ZEGEL TAPE NO. 3
July 1984

Copyright © 1984 Jon Zegel Redistribution rights granted
for non-commercial purposes.
((This is the complete and unabridged, word for word
transcript of Jon Zegel's tape number 3. Remember that Zegel
recants the entirety of his first 3 tapes, including this one, in
the 4th tape.))

Hello again, it's July 1984 and this is Jon Zegel.
This is tape number 3 in the series of tapes that we've
produced.
When we did the first tape a little over a year ago, in July
of 1983, there were just a few hundred splinters around the
world. By the time we did tape number 2 in January of 1984, there
were thousands of splinters, a real worldwide splinter movement.
This tape, I believe, marks the end of the 'splinter'
movement.
There exists today a complete new Church. We are no longer a
schism of Scientology. In fact, we have arrived. We lack only a
common name.
As you know, a Church is by definition a collection of people
who share the same philosophy and beliefs. The new Church is such
a collection, a group of people who believe in the philosophy of
Scientology, the basic dignity and rightness of people, they
believe that people have a right to improve their lives and the
lives of those around them without becoming emotionally or
economically bankrupt, and that people, just as they are, are
basically good and are seeking to survive.
In this tape, we are going to take a hard look at some of the
difficult areas to confront. We will look at Church credibility,
who is in control, and the most difficult area, LRH's involvement
or noninvolvement in what has occurred. We will look at the
question I am asked most often, "How could this have
happened?" And lastly, we will look at what this all means.
Credibility.
In any situation where evaluation of data is important, the
credibility of information is always a question. Church
credibility has been extremely poor, both with the public and the
press. Here are a couple of examples of why.
In March of this year, a group of people concerned with the
Church's failure to make prompt repayments staged a protest
demonstration at the Cedars complex here in Los Angeles. The
march was covered by both local and national media, TV, radio,
press and so on.
The Church responded by sending Scientologists out carrying
signs saying "Sponsored by the Los Angeles Psychiatric
Association" and passing out similar statements to the
press.
What follows is the report broadcast on KFWB radio:
"People upset with the refund policy of the Church
of Scientology marched in front of the Church headquarters in
Hollywood today. KFWB's John Brooks reports that the
protesters have filed suit against the Church and claimed
they have been harassed and intimidated."
"Former Scientologists who say they were denied
refunds totaling thousands of dollars marched down the Sunset
Boulevard sidewalk, while current members of the Church
joined the march with their own picket signs and gave out
misleading statements to the press as though they were part
of the protest. Other Scientologists took down the names of
the marchers and photographed them. The former Scientologists
say harassment and intimidation are what they faced when they
tried to get refunds, despite Church advertisements that
money would be promptly returned. Church spokeswoman Shirley
Young says protesters failed to follow the refund procedures
and are using this issue in a continuing effort to discredit
Scientology. John Brooks, KFWB news 98."
The credibility problem is not just a US phenomenon. What
follows is a recording of a BBC radio call-in program featuring
Scientology's UK Director of Public Relations, Mike Garside. He's
being asked questions about Church policies on disconnection. The
first person you will hear is a caller named George.
Caller: "I agree a person should be allowed not to talk
to someone if they don't want to, but I disagree with the fact of
a Church saying to a person, 'You should not associate with
someone else because we decided he is no longer in agreement with
our aims, and so you should stop your communication with him.'
"
Interviewer: "Do you in fact do that?"
Mike: "Well I think, I think really, we, you know,
you need to look at the actual policy of the Church in the
matter, and really uh, the...the..."
Interviewer: "Come on Mike, tell us, what is the
policy of the Church in the matter? Do you or do you not tell
your people not to associate with those who have broken
away?"
Mike: "What we say is that if somebody is, if
somebody's survival is being threatened by somebody they are
associated with, then it is probably a good idea for them to
keep cool on it and to steer clear of them for a while."
Interviewer: "Are they being 'keeping very cool' of
you George?"
George: "Uh, well, yes, yes, but, their policy from
what I have read is not that it should be a good idea, but if
they don't, they themselves could be declared as a
suppressive person."
Interviewer: "True or false, Mike? Last word on
that..."
Mike: "I, I think really the, the, the basic charge
of that is false."
OK, let's see what the Church policy actually says. From the
Church Policy Letter 10 September 1983 called PTSness and
Disconnection, on page 2, "the term disconnection is defined
as a self-determined decision made by an individual that he is
not going to be connected to another. It is a severing of
communication."
The issue here, by the way, is not disconnection, but whether
or not it is self-determined. Let's have a further look, on page
4 of the same Policy Letter it states "A pc is connected to
a person or group that has been declared suppressive by HCO in a
published Ethics Order. He should disconnect."
It goes on to say, "No attempt should be made to
establish communication with the declared SP to clear matters up
or to seek to reform the SP. The SP's reform is strictly in the
hands of HCO. The PTS simply disconnects."
And later goes on to say, "To fail or refuse to
disconnect from a suppressive person not only denies the PTS case
gain, it also is supportive of the suppressive, in itself a
suppressive act. And it must be so labeled."
It then refers to HCOPL 23 December 1965RA, which was revised
and reissued on the 10th of September 1983, and is called
Suppressive Acts.
It was republished just a couple of months before this radio
program was broadcast. Let's have a look at it.
Sure enough, on page 4 under Suppressive Acts it states, 28.) "Continued
adherence to a person or group pronounced a suppressive person or
group by HCO."
Further, on page 9 it says: "Any PTS who fails to
either handle or disconnect from the SP who is making him or her
a PTS, is, by failing to do so, guilty of a suppressive
act."
So, is disconnection self-determined? In fact, no it is not,
specifically in two instances. One when handling fails, and when
a person has been pronounced an SP by HCO. The only choice is
being on lines or not. If you disconnect, you can be on lines.
Mr. Garside would have you believe that this is all
self-determined. Let's see how it is actually applied. I will
read from three actual Church Ethics Orders all issued within the
past 12 months.
I've deleted the names of those involved for obvious reasons.
From the first, this one issued at FOLO West US, it says, "Any
Scientologist found to be maintaining a line with, offering
support to, or in any way granting credence to ...., and his or
her motivations, is also subject to declare and denial of any
further service."
On another Findings and Recommendations from a Comm Ev, it
says "...that this person be declared a Suppressive
Person, her only terminal being the International Justice
Chief".
And on a third, this one from Flag, it says, "All
Scientologists and In-Ethics individuals everywhere are warned
not to associate with these suppressive individuals or become
involved in any treatments with them, as such would be personally
dangerous to your progress in Scientology. Any such association
would also make any person connected a Potential Trouble Source
per the policies governing PTSness. These individuals' only
terminal is the International Justice Chief."
So does the Church practice a policy of involuntary
disconnection?
There is no question about it.
Just as an aside, the very same policy letter, Suppressive
Acts, restates FAIR GAME. On page 10 it says, "Also,
until a Suppressive Person or group is absolved, no Committee of
Evidence may be called on any Scientologist or person for any
offenses of ANY KIND against the Suppressive Person, except for
offenses which violate the laws of the land."
Is that Fair Game? You bet it is. And I have seen it applied
to myself and others recently. All claims that "Fair Game
was Canceled" are just more evidence of this lack of
credibility.
Forgery of Documents.
According to the RTC, LRH donated his trademarks to the RTC on
two documents called Assignment Agreements. Real questions exist
regarding these Assignment Agreements. They have been examined by
two professional Questioned Document Examiners, with proven
credentials and long careers. These are not people with any axes
of their own to grind.
They have been examined by John L. Swanson of Boston MA., and
Erngard Wassard of Holt Denmark. Both have found the LRH
signatures on the Agreements highly questionable.
((In later trials, the credentials of John L. Swanson were
thrown into doubt as his training was not as extensive as
originally thought.))
Ms. Wassard, after examining the two Assignment Agreements,
states,
"The doubtful signatures show so much similarity
in the writing movement and shape of the letters, in the
breaking off of lines, the tilt, and not least in the chaos
of big loops in the upper zone of the writing, that there is
a probability amounting almost to certainty that
- the two signatures have been made by the same
person, and
- that that person is NOT identical with the person
L. Ron Hubbard who has signed his name on the known
samples, since the doubtful signatures show a
multitude of deviations from the authentic writing,
which are typical of forgeries."
She then lists 18 specific discrepancies between the real and
questioned signatures, and states,
"Apart from all this, there are so many
interruptions of the writing, interruptions of the line,
added lines, irrelevant additions, omissions and failing
imitations, that the conclusion must be that there is a
probability amounting almost to certainty that the signatures
are forgeries of the signature of L. Ron Hubbard."
She goes on to say,
"Note: The phrase 'A probability amounting almost
to certainty' is the strongest phrase used in cases of this
nature, also by the police. It is my personal honest belief
that the doubtful signatures are not authentic."
And she signs her name at the bottom.
The Church had deleted sections of these documents when they
first submitted them to the court in the Omaha Trademark case.
When complete copies of the documents were later obtained, it was
discovered that the Notary Public, the Official Witness to these
Questioned Signatures, was none other than David Miscavige.
Further examination by the Questioned Document Examiners of
the complete documents show remarkable similarities between Mr.
Miscavige's signature and the questioned signatures of L. Ron
Hubbard.
You know the Church is very fond of putting heads on pikes and
making grand claims that it has reformed. (('We found and
busted the SP, so that isn't going on any more...')) I would
suggest to you that such claims be viewed with the deepest
skepticism.
I say this for two reasons.
One, the only remedy for lying is, of course, telling the
truth.
And I believe that there has been little evidence of that.
And Two, the only real evidence of reform is the making amends
for damages done. I would point out that there is NO evidence of
that at all.
So beware of the claims of reform.
The same senior personnel are on post, and the same policies
are in force. A few minor figures have been crucified to be sure,
but I see no evidence of reform.
By the way, Lyman Spurlock, who is the Chief Executive Officer
of The Church of Spiritual Technology, and a trustee of the RTC,
recently said under oath that former Scientologists who wish
their folders not be held by the Church can contact the Church,
and while present, have their folders destroyed. I wonder if
that's true.
While the 1982 Mission Holders Conference is old news, it was
pivotal in recent Church history. Since I have uncovered some new
data about it, I thought I would share it with you. I was very
fortunate to obtain an audio recording of the Sunday Evening
Meeting, as well as having interviewed several people who
attended.
First, according to all accounts, those who attended the
conference were extensively flashbulbed, that is, flash guns from
cameras were fired in their faces every 10 to 20 seconds or so,
throughout the first 4 hours of the conference. There were three
individuals actually doing this, among them Jesse Prince who is
the secretary on the Board of Directors of the RTC.
The atmosphere, not being allowed to leave, heavy ethics
presence, flashbulbing, etc. is all very typical of implants.
Clearly, this flashbulbing was not for photography. Simple
arithmetic would indicate that flashing every 20 seconds or so
would lead to between 60 and 120 flashes per hour. Since ordinary
35mm film contains 36 exposures per reel, and no film changes
were observed, something else besides photography was going on.
MAAs additionally patrolled the room making sure every eye was
on the speakers. If one glanced away, even for a moment, one of
these MAAs would come right in front of you, glare directly at
your face, wait until you looked straight ahead and then move out
of your way.
Not one person on that podium said a word to stop this
flashbulbing and intimidation. David Miscavige, trustee of the
Church of Spiritual Technology, trustee of the RTC and trustee of
Author Services, Lyman Spurlock who is the Chief Executive
Officer of the Church of Spiritual Technology, trustee of the
RTC, Mark Yeager who is CO CMO INT, that is Commanding Officer of
the Commodore's Messenger Org International, and Chairman of the
Watchdog Committee, Norman Starkey, who is the Chief Executive
Officer of Author Services, Guillaume Leserve, who is the
Executive Director International of the Church of Scientology,
Raymond Mithoff, the Senior C/S International for the Church of
Scientology, Jesse Prince who is the Secretary of the RTC and a
member of its Board of Directors and Wendell Reynolds who is the
Finance Dictator.
The highest tech and admin terminals in the Church sat through
this for 4 hours without one protest, so they must've agreed and
subscribed to this kind of behavior. That's the only conclusion
that can be reached.
One of the things that always puzzled me about the Mission
Holder's Conference was, why publish the transcript?
There is an answer to that question, but I never would have
discovered without the audio tape. The answer is what was written
up in the transcript does not match what was said. There are
hundreds of minor alterations, deletions of 4 letter words and so
on. But little of that is significant. What is significant is the
major difference between what the Church Attorney Larry Heller
said, and what the transcripts said.
Now what I am going to do is, I'll alternately read a couple
of lines of the transcript of Mr. Heller's remark and then I'll
play that segment of the tape, and you'll see what I am talking
about.
Now what I am doing right now is, I am reading from page one
of SO ED 2104 INT, which is the transcript of the Mission
Holder's meeting. I am looking at paragraph number 4 of Mr.
Heller's remarks that begin as follows:
"All of the Scientology/Dianetic trademarks were
previously owned by L. Ron Hubbard. L. Ron Hubbard has donated
the vast majority of those to a corporation which some of you
have probably heard of, by the name of Religious Technology
Center. "
Now I'll play the corresponding section from the tape.
((Zegel plays actual tape...))
"All of the Scientology/Dianetic trademarks are
owned and will be owned in perpetuity by L. Ron Hubbard. L.
Ron Hubbard has licensed those trademarks, or the vast
majority and the use of them, to a corporation which some of
you have probably heard of, by the name of Religious
Technologies Corporation."
Just to recap briefly, what the transcript says is that the
trademarks were owned previously by L. Ron Hubbard and donated to
the Religious Technology Center. What Mr. Heller actually said
was that the trademarks are owned in perpetuity by L. Ron Hubbard
and are licensed to the Religious Technology Center.
Now the use of those two terms, that Ron OWNED the trademarks
and continues to own them and licenses them to the Religious
Technology Center are consistent throughout Mr. Heller's speech.
The next line of the transcript reads as follows, "In
donating those trademarks, L. Ron Hubbard imposed the duty on
Religious Technology Center (RTC) of assuring that the source of
those trademarks, the technology that those trademarks represent,
are given and disseminated to the public in the way that he
formulated those trademarks."
Now let's listen to what Mr. Heller actually said.
"In licensing those trademarks, L. Ron Hubbard
imposed the duty on Religious Technologies Corporation of
assuring that the source of those trademarks, the technology
that those trademarks represent are given and disseminated to
the public in the way that he formulated those
trademarks."
Mr. Heller is clearly speaking of a licensing of trademarks to
the RTC, NOT a donation. That, coupled with the question of the
authenticity of the signatures on the Assignment Agreements that
we covered earlier, leaves some mighty large unanswered
questions.
It is my opinion, and let us be sure that we have labeled this
clearly, THIS IS MY OPINION as to why this was done. I believe
what you have going on here is a 'have your cake and eat it too'
type set-up. It is very clear that there is the desire on
someone's part to file lawsuits to stop other people from using
Scientology materials and trademarks. If L. Ron Hubbard is the
owner of those trademarks, he is an indispensable person in the
lawsuits. If, on the other hand, he has donated the trademarks to
the RTC or some other organization, THAT person or organization
becomes the principal in the lawsuit and L. Ron Hubbard is spared
the inconvenience or the discomfort of having to appear in court.
On the other hand, if the Assignment Agreement is genuine, LRH
ends up giving up ownership of the trademarks. Now, there was
always an outpoint to my way of thinking in LRH GIVING these
trademarks away.
A lot of things can be said about LRH, but that he gives away
the materials of Dianetics and Scientology is not one of them. So
that act in itself was an outpoint.
If what Mr. Heller said is true, that these trademarks have
been LICENSED to the RTC, and I have every reason to believe that
what he spoke there was the truth since he was very much involved
in the documents surrounding it, then LRH is being paid royalties
or other fees for the licenses and the trademarks, and these
other documents talking about the donation have simply been
created to shield him from becoming a principal in the lawsuits
regarding the trademarks.
And that's really all that's going on.
There has been some question about verbal declares at this
meeting.
Here, in David Miscavige's own words, he'll tell you about two
declares, and you will actually here him say "Declare
her!" as Cora Lee Wimbush, having just heard that her
husband Kingsley has been declared, rises to leave.
Now you will have to listen closely.
((Zegel plays tape...))
David Miscavige:
"Scientology will go as far as it works, and when
it is not applied correctly that's a violation of trademarks.
****???????????????**** I just want to tell you exactly how
much business we mean, you know, remember we said Dean Stokes
and Kingsley Wimbush were here. Well, they've been declared,
and we are going to file criminal charges on them. Kingsley
Wimbush and his 'de-dinging' process is OFF SOURCE and is
Squirrel and is a violation of trademarks. And he is calling
something Scientology that isn't, and it's not going to go on
any more."
Next person who I am going to introduce to you is Warrant
Officer Lyman Spurlock. He is the Corporate Affairs Director of
the Church and he is going to brief you on the new Corporate
structure of the Church.
"Declare her (snaps finger)."
((In transcribing this tape, the sound level was so bad I
had to go get the printed copy of the transcript to decipher some
of the text. In doing so, I noticed that the printed transcript
has a slightly different view than the recorded tape. Here is the
relevant section from the transcript.
David Miscavige:
"Scientology will go as far as it works, and when
it is not applied correctly (out-tech), that's a violation of
trademarks. This is a very serious matter.
Earlier this evening both Kingsley Wimbush and Dan Stokes
were here. They have both now been declared, and we are pursuing
criminal charges against them. They have both been delivering
their own squirrel tech, while calling it Scientology. Kingsley
Wimbush's "dinging process" is completely squirrel. You
won't find it in any tech, yet he has been calling it
Scientology. That's a violation of trademark laws and he now
faces some serious charges for this crime. This sort of activity
is NOT going to go on anymore." ))
As long as we are talking about Mission Holders, I thought it
might be a good idea to look at what happened to two of them,
because their stories are instructive of something I feel needs
exposing. And that is the practice of the Church of Scientology
deciding to do something, taking over large missions, or
converting their cash into Church assets, those sorts of things,
and how they will manufacture a shore story to justify those
actions.
The process is really quite consistent, and takes place in 4
stages.
- They decide what they want. Mest, money, a stat, silence,
etc.
- They try using ordinary means to get it, conversation,
asking for it, promotion and so on.
- Presuming that that fails, they take severe actions,
they'll relicense all the missions with Church in
control, or they'll simply take what they want or they'll
intimidate or they'll lie or they'll threaten etc.
- What they'll do is they'll change the past or manufacture
a past in all manner of shore stories in black PR on the
person or group to make it alright, and to discredit any
objection that person might have over what was done.
Let's watch this in action, and the most important element of
this is changing the past, as I think you'll see.
The first of these Mission Holders we will look into is
Kingsley Wimbush. Obviously, the eval that Kingsley Wimbush did
that led to the famous de-dinging has been much maligned. I
thought you might be interested to hear his side of the story.
In June of 1982, Kingsley owned 6 missions and employed 132
staff.
At its peak, this network was taking in nearly $175,000 a
week, much of which went to reserves. The staff was well paid, a
booming scene all around. Kingsley and others who were around at
the time credit the booming scene which was going on there to the
eval and the effects that had on the staff.
During the summer of 1982, Kingsley made the eval available to
other Mission Holders who wanted it, and reports of rave
successes in using it were far and wide, stats up and so on. And
these are verified by my interviews with those who used it.
As Kingsley will now, in hindsight, freely admit, however,
there were some minor out-tech points, but those were really
minor and the eval did produce results. Nonetheless, in the first
week of August 1982, Roger Barnes, who was then with SMI,
Scientology Missions International, received a telex from
International Management labeling the eval out-tech.
Mr. Barnes contacted Kingsley who in turn contacted every
Mission Holder by letter and phone instructing them to stop using
the eval, return the tapes, etc. He even received a commendation
for doing such a thorough and rapid job cleaning up the scene,
and he even refunded some of the money that had been paid to him.
He was ordered to Flag for Sec Checking and got 25 hours.
During the 25 hours, he had an absolutely enormous win, really
saw what had gone wrong, and asked to go to Ethics so that he
might go ahead and complete the cycle by doing lower conditions.
This request, by the way, was denied, but that didn't stop him.
He simply got ahold of an Ethics book, sat down and began to
apply the conditions anyway.
Generally, he was absolutely blown out and delighted with the
results that he'd had. He went to Div 6 there at Flag, that is
the Public Division, and got a list of those people that Flag
said had been upset by the eval. He contacted each and every one
of those people, and there was only about 10 or 12, personally,
with a resolve to handle them.
It was interesting to note that he never really found any
people that were upset with his eval. All the people that were on
that list were upset with Flag, but for reasons other than the
eval. He handled them anyway, and simply continued the cycle.
But the Church was not satisfied. They ordered that he take
additional sec checking, and in fact, he had nearly a hundred
hours more. In hindsight, Kingsley feels that what the Church was
doing was just digging up or attempting to dig up dirt to use
against him.
Anyway, he continued on the sec checking at Flag. He learned
along the way that there was to be a Mission Holders meeting in
San Francisco, and requested permission to attend. He was told he
was not permitted to attend.
But on Sunday October the 17th at 6am, that's the day of the
meeting, a CMO messenger awoke him and said, "You are
ordered to attend the Mission Holders meeting, you have 5 minutes
before we leave."
Kingsley was delighted, he lept up, you know, cleaned up as
best he could, threw some clothes into a suitcase and jumped on
an airplane back to San Francisco. He arrived at the Mission
Holders meeting expectantly, and was declared on the spot.
Obviously, this was a tremendous blow to him. And in fact, it
took him a couple of days to fully regain his equilibrium, as I
suppose it would any of us.
Nonetheless, he caught a plane back to Flag and set up
meetings with the SMI Justice Chief, a guy named Jay Griffin.
Griffin told him, "Look, you can't stay on as Mission
Holder because you are now a declared SP, so what I want you to
do is to sign over your missions to SMI, do your A to E, and then
we will give your missions back to you as soon as you are
undeclared." Kingsley agreed to do it.
Soon afterwards, however, an SMI ethics order appeared on
Kingsley that said,
"He may never be a Mission Holder again, and may
never do the upper bridge."
That ethics order of course was signed by Jay Griffin.
Kingsley is tremendously discouraged, his mission network,
complete, has been taken away from him, and he returns home.
The Church begins to spread malicious rumors about him, saying
that he has been embezzling money, guilty of bribery, he has
enough crimes to be put in jail for four lifetimes. Miscavige, as
you heard at the Mission Holders meeting, said that the Church
was going to pursue criminal charges against him. All that was
just hot air.
Nonetheless, in November of 1982, Kingsley got a call from Jay
Griffin to come to Los Angeles, that they'd "sit down and
discuss things and get them straight."
Kingsley was delighted, he drove all night from northern
California to get to Los Angeles the following day. He arrives
and checks into a motel and calls Griffin, only to be told to
report to a particular address that Griffin gave him. So he jumps
in his car and he goes to the address and he enters a room and he
discovers within the room two private detectives and a court
stenographer and is given the following recommendation.
"Anything you say can be held against you."
Kingsley, as you might imagine, freaked out a bit. He said
look, I am not going to get into this until I talk to an
attorney, and goes off and does so. He spends a little bit of
time with the attorney, explains exactly what's occurred, the
attorney says look you have absolutely nothing to worry about, go
and talk to them all you want.
And so he does. In fact, he goes back and he discusses with
the PI's, the Private Detectives, Private Investigators if you
will, precisely what is going on in great detail, and all this is
typed up by the stenographer and so on, and the Private
Investigators, frankly, couldn't be less interested. The Church
had apparently told them that Kingsley was responsible for blood
highway from one end of the country to the other, and they were
very disinterested in what they discovered from him.
Nonetheless, shortly thereafter, a comm ev was held. Of
course, the findings and recommendations for it were never
published.
The loss, well, from the Mission Network there was a loss of
about $400,000 in cash that went into the Church, another
$400,000 approximately in real estate equity, and those missions
have never recovered.
Why was this done to Kingsley? Well, we are going to look into
the story of another large mission holder, Steve Surry, because
he was TOLD why.
Steve owned 5 US missions, Salt Lake City, Denver, 3 in the
Seattle area called Bellevue, Seattle per se, and University Way.
As of October 1982, his network had highest-ever stats of nearly
$40,000 per week and the 5 missions have a net worth of cash and
liquid assets of nearly 1 million dollars.
Steve, as did the other mission holders, attended the 1982
Mission Holders Conference, was as shocked at its content. But he
was more shocked at what came next.
By Wednesday, October the 20th, Bridge, a private
profit-making corporation, had called him on the phone and told
him that every single one of his missions must have 100 copies of
every Scientology book as their book stocks.
He was told "If you don't, the Finance Police will be at
your door."
Well, a deal was struck. By Thursday, October the 28th, the
Commanding Officer of FOLO West US, Link Elliot had, unbeknownst
to Steve, traveled to the Salt Lake City Mission and had begun
conversion of it into an Org.
As a matter of fact, on Friday the 29th of October, he called
a meeting of all the Mission public to announce it. On Sunday,
October 31st, Steve received a call from the Salt Lake Mission
ED. "Lieutenant Galloway of the International Finance Police
is here and he wants $15,000 per day for inspections."
Steve considered carefully his position at that point, and he
realized that either he would pay the $15,000 a day or they would
simply declare him and take the money anyway. So he paid $30,000
for 2 days inspections to the International Finance Police.
Monday, November the 1st was not to be a good day. To begin
the day, Steve received a call from the Seattle area missions
telling him that the University Way Mission broke.
On the same day, later on, the Salt Lake Mission ED, whose
conscience was really bothering him, called Steve up to tell him
about becoming an org. Steve, as you might imagine, was shocked,
dismayed and angered.
I asked Steve what he got for the $75,000 that he paid to the
Finance Police. After considering his answer carefully, he made
it very clear that what the Missions got out of it was literally
nothing. What was being done to the missions at that point was
simply a gigantic reg event for Flag, both public and staff were
being ordered and/or encouraged to go to Flag.
They didn't inspect any books, any folders or anything. He was
additionally ordered to get 10 staff members to Flag at a cost to
the Mission network of an additional $17,000.
On Wednesday, November the 3rd, Steve got the answer. This is
the answer for Kingsley, and it's the answer for him. He had a
meeting with Link Elliot again, who is the Commanding Officer of
FOLO West US, and asked him what the heck was going on. Link said
very clearly that he was under orders from the Watchdog Committee
to turn all large Missions into Orgs, and any mission holder who
refused would be declared.
Steve asked, "Well what exchange am I to get for this, I
have put these years of my life into building these
missions..." and the answer to the question was nothing.
By the end of the day, of Thanksgiving Day, November 25th
1982, beyond the $45,000 for the Seattle area missions, beyond
the $30,000 for the Salt Lake City Mission, an additional $87,000
in fines had been levied against the Mission network. The total
paid in 5 weeks time was $75,000 in inspections, $25,000 in
books, films and so on, $17,000 for staff training and $87,000 in
fines, for a total of $204,000 paid to the Church of Scientology.
But there is a Catch-22 in all of this, as well. In December
of 1982, Steve was recalled to Flag, obviously he had 'bad
attitude' by this time, and among the things that occurred was
that he was sent to Ethics, and it was decided he would work out
of the condition of Treason, as he had been upset with management
and so forth.
And what was his amends project to be? His amends project was
to be turning the Salt Lake City mission into an Org.
In January 1983, Steve returned home. He tried to put all of
the upsets behind him. He contacted his mission ED's, look we are
going to put this network back together, we're going to get back
on our feet and go for it. But in the middle of the month he was
called by SMI, Scientology Missions International, and told that
a Committee of Evidence was called on him, and 22 mission
holders, as well.
His mission executives around the country were being told that
he was being Comm Ev'd, there was lots of third party, and so
forth, and so his ability to actually control and manage those
missions was diminished considerably.
When Steve finally did get to testify before the Comm Ev, he
discovered that they had only two reports of dubious credibility
on him.
The reports had very little information in them, and yet,
according to the findings that were later read to him, he was
found guilty of dozens of crimes and High Crimes.
And yet, those findings and the recommendations that would
have gone with them, simply were not issued.
In February of 1983, because of his deteriorating ability to
manage the missions, as a result of the third party and the
unknownness of his findings and recommendations from the Comm Ev,
Steve felt it was best for the network and best for his own
sanity for him to resign, which he did.
On May the 1st 1983, the findings and recommendations of the
Committee of Evidence were finally published. It's interesting to
note that Steve was NOT declared, he was just given lower
conditions.
Of course, by that time, his career was ruined, his mission
network was torn to pieces, and he started a new life.
A number of people have asked me to tell my story. I should
say our story, because it involves both myself and my wife
Vivian.
And although we've been hesitant to do so, it so well
illustrates the 4 stage approach that we mentioned earlier, you
know, decide to do something, try the usual means, take severe
actions, and then change the past to make a justifiable shore
story, that I have decided to go ahead and do so.
Our story begins in December 1982 when I was called by a Flag
reg and asked about doing more NOTS. I was quite candid with him
about how I felt about Church activities, including the Mission
Holders meeting, the materials revealed in the Ron DeWolfe trial,
the Richard Stewart, you know he was the private business owner
in Los Angeles that was so abused and so on. And he wrote me up
to the CMO, that is, the reg ((wrote me up)).
I was called in and an attempt was made to 'handle' me, but
their promise to follow up on the cycle and call me back and so
forth was broken several times. And as more and more activities
continued in Los Angeles, by the spring time we had contacted
Vivian's son, who is Mark Yeager, at that time the Commanding
Officer of the CMO International, and Chairman of the Watchdog
Committee.
We asked that he come home and have a talk with us. He said he
was unable to do so because he was leaving town and couldn't, but
he would meet us within a few weeks. In the interim, we were
called and visited by Jeff Chervel (sp?) from the RTC, Ray
Mithoff, who is the Senior C/S International and Jesse Prince,
who was a principal in the Inspector Generals Network.
We were told, as the three of them came in a group, that they
had flown in from Flag just to see us. Over that weekend that
they called, we had 8 plus or minus hours of meetings with them,
and told them specifically our observations and grievances. They
were convinced that there was a third party and we, as active
field auditors, must have out-tech.
There was some yelling, mostly by Jesse Prince, but otherwise
the meetings were cordial. What was most surprising was their
expression of complete shock and not knowing about any of these
activities that had allegedly gone on in Los Angeles.
The following Saturday we were visited again, this time by
Jesse Prince, Jeff Chervel and his aide named Warren McShane. We
were told that the Senior C/S International, Ray Mithoff, had
written a program just for us, and that two 'auditors' had been
flown in especially from Flag to handle us. We were told we would
be getting some word clearing, and sec checking, and all of this
was going to be done for free, provided that we handle other
disaffected field as exchange.
We agreed and spent a week being sec checked up one side and
down the other. Our sec checkers, we later learned, were both in
the Finance Police. By Saturday night, we were called to a
meeting with Ray Mithoff, Warren McShane and Jesse Prince. During
the meeting, Jesse became abusive, vulgar and threatening, when
we refused to take a Condition of Confusion purely on his say so.
He accused us of all manner of crimes and High Crimes, none of
which we were guilty. After some minutes of the yelling and the
threats, I stood up and Vivian with me, and said, "That's
it. We've heard all we're going to of this, good night", and
tried to leave.
It was then that we were assaulted. Ray grabbed Vivian and
yanked her back into the room, Jesse and Warren grabbed my arms
and held me.
Finally, amid their yelling and cursing, we struggled free and
escaped.
There were attempts by our auditors to patch things up, but
all they were allowed to run was "What withhold did Ray
miss on you?" or "What withhold did Jesse miss
on you?" and so forth.
Approximately two months later, we learned that we were to be
Comm Ev'd. We had already resigned from the Church, not so much
because of our cycle ((with Ray and gang)) but because
of what we saw being done to others. The Committee of Evidence,
nonetheless, went on. Vivian, always the more direct of the two
of us, refused to attend. I did attend, but made it clear that it
was only as a courtesy to the members.
Besides, we had learned previously that the findings and
recommendations for the Comm Ev, although it had not yet taken
place, had already been written up at Int.
My reporting that fact made them angry. That I would even
think that they would allow such a thing to go on. But it turned
out to be true, and when the findings and recommendations were
finally published, 3 of the 4 committee members wrote really
serious knowledge reports to the Church saying that the findings
and recommendations had been significantly altered. By the way,
for anyone that's interested in seeing them, I have copies of
those Knowledge Reports.
A mission, as a matter of fact, was fired to Los Angeles to
handle the "Zegel Comm Ev which was flapping".
What was the Church's response to altered findings and
recommendations? "We can't change the findings and
recommendations because that would be following the enemy
line." I guess it means more to the Church for the lies
to stand.
Coming up a little closer to present time, I thought we would
talk about the recent Church caper in Germany. The OT Committee,
which is an association of Free Scientologists from around the
world, was holding a convention in Munich, West Germany and the
Church fired two missions and 10 detectives to try to disrupt
that meeting.
These missions came from COST, the Church Of Spiritual
Technology, which is the new alter-ego of the Church of
Scientology and the RTC, the Religious Technology Center. They
discovered that attending this meeting was one Silvie Herman, a
former staff member from Munich, and what the missions attempted
to do was to collect an affidavit from some of her former staff
memeber associates, indicating that perhaps she had
misappropriated funds or embezzled money or some such things
while on staff, so that they could present criminal charges
against her.
In fact, they did collect such an affidavit, they went to the
German Police and the German Police came and arrested Silvie
Herman and put her in jail. The Free Scientologists that were
there got real real busy when this occurred, gathered up a huge
amount of documentation indicating that this was a typical kind
of Church activity, that they had submitted false affidavits and
so forth in the past, and had this material delivered to the
judge prior to the hearing.
When the hearing for Silvie took place, the judge looked
through the materials and said that there was considerable
question in their minds regarding this particular affidavit. As a
result of that, he released Silvie on her own recognizance, but
unknown to the Church Officials at that time, the State Attorney,
which is the next higher level Attorney in the German legal
system, had had a meeting with the judge scheduled for just 15
minutes after this trial was to be over.
In fact, that meeting took place and a decision was made that
there should be a raid against the Orgs in Munich.
The following morning at 8 am, 100 police officers arrived in
front of the Munich Org and another 15 or 20 arrived at the local
mission.
4500 kilograms of files were taken at the Org. Approximately
300 kilograms of files were taken at the nearby Mission, a total
of nearly 5 metric tons of documents.
Of those materials, no pc folders were taken.
After reviewing that information, and looking through the
financial records of the Church, a hearing on the status was held
and it was found that the Church of Scientology, in fact, was not
a Church at all, but a trade or commercial activity, a for-profit
corporation in Germany.
Scientology has lost its Church status. They now, all the
staff members, have to apply for trade licenses to be
Scientologists.
There was another Church caper recently in Spain. John Caban,
who is one of the principles in the OT committee, lives in
Madrid, and had arranged with Peers Gartstrom (sp?), a former CO
of the Madrid Org, to come to Spain to speak to Spanish officials
regarding alleged illegal activities of the Church in Spain in
previous years.
Melissa Caban, John's wife, went to the airport to pick Peers
Gartstrom up, and as he was walking up the ramp toward her, three
plainclothes "officers" took Peers away. Later, Church
detectives approached Melissa and said to her, "Your husband
is next."
Melissa was obviously very shaken by what she had seen. She
went home, she got on the phone, she called all the Spanish legal
officials that she could think of, the local police, the state
police, other individuals of that nature, simply trying to find
out what had happened to Peers, and none of them knew anything
about it at all.
Ultimately, how it turned out, was that the Church had sent
private detectives to pick him up. They had identified
themselves, pretending to be law enforcement individuals, had
taken Peers away, apparently scared him to death saying that
Interpol was after him and he was going to have to run for his
life and so forth. Peers was put back on a plane and went back to
Denmark or another one of the Scandinavian countries, and has not
been seen or heard from since.
But what Melissa did was to go to the Spanish authorities,
identified the three Church detectives that had impersonated
police officers, they were arrested by Spanish authorities and
charged with impersonating police officers, criminal charges.
I thought perhaps it would be worthwhile to take a few minutes
as well and talk about Robin Scott. For those of you that haven't
heard, Robin Scott was involved in an operation in the early part
of 1984 where individuals entered the Org in Denmark wearing Sea
Org uniforms or the like, and collected a NOTS pack, walked away
with it, and had it in their possession.
The Church, obviously, was very disturbed to hear that this
had happened, since that obviously would cut into their monopoly
on the NOTS technology, or so they thought, and so an operation
was planned to 'get' Robin Scott.
Peter Glass was the Scientologist that was chosen to assist
the Church in this activity, and what Glass did was call Robin on
the phone.
He told Robin that he was a musician working in Denmark making
very good money, and wanted to do Solo through advanced section 3
((OT III)) for himself and his wife. He wanted his advanced
section V, what the Church calls NOTS and other auditing.
He invited Robin to join him at a rather posh resort, where he
was to be going on a vacation, and the two of them would discuss
the details, exchange money, and so forth. On March the 13th,
1984, Robin got on a plane flying toward this resort, and the
plane had a stopover in Copenhagen. And while that made him a
little bit nervous, he really didn't think too much about it.
As he got off the plane, policemen stopped him, there were GO
staff members about, hiding behind pillars, taking photographs
and carrying on, and one of them had been present to identify him
for the law enforcement people.
It was a very smooth operation on the part of the Church, and
in fact, you know, one of their better operations. Robin was
first taken to a holding area in the airport, where he was
questioned, his luggage was searched, it was, in fact, determined
he was the person that the Church was talking about. He was then
taken to jail in Copenhagen. He spoke extensively to the Danish
Police, felt that coming completely clean with them, telling them
every single detail of not only what he did, but why, was the
most important factor, and essentially found them to be very
affable and very helpful to him, and were not hostile or mean or
unpleasant to him in any way.
At any rate, he found that a lawyer was appointed for him by
the Danish authorities, the lawyer turned out to be an
exceptionally skilled and really very helpful individual, who
placed calls to Robin's wife, and made sure that those kind of
communication lines stayed open, and that he got mail and visits
and all the things that one would want given in that rather
unpleasant circumstance.
During this period of time, Robin was approached by Church
officials and offered a deal. If he would merely return the
materials that he had taken, and sign an affidavit they had
prepared, they would drop the charges against him.
He had largely returned the materials already, but he was
horrified when he read the affidavit that they had prepared. What
the affidavit did was indicated that there was a large
international conspiracy of which Robin was only a part, and that
the conspirators included David Mayo in Santa Barbara, Bent
Corydon in Riverside, Lawrence West in San Diego, California and
a wide variety of terminals in Europe.
Robin simply refused to sign the affidavit, that information,
in fact, was not true, he states it's unequivocably not true, and
I have talked to the majority of the other people that those
affidavits were designed to implicate, and they said they simply
had no knowledge or understanding of what was going on at all.
This is another instance of the Church simply attempting to
manufacture bad news about these people that it is trying to
discredit when, in fact, that bad news, that discreditable
information, does not exist.
Robin's trial date was set for Wednesday, April the 18th. Five
days prior to that on Friday April the 13th, he was informed that
he had a visitor. A strange event in itself in that he had
already had his prescribed visitor that week. His lawyer, of
course, could see him as often as necessary, but he was only
permitted one visitor.
Nonetheless, he was escorted down to the visitors area and he
found that in this small room, which was about the size of an
average auditing room, there were 10 people jammed in there. The
RTC had fired a mission to Copenhagen to try to get something
more going against Robin Scott.
In that room was a Judge, the Judge's Bailiff, a stenographer,
an interpreter, three Church attorneys, including Thomas Small
that had been flown in from Los Angeles, Warren McShane and a
variety of other Sea Org members in full uniform and regalia.
The attempt here was to get an injunction served on Robin to
prevent him from distributing the materials that he had collected
from the org in Denmark. Because, in fact, he had already
returned those materials, the Judge found in Robin's favor. That
was the end of that.
The cost of that was inestimable.
On Wednesday, April the 18th, came the trial date for Robin.
He went into court, the Church charged that he had damaged them
to the tune of $200,000, because the GI at the Denmark AO had
crashed by that much apparently, charged him with theft, and
charged him with entering the premises with the intent to obtain
documents or information, essentially an industrial
espionage-type charge.
Regarding the damages, the Church was unable to establish in
court that the criminal court was the right place to sue for
damages. The judge threw that charge out because that, of course,
is a civil damages activity, and he was very surprised that the
Church had tried to get away with that in criminal court.
The second charge of theft was withdrawn by the Church, they
couldn't prove that Robin had stolen anything.
The third charge however, of entering premises with intent to
get documents, Robin had pleaded guilty to, and the judge looked
at that, and said, "Yes, indeed that's the case, the
ordinary sentence for that is 4 months. However, you have already
served one month, I will suspend the remaining three months, and
so you are free to go."
The Church, of course, had very bad indicators on that, Robin
was tickled pink, and within 24 hours was on a plane and back
together with his wife in Candacriag in the UK.
So, we are very pleased that Robin is free, we are sorry that
any religious group exists on the face of the Earth that hides
its materials, or holds its materials so far from the public that
the only way that one can get them is to undertake such Herculean
tasks.
Perhaps the period of time when that is the case, is now
behind us.
Probably a dozen times a week I am asked this question, "How
on Earth could this have happened?"
How could the Church and the tech that I love get so far off
the rails. Hundreds of thousands spent on private investigators
for harassment, millions and millions spent on lawyers, dozens of
law suits, the Church lying to the press and to the public,
missions closed, all manner of abuses, how on Earth could this
have happened.
It is my conclusion that there are three closely related
factors that brought this about.
The first of these three factors is the spill-over of tech
into admin. It is important to remember that, to a large degree,
tech was developed for use in auditing, in that closed
environment. As the Church grew, and being an admin terminal
became a career, we discover more and more instances of the tech
being misapplied as an admin tool.
We find admin terminals studying the tech with the viewpoint
of "How can I use this to get my stats up?"
The result is that there is a bending of the technology. For
example, a pc who natters in session is indicating the presence
of a missed withhold, a simple technical matter. The auditor
locates and handles the missed withhold because, and this is
important, because the pc will directly benefit. He will feel
better, the session will proceed more smoothly, and the pc will
get more gain.
You can see the direct benefit. This benevolent tech, however,
has been bent to mean that anyone with any complaint has crimes
against the org, and is used as a justification for all types of
acts against the person involved.
The paranoia and relief confronting actual outpoints is
terrifying. Anyone with a complaint is a potential criminal, and
boy is that convenient.
This altering of the tech is squirreling, if you will. Let's
take a look at Ethics. Remember when Ethics was the 'Reason and
Contemplation of Optimum Survival'?
Boy, have we come a long way from that to on-the-spot
declares, dirty tricks, private investigators, a variety of
illegal acts, and so on. Is this Ethics? I think not. I see it
more as arrogant lawlessness in the name of Ethics.
We have to deal with this Technology in the frame for which it
was developed, rather than buttering it all over the universe.
Let's take another simple piece of technology as an example.
What turns it on, will turn it off.
I would suggest that if I were to talk over to you and put an
anvil on your foot, that my continuing to put anvil's on your
foot would not turn that off. The datum, put back in context, and
there's the key factor, IN CONTEXT, means if an auditing process
produces a reactive response in the pc, the continuation of that
process will ultimately run out that reactive response. That is
demonstrably true, and also demonstrably of benefit to the pc. So
what turns it on, will turn it off, but not when you are dealing
with anvils on the foot, or when you are dealing with lies to the
press.
You can not eliminate dishonesty with more dishonesty. Do you
see?
And it's a trap. We recognize the basic truth of the
technology, we have seen the successful applications, and yet we
are trapped in the misapplications or the applications out of
context. The tech MUST be applied in the context for which it was
created. Otherwise, it can be a real trap.
The second part of the answer to the question, "How
could this have happened?" is what I call 'The NO LOOK'.
Those people within the Church, or out, who don't want to look
at anything but what the Church of Scientology tells them to look
at.
You've encountered them and so have I, you know, 'No, don't
play me any tape, no, I don't want to read that' and so on.
Why would a person, in a subject that reveres LOOKING, you
know, look--don't think, if it's true for you it's true, and so
forth, why would, within that philosophy, we have people who
won't look? It's troubled me for some time. In fact the answer
came just after Christmas of this past year. I was given a
sweater that was the wrong size and I took it back to the store
to exchange it.
The clerk was not at all attentive to me. He kept walking away
and so on. Just before I started to say something, and I wanted
to say something sharply to this person, I hesitated, 'He'll
think I have a missed withhold' I thought. Now why did I think
THAT?
I was really puzzled, my universe sort of went 'creeeak!', and
I was determined to figure out why I had this particular
computation. And I did figure out what had gone on, to explain...
Let me create an example, and it's really quite simple. Let us
suppose I walk into the org and the reg wants me to sign up for a
service. I say "Are you kidding me with these prices or
what?" Now the reg, seeing that I am upset, and of course,
the basis of my upset you must understand, most likely, is that I
want Scientology and can't get it...
Nonetheless, he arranges a free session for me, so at least I
am going to get SOME Scientology. I go into the session, and this
issue of prices is on my mind. Now, of course, the auditor will
check for ARC breaks and Problems, but eventually we are going to
have to handle prices, and since I am complaining, he's not going
to have much choice but to pull the withhold, you know?
"On the subject of prices has a withhold been
missed?"
And so on. And we'll pick up probably chatter to friends, and
go earlier, and maybe pick up an incident in the 5 and dime store
as a kid, you know, change the price on a toy or something to buy
it when you didn't have enough money.
Any rate, that ultimately will F/N and there will be a bit of
charge off the case, and you'll feel better.
Now, a smart auditor has a broader look, and perhaps will
check the subject of money, you know, now that'll get the meter
active, for missed withholds. In this society, a good auditor can
generally get a chain or two on money almost any time. But we'll
take these couple of chains and we'll run 'em off and we blow a
bit more charge off the case and you'll end up at the end feeling
a bit better.
But look at the misapplication. Are the prices in fact lower?
No they're not. Is the person's income any higher? No. Well, what
are we doing then? Well, apparently, what we are trying to do is
to run out the analytical evaluation that prices are too high.
Does it work?
Unfortunately, sometimes the answer is yes. But perhaps not
why you think. It works because the session, which has failed to
handle the real situation, is now a lock on the present scene,
you know. A = A. The disagreement with prices = the missed
withhold on money. And if you continue to speak out, it means you
have MORE overts, and of course, you don't want to have more
overts, and you certainly don't want others to THINK that you
have more overts.
Let's look at this a bit further. Look around the room you are
in right now and select any object, any object at all. I promise
you I can find a chain of overts or withholds in your case
regarding that object.
Suppose you chose a lamp. "Did you ever do anything
you shouldn't have done with the lights on?" How about
"Have you ever done anything you shouldn't have done with
the lights off?"
If you picked up a piece of paper, how about "Ever write
a love note you shouldn't have written?" How about "Did
you ever read something on paper that wasn't addressed to
you?" Do you get the idea?
You can find a chain of overts or withholds under ANYTHING in
the bank, because A = A, that is Anything equals Anything.
Perhaps you committed an overt when there was a plant in the
room.
Well, we can find that overt, although disrelated, via the
plant, because in the bank the plant equals the overt. The fact
of a chain of overts under prices or money does not mean that the
complaint is invalid, only that there is some charge there. A
charge present does not mean that there is no real present time
situation.
But watch the implication come forward. If you read or hear
something you shouldn't, say about the field or Anti-Scientology
and you observe it to be true or agree, you must have withholds.
That's what the Church would say. And, of course, it's true. Now,
no one wants to have withholds or be bad, and certainly no one
generally wants their withholds exposed. So all the Church has to
do is indicate that any time you agree with anything that they
don't like, it means you have overts and withholds. And they do
that.
All this sec checking business centers around this phenomenon.
And the trap is that it is true, 100 percent. Anyone who agrees
with the field has withholds. Of course, so does anyone who has
ever driven a Volkswagon, so does anyone who's ever eaten fish
and chips and so does anyone who has ever breathed.
((Ron wrote a bulletin early on that said ALL ARC BREAKS
STEM FROM MISSED WITHHOLDS. He later suggested that the nature of
the missed withhold was more related to the wrong or missed item
in the GPM than it was to any overts the pc had committed.
He makes it clear though that the pc's complaints and
natter about the auditor only really indicate a missed withhold
when the auditor is doing his best for the pc. If the auditor is
not doing his best, and in fact is trying to harm, use, or
suppress the pc, the pc will of course get upset and start
complaining and attacking and nattering about the auditor.
So it takes some skill to determine what's really going on
with the pc. It may very well be true that a pc high enough on
the tone scale, when faced with blatant suppression, out-tech, or
subversive intentions on the part of the auditor, would just turn
the session around on the auditor and pull HIS withholds! So it
may still be possible that the pc that succumbs to complaints and
natter and 1.1. attacks rather than direct handling of incoming
suppression is suffering from his own indecisions in the past and
his own, as yet, still unpulled overts.
The fact is though, that if you really DO pull the
withholds of the pc who is being abused by the auditor, he WILL
come up tone to suddenly turning the tables on the auditor and
putting HIM in session to get HIS overts to stop.
When someone does you wrong, you complain and natter to
the degree that you have done wrong too and have it justified and
restrained, and you handle the wrong coming at you terminatedly
to the degree that your own slate is clean.
The fact that a pc complains about an auditor means that
the auditor is doing wrong, AND the pc has missed withholds on
the subject of his own.
The Church would have you believe that if you had no
missed withholds of your own, you would be able to tolerate any
wrong that came your way, WHICH IS TRUE, but that don't make it
RIGHT! Get it? The Church is still wrong. The fact that people
blow and natter and complain about the Church rather than handle
its out-ethics terminatedly merely means that the Church is
committing overts that are similar to the overts that are
restrained and withheld on the pc's own track. Thus, the Church
gets away with murder, and smugly claims that everyone who
doesn't like it has withholds.
YES, THEY HAVE WITHHOLDS AND SO DOES THE CHURCH, WHICH IS
WHY YOUR WITHHOLDS ARE BEING RESTIMULATED!
The very biggest problem though that I see in the money
arena with the Church is that everyone in the Church has a
massive MU on the concept of WORTH. How much is auditing worth?
How much is Eternal Freedom worth? Is it worth a million dollars
to not go to hell forever?
Is it worth your life? Is it worth eternal slavery to
those that freed you?
Their concept of worth is what you are willing to trade
for the end result of the service. Surely, getting free of this
joint is worth every penny you have, as long as the price does
not ruin your Eternal Future.
So when you want to buy auditing you ask, "How much
is Eternal Freedom?", they say "How much you got?"
And you say, "Well I've got this much." And they say,
"Good! It's worth ALL OF IT!"
But this can only go on as long as there is no competition
from other purveyors of Eternal Freedom.
Say the Church is selling auditing at $3000 per intensive.
They say, "Well it's worth that much!" And you say,
"But I don't got that much!" And they say, "Well
tough, come back when you do, we can't sell auditing for less
than its worth."
Then one day, Joe Squirrel comes along and offers the same
auditing services for $2000 an intensive. He is starting
competition. And the Church goes to him and says 'But you can't
do that, you are selling it for less than it's worth!' And he
says 'Worth Smorth. If I sold it for $3000 an intensive I would
be making far less money than I am selling it for $2000 an
intensive, so IT'S WORTH IT TO ME TO SELL IT FOR LESS.'
Then someone else comes along and starts selling the same
service for $1000 per intensive and all the customers start
coming to him, and obviously pretty soon the Church and the other
guy have to both lower their Copyright competitive.
So now let's say that 20 people are selling auditing, each
trying to steal market share by undercutting the rest because it
is WORTH it to them to do so, and the price of an intensive is
down around $50 an intensive. How low can this go? Well pretty
soon, you find that people just can't charge any less because of
the baseline costs of keeping themselves alive, and so when there
are lots of competitors, each trying their best to streamline
their operation, and give the best service for the lowest amount,
you find that pretty soon everyone is charging just about the
same price and that price is the minimum deliverable price for
that product.
Now, here is where the MU on worth gets cleared up. Let's
say you bought an intensive with one of the earlier providers at
$1000 an intensive, but you never used it. So you are the proud
owner of one unused intensive and you held onto it while prices
were plummeting.
Even though the guy who sold you the intensive for $1000
is now charging $50 per intensive, he certainly does not owe you
your money back nor even more intensives to make up for the
amount of money you originally paid. This is true for any
commodity. If you buy a commodity and then prices come down, you
take a capital loss.
So, one day you decide you don't really need this
intensive that is waiting for you at that provider and you get
the idea that maybe you ought to offer it up for sale to someone
else who might want to buy it and use it. So you go to market and
you set up a stand and you make a great big sign that says 'One
Intensive for sale, 1000 bucks.'
Someone comes over to you and points out to you that
others are selling intensives for $50, how can you expect to sell
your intensive for $1000? So you say, "Well that's what I
paid for it, that's what I want to get for it." A little
discussion with your potential buyer shows you that you don't
stand much chance of getting what you want, you certainly do not
DESERVE to get what you want just because you want it, right? So
you say, "But it's WORTH $1000! It was worth it to me to pay
$1000, and it should be worth it to others to pay $1000 for this
intensive."
And your buyer says, "Yes, no doubt if this were the
last intensive in the world, you would probably find a buyer at
$1000 very quickly, but intensives are everywhere, and they cost
$50, and frankly you can't sell your intensive for $1000 today
because IT IS NO LONGER WORTH $1000, it is worth only $50!"
So finally, you understand that the WORTH of an item is
exactly and only what you can get for it on the open market. It
may be "priceless" art from the Orient, but if nobody
wants it, it's completely worthless.
On the other hand, if someone wants it really bad, and
they are willing to give everything they own for it, then it's
certainly worth something more. However, if they can get it for
$50 dollars down the street, then its never worth more than that
lowest price that he can get it for down the street. Saying,
"But it's WORTH a million dollars, buy it from me
instead" is ridiculous.
So the next time someone says, "Well the reason that
auditing is priced so high is because it is worth a lot of
money", realize that you are talking to a criminal liar who
thinks that price is a function of worth, rather than worth being
a function of price.
Price is actually a function of VALUE AND AVAILABILITY
through independent dealers. The more something is valued the
higher its price, until you hit its ceiling price where no buyer
can afford to purchase it. And the more available it is, the less
its price will be until you hit its baseline floor where no
seller can afford to produce it and bring it to market.
The monetary WORTH of any item IS its price, and is solely
and only what you can buy or sell it for on the free market.
Now you understand the fanatical devotion the Church puts
towards wiping out free market competition. It places an inflated
WORTH on their products.))
The third part of the answer to the question "How could
this have happened?" is, like it or not, LRH and his
influence. It does not take a genius to recognize that no matter
who is holding the Senior Management positions in the Church, the
Church has behaved in an irrational and erratic fashion over the
years.
Just by dumb luck, someone would have risen to Senior
Management who is sane, yet almost without exception every Senior
Management person has been removed and vilified.
And surely the actions of current management, and their
influence on the Church, indicates serious problems there as
well.
The tech says that when there is a constant trouble in an
area, look only at those people who have been there throughout
the time of the trouble. In this instance, unfortunately, it's
Ron himself. And yes I know that current public relations press
and so on, is that he hasn't managed the Church since 1966, but
that is simply a lie, another in a long line of shore stories.
The facade that LRH constructed for himself, to shield himself
from blame, or legal liabilities for wrongdoing by the Church, is
falling apart. In addition, the PR image that has been presented
of Ron is also falling apart. The implications of all this are
pretty wide-reaching.
Ron's image is going to be tarnished, that's just the way that
that is, and not because of enemies, but because of actualities,
lies and misrepresentations.
We in the new Church are going to have to confront and deal
with this truth. We have already proven our ability to do so by
our handling of the scene with the Church. Now there is going to
be a scene with Ron. This is going to be tougher, but since we
know it is a problem, let's simply go ahead and tackle it head
on.
I have done my best in the past, on these tapes, to collect
and verify every bit of information wherever possible. And this
tape is certainly no exception. Now this isn't necessarily going
to be easy, so fasten your seat belt.
The first area we are going to look at is claims about LRH's
early life. And before we are too harsh, let any of us who has
never exaggerated our own life, or our own accomplishments, cast
the first stone.
But this information is going to be published, and as
believers in this philosophy, we are going to have to handle it.
While many many details about LRH's past have been falsified or
exaggerated, I intend to concentrate on those that relate to or
influence the tech.
Let me give you an example, LRH's claim that he was raised on
a cattle ranch. Records show however that he lived mostly in
small towns with relatives, not on a ranch. This is no big deal,
the person who developed the tech could have lived either place
without affecting the quality of the work. So who cares about
that particular claim anyway.
On the other hand, LRH claims to have extensively traveled
throughout the Far East as a young man, including being taught by
a variety of mystics and so forth. In fact, according to records,
his travels to the East consisted of a two week trip to China
with the YMCA, and a short period on Guam, when his father was
assigned there by the Navy. These travels are NOT extensive, and
LRH's diaries and notes from this period fail to demonstrate any
significant insights.
I trust you see the difference between the two types of
discrepancies.
OK, here we go.
Ron's college career is not as illustrious as we have been led
to believe. He spent, in fact, only one year in college, and the
nuclear physics course which is so talked about, in fact, he
received an F in.
He never received any degree at all. The doctorate that he
claims came from Sequoia University, a mail-order diploma mill.
Some records indicate that Ron had a financial or ownership
interest in it.
His military career is not as he has represented it either.
LRH saw no verified combat that we can determine, and certainly
was not a combat hero. He was never wounded, and was neither
blinded nor crippled. He did not command a squadron of Corvettes,
nor was he returned as the first casualty of the Easter Theatre
on the Secretary of the Navy's private plane.
There have been claims that LRH won between 20 and 40 medals
and Palms, but Naval records indicate that he received only four
campaign ribbons. He won no Purple Heart, the automatic
decoration for those who are wounded in the line of duty.
The shore story was that he was in Naval Intelligence, and
consequently, his records fail to show his actual
accomplishments.
((Meaning that for security purposes his history has been
played down by those employing him in the undercover operations
of Intelligence.))
Careful review however shows NO indication at all of an
intelligence career, and the important records, such as being
wounded and so forth, would not have been the type of records
purged from any Intelligence Officer's file anyway.
LRH's post-war career takes on a different character, with his
claim of being blinded and crippled deleted. Clearly he did not
cure himself of those things by his early experiments in
Dianetics. What is clear is that after leaving the Military, Ron
was very mentally uncomfortable.
He wrote repeatedly to the Veterans Administration asking for
financial, medical and psychiatric assistance. During this
period, also, he was involved with Aleister Crowley, and all
manner of cultic ritual. Some of which was, if you will,
unsavory.
The next area that is important to look at is the development
of the tech. Here we have considerable contradictions. LRH would
have us believe that he is the Sole Source of all of the
worthwhile tech, and that everything that was contributed by
others was either useless, dead-ends and so on.
However, in my interviews with dozens of people, many many
individuals contributed SIGNIFICANTLY to the tech, not just in
refinements, or in methods of application, but in terms of
genuine basic pieces of tech, most still in use today.
((Thank God, or else the whole thing probably wouldn't
work!))
For example, the TRs were developed in Washington D.C. by Jan
and Dick Halpern, and early bulletins apparently even included
acknowledgements to them for that creation. Later, of course,
those acknowledgements were deleted.
The CCHs were also developed by the Halperns, with the help of
LRH, Jr. or Nibs.
The concept of repetitive questioning was created by Jack
Horner, ((who)) according to the Church, ((is))
one of the most horrible Squirrels of all times.
((Jack Horner is presently listed on FLAG ED 2830RB
Suppressive Persons and Suppressive Groups List. Nibs (Ron
DeWolfe) is not listed, but he is certainly not in good standing,
and I vaguely remember from somewhere that the Halperns had been
declared, but they are NOT on the present list.
It should also be noted that John McMaster was the driving
force behind the original Power Processes, now considered
confidential even though they are no longer on the Bridge.
McMaster resigned from the Church in disgust in the early '70's.
He too is NOT on the declare list.))
So, as you can see, the tech has come from a wide variety of
Sources.
Once again, we must put this in perspective, because we don't
want to completely negate LRH's contributions to the tech either.
Either extreme is incorrect. His contributions are myriad and
important. He has been a catalyst, a harvester, and has written
brilliantly about the material. But has not created all of it, as
we have been led to believe over the years. This is simply
another example of changing the past to meet current needs.
What WE need to do is to rebalance our affection for Ron. We
can still hold him in high esteem for what he really created, and
stop the false admiration of him for things he did not. That I
believe will be good for all involved.
What IS important in this technology is not Source. Now, I
realize that's a heretical thing to say, but what is important is
not Source, but TRUTH. We can be gracious about past
misrepresentations, we could waste our time in useless
castigation, but I suggest we simply forgive all past lies, and
spend the time and energy we might have devoted to blame and
regret to a rededication by each of us to find the Truth.
The relationships between LRH, the Church, and the variety of
peripheral corporations surrounding it, have been the subject of
much controversy. I would suggest that the principle problems
faced here are the lies. The Church, its officials, not to
mention LRH himself, have had to live double lives, not unlike
the woman who is being physically beaten by her husband at home,
yet says that all is well while speaking to the neighbors.
Living that kind of a lie, and the Church, the Sea Org, the
Commodore's Messenger Org, the RTC, Author's Services, and the
Church of Spiritual Technology all live that kind of lie, is a
nearly impossible and emotionally devastating task.
The hottest subject in this area of course is money. LRH has
always claimed that his only compensation from the Church has
been book royalties, and that, of course, is a half-truth. While
he has received book royalties, they have been enormously higher
than those paid by regular publishers.
However, since LRH controls the publisher, Bridge and New Era
Publications, formerly PUBS and PUBS DK, he set the royalties
where he liked.
Facts. LRH's royalties through 1981 on his book income have
been in excess of $50,000 per week. Sometimes much more. No, that
was not an error, that was $50,000 per week.
Now, an author is entitled to whatever royalty the market will
bear. Of course, when one controls the publishing company, it
will bear a great deal more.
Beyond this, LRH has billed the RRF, do you remember the
Religious Research Foundation, he's billed the RRF $10,000,000
for the scripts, directorial fees and consulting for the Tech
Films. At least $2,100,000 as already been paid, yet LRH
maintains control of all the copyrights for both the scripts and
the films.
Most recently, through LRH's private company called Author
Services, he has been collecting huge sums. According to
individuals I have interviewed, between March and October of
1982, LRH was collecting in excess of a $1,000,000 per week. That
money came from the US, and it went to Bridge, then across to
NEP, that's in Denmark, and then by bank wire or transfer to
accounts in Luxemborg and Lichtenstein.
The shore story of LRH financing all the research and so forth
is just that, a shore story.
Church critics and the IRS have known about this for years.
Such large sums going to an individual is called inurement,
that is the proceeds of a non-profit corporation benefiting a
private person.
Such could cause the loss of tax-exempt status, and apparently
the Church as already lost that status. ((They just got it
back. 1994))
See how the problems begin to accumulate?
The next area we'll look at is MCCS, Mission Corporate
Category Sortout.
It was run by Laurel Sullivan, LRH's personal public relations
director. The mission was to take all Church entities, the Church
of Scientology, Bridge, LRH etc etc, and sort them out by
category.
Now MCCS had a problem that it was supposed to solve. And the
problem was, LRH controls the Church and has always controlled
the Church, but he couldn't control the Church. Now you solve
that problem.
For example, the trademarks were an issue. To prevent
Trademarks from going into the Public Domain, one must exercise
both supervision and control over the marks. If LRH controlled
the marks, he controlled the Church. So did he then control the
Church, or have the marks gone into the Public Domain. You can
see the problem I'm sure.
As an aside, the trademark cases, both in Omaha and in San
Diego, are brought and funded by the RTC, just as their assertion
of control, to establish a legal presence as being in control.
Now this is a pretty expensive exercise, and I believe there is a
pretty good chance the trademarks will be ruled to be in the
Public Domain. ((No chance.))
If LRH had been in control, of course, he would be legally
liable in some of the many lawsuits against the case, but LRH
had, of course, 'resigned in 1966'. See how the confusions and
conflicts begin to mount?
MCCS was to create an image by paper trail, an alteration of
the past, that would demonstrate, after the fact, that LRH was
NOT in control of the Church, when, in fact, he was. LRH's
category was to be 'An Author receiving royalties'. That, of
course, is a half-truth, and in talking to the people involved, I
learned how this works.
First, you must become indoctrinated to get this. You must
live, underline that, you must LIVE the half-truth. You LIVE 'LRH
is an Author collecting royalties'. You do not live 'He runs the
publishing company and takes as much money as he likes.'
You live only the half of the truth that is consistent with
the image that you are trying to create. MCCS was then to clean
up any inconsistencies with the half-truth that was being
created. And that's all MCCS was trying to do, change the past to
make it consistent with the half-truth in the present.
There have been a variety of other financial transactions, the
details of which are long and dreary. They follow a similar
pattern of LRH collecting large sums of money, while PR
indicating that such was not the case. So what IS this? What are
we looking at?
How can LRH have contributed so much to the tech, and yet be
involved in these activities of, to say the least, questionable
morality, not to mention questionable legality?
The answer is found in the dictionary under the term
Schizophrenia.
Schizophrenia comes from the Greek, schizine which means to
split, and phrenos which means mind. And the definition has two
parts.
- A form of psychosis in which the patient disassociates
himself from the environment and deteriorates in
character and personality.
- The condition of having or showing markedly inconsistent
or contradictory qualities, split personality.
This is not just a psychiatric term, it can be said of nearly
anything. For example, a fancy sports car can be said to be
schizophrenic when its a great deal of fun to drive, and yet is
constantly in need of repairs.
LRH, by all accounts of those who were close to him, suffers
from schizophrenia. He has disassociated himself to the point
that he is in seclusion. He can be, on the one hand, the
brilliant author of much of the tech, while on the other, a
ruthless, vicious tyrant, screaming, punishing, and intimidating
his near associates into submission. Being a vengeful, vicious
adversary to any he views as his enemies.
The Church, especially its high officials, have had to live
this double life. They have had to live the PR half-truths in
lies, pretend everything was OK, and yet comply with orders from
him they KNEW would cause harm and bring disrepute to the Church.
These Church officials, for the most part, I believe, acted
with good hearts. They wanted to see people on the Bridge getting
gains, regardless of the sacrifices they had to make in their own
personal integrity. Those sacrifices, sad to say, were misguided.
The lies and half-truths have grown to such a state that the
Church has lost all credibility, and if we are not careful, the
tech will soon follow.
They missed the point, the ONLY remedy for lies is the TRUTH,
NEVER more lies.
We haven't mentioned the Gerry Armstrong case, and this might
be a good time to do so. Gerry Armstrong was accused by the
Church of stealing thousands of documents and invading the
privacy of LRH and Mary Sue.
Gerry had been appointed by LRH ((as)) his biography
researcher in January of 1980 and ((he)) worked almost
two years on the post, amassing tens of thousands of documents.
He was instructed to provide copies of those documents to Omar
Garrison.
As Gerry read the documents he was collecting, he realized
that the Church and LRH had been lying about LRH's past, his
credentials and accomplishments. ((Didn't LRH see this
coming?))
When he tried to correct those lies, he was sec checked and
threatened. He left the Sea Org, delivering the last batch of
documents to Garrison in the process. What followed was a false
SP declare, and threats from the Church. Gerry collected from
Garrison copies of those documents he felt would protect him.
Later, the Church paid Garrison $240,000 NOT to write the
biography, and sued Gerry.
The case, which took six weeks to try, was heard in Los
Angeles Superior Court by Judge Paul G. Breckenridge, Jr. His
finding was issued on June the 20th of this year ((1984)).
Judge Breckenridge found that Gerry was NOT guilty of stealing
Church documents, invading the privacy of LRH and Mary Sue. He
found that 'The organization clearly is schizophrenic and
paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection
of its founder, L. Ron Hubbard.'
He found that Gerry and Jocelyn Armstrong, as well as the
other defense witnesses, were credible and extremely persuasive.
While saying of Mary Sue, "Her credibility leaves much to
be desired, she struck the familiar pose of not seeing, hearing,
or knowing any evil, yet she was the head of the Guardian's
Office."
He went on to say, "The Guardians Office, which the
plaintiff headed, was no respecter of anyone's civil rights,
particularly that of privacy." Obviously, the Church has
appealed.
Gerry and Jocelyn Armstrong are interesting heros in all of
this, because they have fought a fight, not for themselves, but
for the truth. And they have earned our respect and admiration
and thanks. I just wish their ordeal was over.
Here's a hot bit of news just in from the U.K. The Church had
filed an injunction with the courts against Ron Lowery and Robin
Scott demanding that all NOTS packs they had in their possession
be turned over to the court. The judge, however, has denied the
Church's request, ruling that those individuals can keep, copy
and distribute those materials in any way they see fit. How about
that!
((I would check on the present status of this before doing
anything rash.))
Before getting into the conclusions portion of this tape, I
would like to invite any of you who would like a free list of New
Church centers worldwide, to send me a stamped, self-addressed
business-sized envelope to, The Clear Center, 11934 Riverside
Drive, Suite 211, North Hollywood, CA 91607 USA.
I guess it's time to draw some conclusions about all of this,
and the first conclusions I've drawn is that it's necessary to
question everything. Stanley Milgram did remarkable experiments
in obedience to authority among university students. And he
demonstrated an alarming willingness of the average person to
perpetrate harmful actions on fellow human beings when they fail
to question directives of a superior.
We have surely seen that, and all of us right now, share a
very special vulnerability. You know the discrediting of the
faith leaves the disillusioned hungering for new ideas, and a new
faith. In fact, the end of an old fanaticism does not lead to NO
fanaticism, but merely moves fanaticism over to a new cause.
A quote "No Scientology" fanatic is no less a
fanatic, and is closer in belief to the fanatic Scientologist
than to their true opposite, the tolerationist.
The danger we face is that by bringing down the old, we
prepare the path for the new fanatics. This is what we must steel
ourselves to and guard against. We must understand it and prevent
it.
Each of us, in our own way, is vulnerable now to a new faith,
a new Way, or a new Guru.
The second conclusion I think we can draw from all of this, is
that we must return to the basic philosophy, we must LOOK. We
were charged in the beginning with the responsibility to
determine what was true for ourselves, and our failure to uphold
that responsibility has left us vulnerable. Look for yourself,
study, investigate, question and examine EVERYTHING. THAT is the
real lesson to learn from all of this.
The third conclusion I think is not to throw the baby out with
the bath water. We need no campaign to defile LRH, no campaign to
defile the tech. We need a calm rational evaluation and a reunion
with the society we so carelessly shoved aside.
I am very pleased, and a little sad to announce that this is
the last of these tapes. Their objective has been achieved, a New
Church exists. I would like to thank all of you for your help,
your good wishes and your support. My investigations, I assure
you, continue.
Perhaps this is a bittersweet ending, but from our
disillusionment can grow a new faith in our own abilities to see
and judge the truth.
Jon Zegel