> >The time track retains its solidity until clear-OT.  The
> >solidity is the result of alter-is of time.  Most especially
> >it occurs because of pushing incidents out of sequence to
> >justify overts, but other alter-ises are possible.
>
>   Signifcant statement.
>
>   Homer


> The Pilot (pilot@soda.csua.berkeley.edu) wrote:
>
> >CLEAR AND THE TIME TRACK
>
>    Pilot,
>
>    Are you a Clear OT?
>
>    As I remember the definition of Clear OT was able to
> stay out of a body while it is being hurt.
>
>    Homer

Yes, I officialy attested at CofS to the confidential definition
of Clear OT.

They had decided that I was stuck in a win on the huge blowout
I had when I got expanded grade 2 (which was my second time
through grade 2, and of course I had already run others through
grade 2 when I got run on expanded 2).

And I had complained that the state had turned off while getting
dianetics as part of my setups for OT levels at the AO.  And I
was full old OT 7 by this point and felt really good about it but
I was also a little bit disappointed because the grade 2 state
hadn't come back and I felt it was in some way higher than the
the state I was in after OT 7.  I had kind of put up with that
while doing the OT levels because I thought it would come back
stabily when I hit the appropriate level, and of course it didn't.

And so they decided that they had better really rehab it right
and get whatever it was fully acknowledged.

I mentioned that it seemed like the track was gone after that
point and that's when the auditor ran out and got the confidential
HCOB on it.

The HCOB only says "no track".

It does not say "able to stay out of a body while it is being
hurt".  Either that is PR or it is from something else in
the 1950s.  I think that that might have been said about
"theta clear".  But there were lots of varying statements
about theta clear in the 50s and it might really be a half
dozen different states.

I can think of a number of different states I've hit which
could be called theta clear.  I put a whole list in Super
Scio.  But we have lousy definitions for these things.

As far as your "stay out" question goes, for me the answer is
that I can sometimes, it is unstable and so I might have an
unstable key-out on whatever state gives that result.

Also sometimes I find its my somatic and the body has nothing
to do with it and if I'm outside stabily, I've got the somatic
where I am rather than in the body.  That is a wild one.
Other times, its the body's somatic and I can be out and
feeling that the somatic is over there in the body.  And
then there are times when I do snap on a body somatic and
even times when I turn on my own somatic and sort of dive
into the body for havingness and to hide from the somatic.
There is a real mixed bag here of different phenomena.

And of course there is also the business of somatics from
entities.  But I can generally blow those off fairly quickly.
That is usually the first thing I look for because it handles
so fast.

I should really make a comment here about the Dianetics I
got after the clear OT state.  I got a whole lot of it as
part of a dianetic assist and it was just great and very
helpful and it did not mess up the Clear OT state.

It was funny, because I was not running up and down on a
track and yet I could easily pickup incidents to run on
the specific somatics (this was the time I got stabbed
and ended up in the hospital - described in Super Scio).
That would bring my confront up on particular somatics
and they would blow.  But note that I had an auditor who
was being very light and careful, never forcing and
accepting errasures by inspection and so forth without
pushing it.

Then they did more dianetics at AO as part of my setups,
and it screwed up the clear OT state.  They were trying
to be thorough.

Nowardays I happily run incidents solo.  But I don't use
anything as formal as R3R.  The trick is in only doing
as much as you need to do - maybe date/locate and duration
plus a few scans through and any and all steps skipped whenever
they don't feel like they are needed.  In other words, knowing
all these tricks that help in running an incident, you just
do whatever you need to get it in full view and blown.

I would not trust an auditor to run me through an incident
with formal R3R.  I might trust one who was using less
formal incident running techniques.

So my general observation is as follows:

You can make great gains from dianetics even after clear OT.

But you can also get into trouble doing that.

The most dangerous in this case is an auditor who has trained
in rote procedure and is good at getting his commands done.

Safest is to do these things solo.

Or to be run in a loose manner with more flexibility and
less push.

A clear doesn't flinch at incidents.  Everything we do to
keep a lower level case from bouncing out of an incident
is a reverse action on a clear.  It gets him to mockup what
isn't there.   And clears don't bounce out due to non-confront.

Sorry to leave this a bit vague but we are still learning.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - To Joanne On Spotting Points In The Body

TO JOANNE ON SPOTTING POINTS IN THE BODY

On 23 Jun 99, "Joanne Barre" <joanne@telsurf.net> continued our
discussion with a post on "The Pilot...background,jb"

> Thank you for the info...I don't know what background would be helpful.

The following was good.  The other question would be if he has
had any processing or metaphysics or anything, but my impression
from your answer is that he has not.

> My dad had 1 massive and 2-3 minor strokes.  This was 5 weeks ago.
> He is in a re-hab hospital.  They are very open to family member's
> interaction.  He is being released in 2 weeks because his progress
> is too slow.  I am looking forward to seeing more progress, faster,
> when he gets home.  That is were he wants to be.  His body is 67yrs,
> his appearance prior to the stroke was good, now his brain is swollen,
> so he sleeps a lot, and has a hard time focusing.  He is paralyzed on
> his left side, so blockage from stroke on right side of brain.  He can
> talk when he has a mind to, he began eating 4 days ago.  He doesn't
> cooperate with therapists very well, unless encouraged by family member.
>
> He remembers incidents from time past more readily than current incidents,
> he names EVERY person he sees or is asked about.  He isn't very lucid
> very long.  I have been doing touch assists.

Very good.

> Unknowingly, I have been doing some light recall.

Again, good, and the more the better, with emphasis on pleasure
moments.

> I will have him spot inside his body.  Please tell me exactly how
> to suggest this to him ( he has never been very open to an
> unconventional idea).

It doesn't require a belief in the spirit.

The brain has nerves running into the affected areas, and there
are problems with them.  The "mind", whether thought of as a
separate spirit or simply thought of as the higher brain functions,
is senior.

Therefore, in pushing into the area himself mentally, he is
forcing the lower brain and nerves to rebuild their connections.
There are many nerves and many cells in the brain, others can
take over for the ones that were damaged if he keeps pushing into
the area.  But they will not do so unless he keeps reaching into
the area himself.

Of course I feel that there is more to it than this, but that is
beside the point.  The drill is good for both bypassing the
switchboard and for encouraging the switchboard to reconnect
and strighten out.

So use a switchboard analogy where the connections are established
by repeated use.

> I asked him if he wants to live, this was 5 weeks ago, and he
> said he did.  Hope he hasn't changed his mind.  He is a great guy!
> (and very interesting presently) Thank you again for your help.
> I really appreciate it very much.
>
> Joanne

All the best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - A Great Statement (Attn Rogers)

A GREAT STATEMENT (Attn Rogers)

On 24 Jun 99, "Rogers" <here-i-yam@erols.com> responded to my post
on "Super Scio Tech - ON PME'S, PLUGS, CBR, & INC 1"

> Great and helpful post!
>
> The Pilot wrote in message ...
>
> >Anything that is blocking you, controlling you, or impacting
> >on you is something that you are also doing, now in present
> >time, to others on an unconsious basis.  And that is where
> >most of your horsepower is going.
>
>
> Yes.  And let's not overlook that one is also, now in present time, doing
it
> to SELF as well as others.  By our agreements we are all interacting on
this
> stuff, but primarily, there is no reason to assume otherwise than: WE,
> directly, or indirectly via our agreements, are the main blocker,
> controller, impacter and reducer of horsepower of OURSELVES.  And it is WE
> who have bound ourselves to the agreements.
>
> I think the basic concept (in a games context) underlying the ethical
> fair-play of a thetan, is that there is NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SELF AND
> OTHERS.

That is a great way of putting it.  Let's remember this one.

> This is the basic explanation for having charge on all 4 flows, as well as
> why our actions reflect back on self.
>
> Les.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - To Aaron on Continuous Creation

TO AARON ON CONTINUOUS CREATION

On 25 Jun 99, "Aaron Bair" <aaron@xartech.com> responded to my post
on "Super Scio Tech - A NIFTY ADVANCED PROCESS - CREATION CLEANUP"

> Pilot,
>
> > Creation Cleanup Process:
> >
> > a) What would it be an overt to create
> > b) What would it be nice to create
>
> I like this process.  I like it a lot.
>
> I'll attempt to recreate the experience.
>
> My first instinct was to add modifiers to it. "As a businessman what
> would..."  That doesn't work.  I persisted in running it until I got
> the cog that the button is CREATE. A games-role seems incapable of
> creation.
>
> Then, "Duh! It all starts with the spirit, the being himself."  Very
> interesting I'm 6 commands into this process and doing it wrong and I
> get two decent cogs.
>
> Then, "I'm just me."  Again, DUH!  I already knew that, why did it
> just dawn on me now that I wasn't "a businessman" or a "business
> owner" or a whatever?
>
> "I'm not a thing. I'm not a role. I'm not a game. I'm not a title.
> I'm not a symbol.  I'm no-thing.  These are all creations."  Created
> things, roles and titles that I'm being pop into view. A cascade of
> things that are suddenly "not me" -- but apparently were two seconds
> ago.
>
> "I just have all that."  Like a person has a ham sandwich or a pair of
> skates, you can be fond of them but they aren't very important.  How
> hard is it to find another ham sandwich?
>
> This is a decent win.  In the old days I'd just hang it up here and be
> happy.  But in this case I know I wasn't even doing the right process,
> and this seems about as objective as you can get so I don't perceive
> much danger in trying the real process.
>
> A. What would it be an overt to create?
>
> Bzzzzt.
>
> Create?  What the fuck is create?  These are all created things.  What
> the hell is it to simply create? I don't know.
>
> I know a created thing can not create.  A creation must be a strictly
> spiritual activity.  (I can barely take that in.  It must be true but
> its like unthinkable.  I was never just a body?  It just doesn't
> register.)
>
> Okay.  Problem.  I can't run the process because I don't know what
> "create" means except in terms of game roles.
>
> Mock-up someone creating.
>
> "you have to just kind of put it there.  You picture it and make the
> picture real."
>
> "Oh, hey.  Its like I picture something up here (1st universe) except
> you picture it out there (shared universe)."
>
> "OH!"  Feel woosy.  You aren't supposed to do that!
>
> That must be the process.
>
> A. What would it be an overt to create?
>
> <I nearly jump out the window>  Eeeek!  Voices, alarms,
> bells--something--is going off.  "I'd better not try that again!"
>
> B. What would it be nice to create?
>
> <relief> "Oh good, something nice.  I can do something nice.  There
> shouldn't be anything wrong with creating something nice."
>
> B. What would it be nice to create?
>
> "lessee, lessee.  Nice.  There are kids in the park, I bet they'd like
> a 10 gallon bucket of black-cherry flavored ice cream in a big wooden
> barrel full of ice to keep it cold and plastic spoons and bowls. Just
> put it on that table ..."
>
> <I violently snap back> "Christ! I what if I actually did it!?!"
>
> For that brief moment I could feel the restraints.  Amazing.  Its a
> very active sort of group program.  "To be one of us, you must never
> ___"  Of course then the whole area shut down and I can't get that far
> anymore. Its just something I can't allow myself to do.
>
> Its interesting because I can still run "As a god what would ..."  And
> if I consider myself "a god" or something I can run the process.
>
> But just creating things as myself is not allowed.  It's thought-crime
> that will get you booted or something.
>
> If I focus on the alarms and bells that go off, I can make out a few
> of the sentiments--but there seem to be thousands and thousands:
> "Don't!"
> "You can't cause chaos like that."
> "You are messing things up."
> "Get out!"
> "we want it THIS way."
> ---
>
> I enjoyed it very much.  Thanks for sharing!

Great.


> > It occured to me that we should have some axioms about
> > reality.  So I thought of the following:
> >
> > Axiom R1: Reality is being created now.
> >
> > The mechanics of reality are the continuous creation of
> > consecutive nows, each in a new unit of time.
>
> I'm having a conflict here. What about all that alter-is stuff?

Damn good question.  Now we're really onto something.

Alter-is keeps you from ceasing to create it.

Alter-is doesn't itself make the creation persist.

It causes you to make the creation persist.

See the axioms of creation in archive 47.

Looks like this gives us a second axiom of reality:

Axiom R2: Reality is compulsively created until it is as-ised.


> How many way's are there to make a creation persist?

Another good question.

Maybe there is only one, and that would be not ceasing to create
it.  And then we get a profusion of reasons for not ceasing to
create something, the most significant of which is that we don't
have the as-isness of it and conscious choice in creating it or
not creating it and therefore compulsively keep it created so that
we wouldn't loose it until we get the as-isness.


> Are you saying everything that persists is being continuously created?

Yes.

> Is "reality" a special case?

Seems like it.

> Doesn't time itself fall into the created-thing category?

Probably not.  It might be just a side effect of alter-is and
persistance.  Ron has said that any second postulate introduces
time.

But maybe each persisting creation has its own "time" as a
side effect of the alter-is but these individual "times" are
grouped together in some fashion into a composite time where the
consecutive change of one thing and the consecutive change of
another are made to "track together", and that correlation of
time could be a created thing.

We ourselves have consecutive time streams that do not track
with each other or with mest time except to the degree that we
make these things track together.

But we're way over my head now and I'm going to have to think
some more about this.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - To Th8an on Between Lives

TO TH8AN ON BETWEEN LIVES

On 24 Jun 99, th8an@yahoo.com (th8an) posted on topic
"Between Lives for PILOT  My first post (th8an)"

> Hello!
>
> I just found FZA Monday (jun21). What a huge relief! I'm
> excited about life again! I'm very excited at the prospect of being
> able Clear myself and my family(beyond words!). I haven't been able to
> think about much else! Strangely enough I had decided the nite before
> that I was just going to audit myself!(before i found the FZA).
>
> My last contact with the CoS was in 1986. I went down to do
> the CCRD but got sec checked instead. Which burned up my money. They
> could'nt understand why I had such a failed purpose, and  blew. Of
> course to actually do the CCRD I'd have cough up more moola! (I was
> already loaned to hilt!) They coerced me back by saying the auditor
> wouldn't be able to audit anymore! I came back, let them finish, gave
> my f/n (under protest!) and slid out...and havent been back since.
> Enough about that....

Yes.  CofS is just wasting the tech, pouring other's money and
enthusiasm down the drain with sec checks and other stops instead
of delivering.

> I've started the Self Clearing course and will start the
> processes as soon as I get myself sessionable. Too many late nites
> reading the FZA, your archived posts etc..
> I'm stoked!! I cant thank you enough...
>
> The actual subject of this post is regarding the BETWEEN LIVES
> area. I have been reading some of your posts about this. I was a
> little disturbed to learn that it's possible even after reaching OT to
> black out after dropping the body and loose the control of ones
> destiny. To me this is unacceptable! I intent to have total and
> complete control of my state, location, tone and abilities by the time
> I blow this body! (I have a Looong way to go!) I dont want to go thru
> all this shit again!
>
> I have some thoughts on the subject. You mention you've read
> some books on OOBE such as Monroe's. So have I. All have been
> disappointing to me because of the lack of control, insight and
> perceptions, with the exception of ONE: "Adventures Beyond the Body"
> by William Buhlman available on www.amazon.com. His
> understanding,experiences and theories make me wonder if he's not on
> to something.
>
> His theory is of a multi dimensional universe, some areas of
> which coexist in the same time and space but are separated and
> differentiated by wave length(frequency). We live in the dense outer
> layer. The dimensions get higher in frequency as you go up and are
> seperated by a mebrane that opens up like a tunnel as beings pass
> through. The higher frequency layers are senior to lower. The lower
> freq layers are built on the framework of the upper ones and can not
> exist without them. Higher frequency layers can only be perceived by
> being who has raised his resonant frequency. Actually he passes thru
> the membranes (tunnels) as he raises his frequency and new layers,
> universes or areas come into view that are not perceivable at lower
> wave lengths. Higher frequency areas are much more malleable to
> thought, lower denser areas are not.
>
> This theory intrigued me since I remember LRH talking about
> Statics having no wave length(8-80). Is this in native state or do we
> have wave length at lower levels? Can we vary our frequency? It has
> been suggested that at body death we go the frequency level that
> matches our chronic wavelength at death. This is different for all of
> us. It has also been suggested that remembering experiences at
> different frequency layers(dimensions) is difficult. Bill Buhlman says
> that he just gives the self command "I raise my frequency now" and off
> he goes!  I do not have the case or training level to experiment with
> this yet!
>
> Do you? Is this theory all wet? To me it had the ring of truth. But at
> this time, I'm still somewhat stuck in this Damn body (Althought I
> consider myself an"outtie"). Could a RD be developed to give us
> control over our frequency? Or do some have control of that already?
>
> I wont be satisfied until I know exactly what goes on in the
> Between Lives Area. I think its vital!
>
> I'm happy to be in the FZ!
>
> th8an@yahoo.com

Ron also talks about percieving on different freequencies, mostly
in tapes of the 1950s.

A thetan wouldn't have a wavelength, but he would percieve on
wavelengths and be carrying around junk that was tuned to
different wavelengths.

I don't think that we are really talking about "wavelength" in
the true physics sense here, but it is probably the closest word.

A lot of the metaphysical groups talk about vibration levels
and whatever.

When one tries to "tune into things", one is probably matching
"wavelengths".

I think drills are possible here.

We are still in the "fooling around with" stage on this one.
I'll try playing with it some more (I do fool around with this
kind of stuff) and you can see what you come up with too.

But for now I would suggest treating it as experimental, and
suggest that you also run self clearing or other processing
for case gain.  Based on experimenting with other energy systems
(Ron's anchor points, the Hindu Chakras, etc.), you shouldn't
concentrate too much on energy structures because it pushes
you towards agreeing instead of getting free from the constraints.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - HELPFUL HINTS ON TRS AND METERING

HELPFUL HINTS ON TRS AND METERING

There were traditions in teaching TRs and Metering back in
the 1960s which often resulted in the equivallent of the modern
Class 12 skill level early in training.  Some of these factors
were never well identified or written down and they disappeared
with the heavy loss of auditors and old timers in the 1969
timeframe.  This was "solved" by the introduction of "Hard"
TRs which further messed up TRs training.  When TRs were finally
debugged and strightened out in the 1970s, these things had
already been forgotten and instead a long and difficult road
through pro TRs had become the order of the day.

THE MOST SIGNIFICANT FACTOR IN TRS TRAINING IS TO COACH THE
BEING RATHER THAN THE BODY.

Now this is almost too obvious to mention.  And in fact it was
too obvious and never did get mentioned properly.  And yet all
the top auditors, the ACC grads, the Class 7s, the BC graduates,
and most people who were coached by them just simply did it
this way.  I know that I picked it up, and I would coach my
students that way when I was cramming officer, and I never
noticed it as something special which I was doing.  And so it
was never actually mentioned or beefed up, we just did it that
way, sort of picking it up by osmosis.  And I will bet that
those sharp old timers picked it up from Ron in the early
days, again by osmosis and immitation, and nobody, including
Ron, quite realizing how important this was or getting it
down on paper as a formal procedure.

And I must have seen later body oriented TRs coaching numerous
times and felt that something was wrong and yet not been able
to put my finger on what it was.

But I could see that people were grinding on endlessly to
reach skill levels that we often attained on nothing more
than two or three light passes through the TRs, and even then
they were often robotic.

TRs just ain't that difficult, and the gains are fantastic.
I know people who've gone clear on a second light run of
TR0 on an HQS course.  They realized that they were mocking
up the pictures that the coach was restimulating by bullbaiting
and they stopped mocking them up.

You mess this up by putting the student's attention on
his body with your flunks.

You make it fast by always expressing the reason for a
flunk in such a way that it draws the student's attention
outward and gets him to operate as a thetan instead of
a body.

You push a button and the student twiches.  You never, ever
flunk him for twitching.  Instead, on seeing a twich, you
would funk him for what he as a being is doing, which might
be flinching at or non-confronting what you said or whatever.

You must get him to confront what you say rather than sitting
there and suppressing the body from reacting.

You want him to have zero attention on his body and all his
attention on you as the pseudo-pc that he is supposed to
be auditing.

This applies to all the TRs.

Let's take TR 1 where the student is learning to say something
to the coach and actually deliver it across the distance with
intention.

Maybe the student says it too weakly and it doesn't get there.
The foolish coach flunks him for "saying" it too weakly and
the student proceeds to make the body say it louder and tries
to get "the body" to speak with more "intention".  The smart
coach says something like "It didn't reach me" or anything
that puts the student's attention outward, so that the student
works on reaching the coach rather than working on making the
body say it a certain way.

It is a subtile difference, but if you start coaching the body
you will find that you are drilling the body's circuits and
teaching a course in posture and elocution and if you coach
the being you will find that you are drilling an OT and
the body manifestations begin to fall away rapidly because
you are validating the being.

------------

The second bug came in with trying to do two hours of TR 0
(or OT TR 0) unbullbaited without any reaction.

LONG MANY HOUR RUNS OF TR 0 UNBULLBATIED ARE AN ATTEMPT TO
FLATTEN "BE A STATIC" RATHER THAN DRILLING TRS.

And auditor can and must be able to sit there comfortably
for two hours handling a session.  But he does not sit
there in a state of zero randomity.  He is running a session.

You can polish up a pro by expecting two hours of TR4
without a flunk.  People can do this.  It is easy once
the student's buttons have been flattened and his comm cycle
has been cleaned up.  You could even have a sort of TR4W,
with W standing for "wait" where the coach intentionally
sits there quietly with long comm lags and the student has
to maintain his intention and session presence rather than
being entertained by bullbaiting.

But if you insist on pure unbullbaited TR0 with no randomity
for too long a period after the student has gotten his TR
zero in, you slide over into flattening tolerance for minus
randomity, tolerance for no-game conditions, and "be a
static".  It actually acts like an overrun, turning on mass
and driving the TA high.

The other TRs do not really overrun like processes.  The
student can get invalidated by continuing too long past a
big win and you can rehab that, but you don't see the other
overrun phenomena, a being can do anything forever and these
are drills.

But with unbullbaited zero, you are not asking him to "do
anything forever", instead you are asking him to "do nothing
forever" and we are pushing straight up against early track
and separation from static.

There will be a point where his TR zero really came in.
He can sit on this point for ten minutes and all is well.
But if you ask him to sit on it for two hours, he is going
to start mocking things up for randomity.

This might flatten eventually, there are high states where
the thetan can have being a static.  But most people get
throught two hour runs of zero randomity with suppress or by
running OT drills covertly to raise havingness or whatever.
It is not actually pure TR 0.

Sometimes they even make big gains doing this, holding corners
of the room or spotting spots in the coach's body or whatever,
but the student is given absolutely zero instructions on doing
anything like this.  And so we have a free-for-all where he might
be doing something helpful (holding corners actually is very
good and mixes in well, I don't want to stop people from doing
this) but he might also be doing something screwy like talking
to an imaginary friend to pass the time.

The important point is that you have moved out of the band
of drilling confront and are over-running into something else.
You can rehab (we used to do that in TR's debugs) or you
can wait a few days until the restim on static cools down
and it will usually run as a confront drill again.

---------

OTHER IMPORTANT POINTS:

These are known but sometimes get forgotten.

Flatten buttons by precise duplication until the button no
longer reacts.

Even mass bullbaiting flattens quickly with big gains if the
group can be made to flatten a button precisely.  Unfortunately,
it is rare that a group will do this properly unless they are
all professional auditors.  Since this is not needed as a
session skill, it was dropped.  But if it should happen on
TRs that the student does overhear a remark from another
student and breaks up or whatever, a good coach should try
and get the other student to repeat the remark and they should
flatten it.  In other words, if you accidentally get into a
bit of mass bullbaiting, go ahead and flatten the button if
possible.

Bullbaiting must be rough.  Even on new people.  Don't mince
around.  At one time bullbaiting was pulled from the HAS (comm
course) and you never saw a course's stats crash so fast.
And they soared back up as soon as rough bullbaiting was
put back in.  New people, even the highly proper and conservative
ones, just love it as long as they get to do both sides,
pushing buttons as well as getting them pushed, and as long
as there is an air of doing it for good intentions to get
people's confront up.

On bullbaiting, anything can be flattened.  The old R6 students
used to chant GPM end words at each other (and not in sequence
or with any auditing protections) and they would get through
it.  It might be better not to do this with new people (at least
not on purpose - they will hit very heavy stuff accidentally),
but don't be afraid of pushing any button, it will flatten.

On new people, being a coach bullbaiting the student is
actually a bit of a grade zero process.  They are blowing
their own communication stops by saying things they would
not normally confront saying in ordinary conversation.

The "lightness" on a TRs course for new people is in the
gentleness of handling, validation of wins, and not staying
on one TR too long.  But the expectations and demands for
skill should be maximum strength.

You get what you validate.  On any level of TRs course, the
coach should validate it when he first feels that the student's
TRs have come in on the particular drill.  Don't leave him
wondering if he's got it right because he will slide back
off of it.  Except for a first course, you do not want to
pass the student until you see that he can maintain the
TR for a while, because you need a stable result. But let
him know that you are feeling good about how he is doing it.

You bullbait again on TRs 3 and 4.  His buttons are much
more exposed while he is trying to do something rather than
just sitting there.  Often you get a lot of suppress on 0
bullbaited, and having him do something at the same time
stops this.  On TR 3 he will sometimes get away with things
by putting them on a circuit.  So you get more on TR 4 because
he can't handle originations intelligently while letting
a circuit run the session.  You don't send him back to 0
for more bullbating because he will just suppress again.

Really TR 3 and 4 should each be done once for comm cycle
handling (no heavy bullbaiting) and again with maximum
bullbaiting.

And on TR 4, you emphasise intelligent and adroit handling
of originations as covered in the PAB rather than robotic
not-isness of the origination.

--------------

A "Pro" TRs course:

As I mentioned, you get what you validate.  A pro course
should begin with a light pass through, giving maximum
validation and bailing out early on good wins.

Then I would recommend a pass through the "permissive
coaching" variation in the 1963 HCOB that the org unfortunately
cancelled (it is in the old tech volumes and the freezone
1963 tech volume).  This does not substitute for real TRs,
but it is an excellent drill for getting the student to
observe the fine points and raising his awareness.  This
can be done in a day, it is not an endurance pass.

Then listen to some demo sessions.

Then go for broke, emphasising naturalness as well as
precision and flawlessness.

If necessary you could do this in two passes, but I think
that most people could make it in one.

Do not go for 2 hour marathons on unbullbaited zero.  It
might take 2 hours before it goes in (unlikely), but when
the student's got it and can maintain it for a few minutes,
give him a pass.

The coaching should be rough and demanding as far as holding
a standard for excellence, but it should be high ARC and
done in a high toned comradly way rather than invalidating.

After normal TR 4 is excellent, do TR 4 with admin.  Then
do TR 4 with a meter and admin.

Finish up with an endurance version of TR 4 (TR 4W as mentioned
above), and it might as well be with admin.  Include occasional
bullbaiting and convoluted hard to handle originations,
but also punch up this business of being able to tolerate
long comm lags from the pc without having to do something.
This one should be two hours by the clock because you need
the ability to sit there in session.

But keep the long marathons out of the lower TRs.  Everything
up to this last step should go fast.

-----------------

METERING:

The biggest bug I have seen in people trying to learn to read
a meter is that they ask the meter instead of the pc.

The meter doesn't have a case.  It will not itself "read"
on the question.  Only the pc reads and you have to ask him,
and the meter will report his reaction.

Almost all beginning students have their TR1 going into the
meter when they first try to assess.

In truth, it is easier to assess by looking at the pc while
also having the meter dial in your line of vision than it is
to attempt to get the meter to read while staring down at it.

TR 4 with a meter helps a lot.  Just putting the student back
on TR 1 without a meter generally does little good because you
are not handling what is putting his TRs out.

But the easiest solution is generally to do the instant read
drill but only coach the TR 1 aspect of it until it goes in.

Hope this helps,

The Pilot

==========================================

These posts were posted with the following trailer -

------------------
The free Self Clearing Book, The Super Scio book, and the
"SCIENTOLOGY REFORMER'S HOME PAGE" are all over the net.

See The Self Clearing Homepage for URLs to these sites
http://fza.org/pilot/selfclr.htm

Or see The Pilots Home Page at http://fza.org/pilot/index.htm

Some translations are available, see links at fza.org

Also see the new www.fzint.org website.

All of the current posts will be collected in Super Scio Archives
#59 and posted to ACT.  See the Pilot Archives at FZA.ORG.

Note that some of my posts only go to ACT.  I cannot be reached by email.
I watch ARS and ACT for messages with Pilot in the subject line.

------------------
