Daily Archives: January 29, 2010

MOQ Corner

Blogger note: I’ve got a nickname for Jim Logan. It is MOQ (Master of Qual). It was inspired by his seemingly effortless ability to rapidly find the LRH tech and policy references that clarify a given situation or resolve a particular problem.  Well, Jim posted a comment today that I hijacked to convert into a post to give it the emphasis and discussion I think it deserves.  I’m thinking maybe we ought to hear from Jim periodically when he does a little research project that clarifies questions currently being pondered and debated on this blog. You think?

JUSTICE by Jim Logan

On a tape from the Briefing Course, 8 June 65, PTS Handling, LRH is giving the ‘music’ for the words he’s published in the Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letters beginning in March of that year, outlining the Justice Codes, what to do about PTS and SP particles impinging on the newly designed Organization Board. He’s outlining on this tape how to ‘play the piano’ with this data.

Anyway, an interesting point is brought up on how a management can go down the slide to becoming ’suppressive’ as he calls it. That is, that it ends up suppressing those it manages.

This is related to various comments that have come up on how it came to be so bad under DM.

In 1980, the top of the org board was undergoing stress. Lots of things to handle, including the Guardian’s Office scene and the end of that trial, corporate sort out and such. In 81, there was the Mission Holders conference at the Sandcastle in Clearwater. I was there for a lot of it because the band I was in rehearsed at the Sandcastle since nobody was staying there as the Air Conditioning had been shut off to save money and the place went into complete mold-ridden. Anyway, the conference was going on down there.

That conference had ‘assigned’ the new Watch Dog Committee, a lower condition, something like Confusion or the like. It was quite bold. Bill Franks was ED Int, and he had good comm lines to the Mission Holders so they had apparently, support from that quarter.

DM finally showed up and ran one of the meetings. A ‘confrontation’ between ‘INT’ and the ‘field’ it was. From that first conference, the die was cast. What to do about it? What to do about these uppity Mission Holders assigning the top of the org board conditions. What to do about the apparent ‘mutiny’? Indeed.

OK, this tape I’m on 8 June 65 PTS Handling says this: ” You mean you’re going to concentrate on this 20 (%) and you’re going to neglect the 80?”

In other words, get wrapped up in handling PTS/SP cases, and neglect the 80% that are doing just fine.

Further in the tape, he says: “Allright, our next approach to the situation is to bring it about where the individual can reach the 80 effectively without being entangle by the 20″. That is, the materials of the Justice Codes, PTS/SP, Dead File, and so on.

Further on: “The ordinary citizen never really has to be policed. But he is policed continuously because of the goofs of three or four criminals. Do you see?

” So it’s an ‘Everybody bears the burden of a couple of crooks’. Do you follow? And you’ll find that most of your arbitrary laws and savageness on the part of executives and officers and so forth, stems from the fact that they are unable to handle the couple that goofed, and if they have enough losses in handling these guys then they get savage toward everybody.”

“That’s how your governments turn into suppressive organizations and so forth, because they really can’t handle the criminal at all.

“Allright, so you get a broad punishment of everybody in sight!”

The Mission Holders conference and it’s milieu and circumstances, was the excuse DM used to re-implement ‘heavy ethics’ and it was on the reported basis of the initial purposes for the Justice Codes, handling the 20%. Add in the fact the guy had the SP characteristics himself, that is, he’s part of the smaller percent of the 20% (that has the tendency to WRONG TARGET) and with the color of ‘LRH policy’ behind him, and the apparent circumstances of ‘mutiny’ as it was called BY DM, and kabang. The reign of terror is in full swing.

Within a year of that first conference, ‘disconnection’ is back in full, enforced, with the Scientology Policy Directive 28, of 12 Aug 82, and in Sept 83, the SP Acts policy is revised, rewritten, and includes 7 new pages, along with the rewrite of various issues related to the subjects of PTS/SP and voila, the whole thing is ’sanctioned’. Mass declares, mass disconnections enforced.

The above quotes describe it becoming suppressive even for those who aren’t suppressive as executives to begin with. What we’ve seen is a real SP abusing valid LRH materials and punishing the lot of us, due to his inability to see any right target.