Category Archives: Orgs

Warning: Grab your vomit bags before viewing

This is pure, unadulterated David Miscavige.   He wants to make “ass kickers.”  Problem is real ass kickers, don’t go around bragging how they can kick ass.  Real ass kickers don’t physically and literally kick ass because they figuratively kick ass by virtue of their abilities to get the job done in a way that raises the tone of those in their environment. Every real ass kicker in Scientology has long since left the church of Miscavology. 

 As far as “winning is everything” – in my opinion, that implanted lesson may have served as the justification for more mass murder in this planet’s history than any other.   Another exhibit for the proposition that the church is dead.

Int Mgmt Bulletin 116R – Solve It With Scientology

To anyone who has been regged to pay a penny (or millions of dollars)  for IAS, Idle Orgs, Super Power, or any other “project” that was touted as more important than paying for auditing and training services, I highly recommend that you read Int Management Bulletin 116R.  Just press the link here for a pdf copy.

IMB_116_R

Twenty-one years ago when there was such a thing called “International Management” and ED Int’s Int Management Exec Committee, there was semblance of consideration for LRH policy. This issue was written by one Jens Urskov as Gross Income Exec Int. He may have been holding that position from above. For many years Jens was D/ED Int.  That was because the guy knew policy cold, and was deft at applying it to situations.  In fact, I believe he was the one constant holding IMEC together performing the irreducible minimum through a perpetual and sadistic game of Musical Chairs DM played for twenty years with IMEC.  Just about anything relatively sensible Guillaume ever issued in his own name was more than likely written by Jens.

Jens therefore was hated by DM.  He was belittled into horrible health  and a state of  spiritual invalidation. I’d like others who were familiar with IMEC and Jens to weigh in here. These are my impressions, and I spent more time away from the base than ever did at the base.  I also find it interesting the date of the revised issue coincides with a small minority of International Management executives attempting to nip the incipient, fledgling IAS crim regging in the bud.  Paul Grady – who I believe was Action Chief CMO INT – went down about this time for objecting to IAS crashing FSO gross income. 

In either event, here is an International Management Bulletin that explicitly makes the same policy argument we’ve been making for a year as to the criminal and off source nature of “straight donos”.  It was not issued once. It was issued twice, in 1987 and 1989.

For anyone trying to sober up a severe kool-aid case, you should be able to go to town with this issue.

Have fun.

The Genus of Insane Governments (organizations)

Another exhibit supporting the proposition that DM has implemented Reverse Scientology from top to bottom:

OSA NW Order of 17 February 1988
All Execs & Staff

 

THE GENUS OF INSANE GOVERNMENTS

(Taken from undated LRH notes.)

Plot a government—any government on Earth today—as you would plot an individual on the Tone Scale.

What do you find?

A murderer, a non-producer, a thing unable to run engrams—in short, an insane person.

Why?

The invention of the “official act” as different from a “personal act” was the beginning of governments sufficiently insane to cause war.

Definition of an insane person: An individual who is not personally responsible for his own acts.

Definition of a public official: An individual who is not personally responsible for his own acts.

Result: Insane Government.

L. RON HUBBARD

Founder

Idol Org Dallas

It has been about a year since DM’s smoke and mirrors presentation at the new Dallas Org. Fleecing public of  30 million to construct a gaudy morgue, tucked away in an industrial park out near the airport where there is no foot traffic, Miscavige has virtually wiped out Scientology in Dallas (would be literally, except Steve Hall is keeping the flame burning).  You think I’m kidding?  Check out their latest promo.  This is what they are doing for GI these days:

Commenters from last night who defended the integrity of high rolling donations to Miscavige’s programs: No, you are wrong.  Each one of those contributions is another nail in the coffin of Scientology.  Don’t worry though, we’ll revive the corpse, gratis of course.

Idle Orgs Update

 

The proof that in order to qualify as “OT” in Miscavige’s church one must act arrogant, illiterate, and oblivious to the history of this planet:

 

These Humanitarians worked a lifetime for Freedom . . .

 

 

Humanitarians in History

 

These HUMANITARIANS are ensuring that freedom for eternity.
   

 
 

 

 

 

CRAIG & SALLY JENSEN

 Craig and Sally Jensen, New OT VIII Ambassadors and La Canada residents,

achieved Humanitarian Honor Roll status for the San Diego Ideal Org. Noted

world-wide for their generosity and mega-donations to Scientology’s leading

causes and groups (IAS, SuperPower, Author Services), the Jensens

distinguish San Diego as an up-and-coming highlight on the Scientology

world map.

Why do we contribute? Because we have benefited from Scientology beyond

our wildest dreams.  We chose the path to OT over the dwindling spiral. We

made the decision to follow the Grade Chart to Clear and OT, to total freedom.

And with that goes a responsibility to LRH and to our fellow man.

Scientology is not a luxury; it is a vital necessity for existence. As the heart of

Scientology in our area, the org must be woven into the very fabric of our lives.

It has to be part of our financial planning, part of our strategic planning, even

part of our estate planning. This is not a Thursday at 2:00 cycle, it is a long-

term commitment. It is an investment in our third dynamic. It is our legacy.

 

Craig and Sally Jensen

 

 

Craig and Sally Jensen

HUMANITARIANS WANTED.  Who’s Next?

Call (619) 239-2091 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting              (619) 239-2091      end_of_the_skype_highlighting to become a HUMANITARIAN for the San Diego Ideal Org.

 

Join the San Diego Humanitarian Club  

Scientology Idle Org Strategy: a sad tale

by Mike Rinder.

Following are excerpts from a recent Church of Mest promo piece:

In 2006 we purchased the former Santa Ana Performing Arts building in downtown Santa Ana for 6.2 million dollars as the new expanded home for our central church in Orange County.  It is a home to service us and our families, friends and neighbors up The Bridge to Total Freedom and a new golden civilization for Orange County.

WHY IS RENOVATION NOT STARTED AND COMPLETED?

Thus we do have a building. But it is incomplete. It needs to be renovated to our Ideal Org standards. Why is renovation not started and completed?

At the time we purchased the building, it was stated that funding for our building was complete. Why? The plan was to sell our current building, This would provide the money needed to renovate the build to our ideal standards.

Times do change. Since then, the real estate market has crashed and the valid and available buyers reduced with the economy. The current church facility has not yet sold. Thus our purpose in creating a new ideal church facility is slowed due to a lack of funding. Also the Public Division spaces have been re-designed based on upcoming releases and testing of designs in current Ideal Orgs.

The evolution is complete and we have the go ahead. We need to go straight up and vertical and occupy our building so we have not an Ideal Org building but an Ideal Organization and all that it means. 

Of course, the outpoints are legion.

First – Orange County was one of the first SAINT HILL SIZE CLASS V Orgs. The decline of Scientology orgs – even the biggest on the planet – is clear for anyone to see.  Once, one of the showcase Class V orgs in the world , in one of the most affluent regions of the United States, Orange County is now incapable of generating enough funding from delivering services to RENOVATE the building they purchased 4 years ago!  4 YEARS to make the money the way LRH said to do it – with Dianetics and Scientology.  

And according to this promo, they just got the go ahead to put in the DM robot Div 6 system now that it has been “successfully piloted.” So, I guess that has been the hold up on all those other “Ideal Orgs” that have been shown at Dear Leader briefings over the years that have never materialized. Anyone remember Harlem? Sacramento? Stuttgart? Brescia? Cape Town? Auckland? Birmingham? Battle Creek? Kansas City? Vancouver? Caracas? ITD? Atlanta? Bulawayo? etc. etc. etc. Hype and forgotten.   

So, let’s get this straight:    This org has a 6.2 million dollar building in the perfect location in Orange County (according to them) that gives them double the space they currently have. And in 4 years they haven’t needed more space in the existing org, nor have they managed to set aside money to renovate the new twice as big building.  This is not management of orgs according to any LRH tech, with evals that find right why’s and programs that expand reach, sales and delivery. This is another Dear Leader patented “one size fits all executive C/S” that is so clearly an epic failure and yet so ingrained into the think of the sheeple that its all they talk about. And if you speak to existing public (and I have), they robotically tell you the wonderful success of this incredible program implemented by COB – and when you say “Have you been to any of the orgs – they are empty?” they respond with absolute certainty “that’s just black PR.” And yet its right in front of their faces. Like this promo piece!  But they are so packed with false data (lies) about the massive expansion created by COB that they are blind. 

Dear Leader said the why of Golden Age of Tech was “the blind leading the blind” – well, if that was true then the why for the current state of Scientology is “the liar leading the blinder.”  

But sadder still is how short the memory of the sheeple is.  Orange County is one of the orgs DM proudly showed at one of the first Maiden Voyage events where he began to hammer in his false data Idle Org campaign. Orange County’s new org was shown as a fly through with all the spaces depicted in computer graphic images to show how this was “really happening.”

Make no mistake, it would be wonderful if Orange County (and all these other orgs) was expanding and actually needed to move into new premises in order to meet the needs for delivery.  It would mean they were delivering standard tech and Scientology WOULD be expanding.  Today, no org on the planet can do that – they are so dispersed selling Basic Book packages to people that already have 2 or 3 sets, regging for their new building or renovations (“so you can attain your next status level” – Dear Leader believes status is the major motivating force on planet earth and he speaks from his reality) or regging for the IAS (next status level in the theater of the absurd – diamond studded excelsior maximus brown nosus) that they don’t put attention on getting in new people and delivering. And even if they did, the doors are blocked into Div 6 because they cannot handle the public individual in front of them, they HAVE to walk people around and show them videos and remain muzzled as part of Dear Leader’s brilliant handling for getting new public in. And if by a miracle they get someone in who wants to go up the Bridge they only have robot GAT auditors who chronically bypass F/Ns . And that presumes they can get them beyond the blanket orders to study the basics, or do 1000 hours of Objectives on every case or whatever the newest fad is that is presented as the newest “brilliant breakthrough from Dear Leader.”

And they really have been led to believe they “will expand” when they get a nifty new building so if they just get that done then all will be OK.  And like new OT IX and X – the promises this week are no better than the promises last week, last month, last year or last century. And the “future” is a false dream that has been sold to the sheeple with “something new” will handle the problem – “just wait for what COB comes out with next.” How long can you go on hoping?And how long can you continue to ignore what LRH says – solve it with Scientology. And do what worked before – because it WILL work again. And the Ideal Orgs and GAT and Div 6 videos – these are all Dear Leader’s NEW INVENTIONS. And they are epic failures. But they are presented as fabulous successes.  Wake up people!

Lisa Hamilton Speaks

Lisa was a stable terminal for many staff and public in the LA area, in fact, across the entire Western United States.  In that part of the world, if you said Senior HCO the person that came to mind was Lisa.  A 22 year Sea Org Veteran, she was respected, admired and loved for her ability to apply standard tech (especially ethics) to those she was working to help.  And that is perhaps the one word that sums her up – help. For the benefit of the individual.  She left the Sea Org with her husband in 2008. She explains why.  This is an “on the ground” report of how the C of M has perverted Scientology.  If you know Lisa, you will also know that this is utterly devoid of hype or overstatement.

 Mike Rinder

I realize some people are wondering what happened to me and are being given slanted data.  I know some of my friends have been told not to talk to me as I am “not in good standing.”  If you fall into this category and are following that order, I do not hold it against you in the least.  I still consider you my friend, and as a friend, I ask you not to violate your integrity either way. 

With that said, I do want to say a few things for myself.  I am not writing here to state that I am perfect, or all my overts were justified.  I am just here to communicate and do believe, as LRH says, that that is the universal solvent.

My husband Mark and I are well.  We live in northern Nevada (Gardnerville to be exact).  It is a very small town and surrounded by mountains, lakes, rivers and all the outdoor activities that go with them.  I work at a local Veterinary Hospital, which is great.  I have gained quite some skills and am helping to improve the lives of animals and their owners.  I have always been very strongly oriented on the 5th dynamic – actually, as strong as I am on the 3rd dynamic.

Over the years, I let certain dynamics go by the wayside, resulting in my dynamics becoming misaligned and out of balance.  And I have handled that.  Those who know me, know I have a very strong help button, so now help is evenly spread across my dynamics and that is best.  I am involved in many activities in this regard.

It is true that Mark and I blew from the Sea Org in July 2008.   At this point, I am not going to get into a lot of specifics as to why, but I felt that I could no longer fulfill my responsibilities as a Sea Org member and maintain my own personal integrity unless I stated what I know. 

I remember sitting in an international event in 2008 and watching the “stats” being presented that such and such org (ASHO, Pasadena, Steven’s Creek, etc.) has so many new people coming in every so many minutes.  I looked over at my husband after one statement about ASHOD and saw his eyebrows raise in astonishment and we looked at each other and said, “Wow, that’s not true.”    Come on, the Bodies in the Shop were going down, the Captain and staff were counting other org’s SO members on the BIS, Paid Completions, Paid Starts and other stats as a stat-push and to save their bacon in case their Basics sales were down.   To hear the head of our group utter such blatant falsehoods to staff and public made me feel ashamed and embarrassed to be a Sea Org member.

You see, we had been in those orgs – old building, new building – they were empty and doing poorly.  These are orgs such as the ones I mentioned above, plus Hawaii, Salt Lake City, Portland, Denver, Phoenix, Santa Barbara, Mountain View, Washington DC, Vancouver, Chicago and more.  Some better than others, but none booming.    If you don’t believe me, do what LRH says – go find out for yourself – go into a few orgs and LOOK.  Go at different times.  Go look at their stats. 

I know the staff WANT to play the Birthday Game for blood, but how can you win that game when you are being forced off post to reg for the IAS, reg for the “Ideal Orgs”, reg for “Superpower”, reg for extra Basics packages, and for who knows what else.  I mean, you are told you are out-ethics if you say you would rather do your post!  Scientology is supposed to be a game where everybody wins, but with these off-policy orders, it’s near impossible.  And to any staff or public who I pressured from my post to give money for any of these things, when you did not have it and would rather have used it to go up the The Bridge, please accept my apology.  I am deeply sorry.  It was an overt product.

While I am at it, I would also like to apologize to any staff or public who I rotely misapplied policy to, disregarding you as an individual.  I continue to make an effort to personally contact people and take responsibility and boy does that blow charge on both sides!  LRH is right: the EXACT time, place, form and event does as-is things.

“What is true for you, is true for you” is a profound statement.  Think of that in reference to your own case gain and your own personal integrity.  It has NOTHING to do with being forced to do something you don’t agree with, NOTHING to do with being made to disconnect from someone just because they believe something different than you, NOTHING to do with being made to say something you did was an overt because someone else said so.  

LRH never said, maintaining your personal integrity was going to be easy – when you get a few threats, subtle blackmail and you are told one sentence of one policy to prove you are wrong or have to comply, then you can really cave yourself in.  Just know that the BEST part about it is, though, that YOU have to agree, YOU have to toe the line, YOU have to be the one to cave yourself in.  Anyone else being cause over you is a cop out.  You have to agree to be suppressed, right?

As I stated earlier, I want to avoid getting into specifics at this time, but I do want to make a statement in regard to the treatment of some “undesirable” staff.  PAC received many staff not wanted at Flag or Int.  Those who had gotten in trouble at Int were sent to PAC to be posted on low, low posts.   There are many of those who had been in PAC for YEARS and were still not allowed out of lower conditions.  Even though they had enough signatures and had excellently applied their conditions, they had to have one final signature from the “top man” or else they were not allowed to say they were complete.  Sometimes he would not respond to their conditions for months – sometimes longer.  Then even when some of these staff were “out of lower conditions” they were not allowed to move up the org board or take a Tech post as they were “not to be trusted” – how so, if they were out of lower conditions and had been productive on post?    One person was sent to Flag for Supervisor training, but when an inspection was done by the “top man” and he saw that person, he sent him back to PAC – just like that.   

This is not to mention those older staff who were sent to PAC so they would not be seen at Flag or Int and cause a “bad impression” or whatever the reason.  One day a dozen or so elderly SO members were suddenly herded onto a plane, without being asked or given time to collect all their belongings and sent to PAC.  Most of them were heartbroken.   Similar actions were done with staff who were seriously ill.  Being part of an organization that treats people who had dedicated their lives to the cause, and who now because of their physical limitations, were being so callously “transferred”, was a source of both anger and grief for me. 

There are many other things that were enforced upon public and staff that I did not agree with.  Arbitraries of who you who could or could not communicate to or what you could or could not read.  This was applied particularly heavily on SO members, where communication was screened, some not being able to talk to certain family unless someone else was present, not being able to read anything negative in print, being gotten inside if anyone showed up to the PAC Base to protest – didn’t you all wonder about the protester with the sign  – “Why did Rinder run?”  — I know I did.  Disconnection policy (yes Tommy Davis, the Church DOES enforce it) was enforced.  I know personally about that, through having my communication so controlled that I sounded unnatural when I was trying to handle a family member, which made the situation even worse.    

I was Snr I&R, I was Snr HAS – and before that, many posts – Snr Qual Sec, HAS, Qual Sec, etc.  I have been up and down the org board, but was definitely proudest of my time in Snr HCO where I was working with and helping staff and public improve their lives.  NO, I was not perfect and yes, I made mistakes.  I did try to make up for my mistakes.  I can safely say in this area, I did much more good than harm.   I know there are those out there who are thankful for my hand in improving their lives and there are those who trusted that I had their best interest in mind.

I still do.

That is why I have to say something.  I have been out of the SO for almost 2 years.  I have not said anything until now, but it has been pointed out to me by some friends that that in itself may be an overt.

So, I am here to state that I am no longer a member of the “official” Church organization as I cannot back up the current MEST-oriented and wasteful actions which,     too often, override the individual going up The Bridge.  I am no longer in agreement with the arbitraries in going up The Bridge (how many times do you have to re-do something after you have attested to it?), I am no longer in agreement with being told who I can/cannot talk to, what I can/cannot read and have to PRETEND that someone else knows better and can control my life – and not control as in KRC, but control as in, frankly, a kind of suppression.  Okay, you may say, well, what about LRH policy?  So, to that, I say that LRH himself stressed what is true for you is true for you…including Scientology.    And, well, I have to say, at this point, WHO knows what is actually written by LRH or not?  Myself, I am sorting this out by what does or does not seem like the truth to me. 

Well, this is a lot wordier than I intended.  Hopefully, you have made it this far (or at least saved it to read when you had time to do so).   J

I am hoping that all of you will at least give what I say some thought, that you DO look at what BOTH sides of this issue are doing and saying.   Once you have done that, you can make your own decision.

If you decide that this is BS and is not true for you, well fine.  That is your decision.  That does not make you my enemy.  Why should it?  We can still be in comm and be friends and “agree to disagree”…hmmm, think that is also covered somewhere…

I am here if you need someone to sincerely communicate with.  Those of you who know me, know that.

Whatever you do, be true to yourself and your dynamics.

Lisa Hamilton  l.hamilton@rocketmail.com

SP Times covers Miscavige cult’s hatred of children

Here it is, http://www.tampabay.com/news/scientology/church-of-scientology-no-kids-allowed/1101759

I think they did a decent job of showing all this church anti-second dynamic business is counter policy.  Could have made it more crystal clear it was the iron heart of DM that implemented virtually all of it.  They had more than two pretty damn credible witnesses to that aspect. Perhaps they took it easy on Miscavige because ALL threats levelled by the church’s teams of lawyers ONLY come when it is Dave being talked about. Or maybe they’ll connect the dots tomorrow. We shall see. If they don’t we’ll fill the vacuum fully this week.  

Love and respect to Claire, Astra, Laura , Sunny, and – yes – Sudden Sam Domingo for speaking out.

Black Dianetics at the top of the Bridge – more on IAS

If anyone has any doubt that DM has constructed a bridge to nowhere, he or she might want to spend a bit of time reading through the extensive trail of evidence Mary Jo Leavitt created which is lodged on the Scientology-cult.com website.  I believe that is far better evidence than myself, MIke RInder, Amy, Jeff, Steve, et al could ever provide.  That is because the insanity of the conduct at the top means a lot less if doesn’t transmit out to effect the product of the organization. Mary Jo’s evidence effectively documents those effects. The new “EP” of OT VIII is now in fact, “knowing and willing effect of, and complicity with,  David Miscavige and his anti-LRH and anti-Scientology campaigns and programs.” 

You think I am overstating it?  Read just two of the knowledge reports that Mary Jo wrote when DM and his minions attempted to turn her into the brave new definition of OT VIII.  I have included them below. Now, please realize that very few of the OT VIIIs handled it like Mary Jo Leavitt did.  With a handful of exceptions, the OT VIIIs walked lock step down the integrity-shedding lemming leap demanded by Miscavige. Thank God Mary Jo held her ground and made a record of it.  Any bridge that leads to a state of other-determinism, particularly suppressive other-determinism, is a bridge to a dark, ugly place. 

You want to know what a real OT VIII looks and acts like? Get to know Mary Jo Leavitt.  

 

 

Mary Jo’s reports:

November 26, 2007 to RTC Reports Officer

Things that shouldn’t be IAS interview/Reg cycle Ted Bragin, Marion Vugger

I was in an IAS reg cycle last Saturday the 17th of November with Ted Bragin from the WUS Office.

I had been told I needed to get an appointment for a briefing and I was hesitant as I do not have the funds to donate now and I am also very busy with my OTA hat as the OTA IC of Latam. Last year, in 2006 MV I donated 150K and in one month completed a Patron Meritorious cycle: I went from 15 K on the IAS to 250K in 12 months and it was a very BIG deal for me, I got into debt big time. I was thrilled and proud to do it but had to follow that up with a lot of production. I am a single woman and while I do own my business it is not one that makes so much profit to allow for such sizeable donations. I basically got a second mortgage on my house to do it.

After course on Tuesday the 13th, I was approached by Claire Taylor (FCS LA Fdn.) and was told I had to have an interview with the IAS, that all the OTs in the field had to be interviewed. There was no reference or no reason given to me. This is a generality and it is an arbitrary that “all OTs have to be interviewed”. I don’t think an enforced interview is OK, especially when I am active and have donated so much. But I reluctantly agreed.

Since Ted Bragin regged me before I agreed to get this briefing from him and asked him to please be brief as I had lots to do and did not want to sit there and tell someone how I did not have money. It is not OK to sit there and talk at length about debt, etc- it just brings one downtone and makes a postulate there.

I had set aside 1 hour for this and Ted was late (which was fine he was in another cycle) but when we started 20 minutes late I was anxious to get the cycle going. Ted made small talk, commenting about people who had made recent huge donations and told me I needed to be with that group of people, hang out with them. I said I had no time to hang out with new people, I was a bit puzzled at the comm. I asked him to please give me the briefing and he said it wasn’t a briefing, it was an interview, which he said was the new name for a reg cycle. I was BIs, I was told I was getting a briefing. It is not OK to lie about the purpose of a meeting, which was not what I agreed to do.

He then started to ask me about my finances and I said I did not want to discuss specifics or my debt, that I had expressed to him this. I did tell him I had no equity in the house. He became irate, that HE was the IAS and I had to disclose everything as I worked for the Church and per policy they needed to know. I asked him for a reference and he pulled out the Les Dane book and referred to the section on qualifying a prospect and said “This is LRH”. I protested this saying this was absolutely not LRH source and then asked him if then anything was mine, did I own anything? Did I have a say on my own finances and how I was going to handle them? It seemed so bizarre. Ted said I was now OT VIII and very self-determined but he “could show me what self-determinism was”. This was all done in a hostile tone. He went and got a staff member from the Flag office who is a trained Flag MAA and is on a mission here in LA, her name is Marion Vugger, and when I explained to her that I was not in agreement with the force of the cycle she told me I sounded disaffected! I am one of the most upstat and active OT Ambassadors and Scientologist on the planet, according to OT Operations Office Int who wrote this before my clearance for the ship to do OT VIII eligibility. Then Ted said, “you know I love you don’t you?” and when I said “no…” he said, “that is the first lie you say tonight, I would lie in front of you and give my life so that you and only you could go free” – it was all very melodramatic and introverting. What is one supposed to answer to that? Marion told me if I could not give money I needed to walk in and say to the IAS “what can I do for you”? I told her I was already very committed as an OTA and could not glibly say that as I would not be able to deliver. She did not answer that. I have to create income and am already very active helping the OTCs in Latam. Ted then said that we had to do it all. When I said I was already “doing it all” (I do not qual for the SO or staff and Ted knows this) he got angrier with me.

I was told I had to give “everything” to the IAS, that I work for the Church and that I had to be there on the same terms as the SO and that COB needed funds NOW. When I said I could not give what I didn’t have, that it would be out ethics, he got furious and said, “don’t you think LRH was out ethics when he almost broke his back researching the OT levels? He was out ethics on the first dynamic and on the second dynamic, he had a family, he was a husband, don’t you tell me you can’t be out ethics!”. He turned to Marion and she nodded in agreement! At that point I just remained quiet and decided I needed to not protest anymore to end the interview. I said I was working on creating more income; that I was with the program and understood what I was being told. At that point Ted told the MAA that I was more active than over 90 % of parishioners he knew and then told me I could leave. Marion left the room and Ted offered to walk me to my car. As we walked I chatted lightly and he asked me 3 times if I was OK. I was not showing any signs of not being OK, it was as if he was concerned that the cycle had been very rough and he wanted to be sure I was OK.

Ted looked very tired; I have never seen him this aggressive. I am not sure what references they are operating on but this type of treatment and comm. is unacceptable and the comment about LRH being out ethics and making it OK and even necessary to be out ethics to be an upstat IAS member, is completely unacceptable. I think this needs to be looked into.

This is true,

Mary Jo Leavitt

OT VIII, OTA IC Latam, Patron Meritorious, FSM

 

RTC Reports Officer Int

Mary Jo Leavitt, New OT VIII                   September 20,2009

cc:

CO OSA Int

PR Aide OSA Int

Legal Aide OSA Int

International Justice Chief

Snr I&R Chf HCO Int

Ted Bragan, IAS WUS

Tiana Lake Snr MAA CLO WUS

Cherie, Snr HAS CLO

Jon Lundeen, CO ASHO Fdn

Lon Kloeffer, Dir I&R CLO

Knowledge Report

Out tech (Out KSW), Abuse of Position

Snr I&R Chf HCO Int

Ted Bragan, IAS WUS

Tiana Lake Snr MAA CLO WUS

Cherie, Snr HAS CLO

Jon Lundeen, CO ASHO Fdn

Lon Kloeffer, Dir I&R CLO

Dear Sir,

This report is written and routed as above because of the potential liabilities such activities can bring about if perpetrated upon terminals less understanding than myself, liabilities that can have severe repercussions on PR and possibly legal lines.

Background:

Recently, two SO members entered my property by jumping the gate of my house without permission. I wrote a KR on the SO members who were from the CLO WUS ‐ and sent it to RTC, copy to MAA CLO WUS and the parties involved; it turned out one of those men was the Dir I&R CLO (Lon Kloeffer). See attached.

Two weeks went by and I went back on course at my agreed‐upon time. On the way out of course, on a Wednesday (August 5, 2009) I was approached in the parking lot by the D/ED of LAD (Mark) and asked if I could go to an IAS interview for a few minutes. I said I did not have time (which was the case), and besides these interviews are never a few minutes. I also said that I did not have any money to donate and the interviews were reg cycles, so I was going to pass. Mark then said to me it was not an option, that it was mandatory. I looked at him surprised and said, “Mandatory? Q1 is self determinism and we have power of choice!” I also said he could tell the people who had sent him that I was not going to an IAS briefing and to take me off their lists (for potential reg cycles). And then I left.

That night I received a call from the CLO Dir I&R (that went to my answering machine) saying I needed to come in to see the CLO Dir I&R immediately. My daughter Joanna, who is also my Communicator, called as soon as she got the message. She was told there was a KR written on me that required me to show up within 24 hours, because I was being summoned by HCO; yet they would not give further information on what it was about. It being a workday the next day, and I was flat‐out with work, Joanna arranged for me to go on Saturday tentatively and got OK from the Dir I&R to postpone the meeting until then. Joanna told the Dir I&R (who refused to give his name) that she would talk with me the next day and see if it was possible to go any earlier in the week. This was agreed and fine. It was late at night and I had already retired.

The next morning, Joanna gave me the message and I called the Dir I&R first thing; I got an answering machine so I left a message saying I wanted a copy of the report so I could see it before it was time to go to the CLO on Saturday (which was the earliest possible time I could go in). I had no idea what that could be about, all I could think of was the comm cycle about the IAS interview that previous afternoon.

Then around noon (approximately 3 hours after I left my message) a man in an SO Officer uniform showed up at the gate of my home/office. He identified himself as the D/CO of the Ethics Org now established in the CLO. Instead of giving me a copy of the KR, he handed me an “HCO Ethics Summons” (attached). He said I had 24 hours to report to the CLO yet would not tell me what this was about, only that it was very serious. I told him I could only think of the IAS comment the day before and that this was a violation of ethics gradients (Ref: HCO PL 29 APR 65 Issue III Ethics Review). He said ethics gradients did not apply in this situation (per policy, however, they only do not apply when an SP act is committed but I didn’t say anything.) We spent 45 minutes talking. I had pressing work and calls that had to be delayed‐ this was right in the middle of my production. I agreed to go to the CLO on Saturday at 10AM.

Joanna then originated that the HCO Summons claimed there had been repeated attempts to get in communication with me, yet she as the Communicator had only received one communication, the phone call the night before, and she had been specifically in comm on the cycle. She called the Snr HAS to get clarification as to what was meant by “repeated attempts to get in communication with no avail” and after a few phone calls it was determined to be a mistake, the Snr. HAS said there had been a misduplication and the HCO Summons was supposed to be withdrawn from my ethics file as it actually did not apply per se, because I was “in comm” and showing up on Saturday. It was understood that the appointment “would not be long” and would be under an hour. Joanna had scheduled important appointments previously for that day, but we were fitting in this appointment with the CLO; Joanna made sure it was agreed with the Snr. MAA CLO and the Dir I&R CLO that it would not take long.

On Saturday, August 8, 2009, I had to wait half an hour before the Snr. HAS came out to meet me. I reiterated that I only had a couple of hours set aside for this (a long time with my schedule). She was not pleased I had a limited amount of time and went to check with someone to see if it was OK. Then 15 minutes later another Sea Org member who identified herself as an HCO terminal said she was giving me an interview and I should follow her. As we walked across the street towards the canteen I asked her what this was about and I saw in her hand my KR regarding the SO members jumping the gate, and I said, “Oh, it’s about that? I’ll be happy to pick up the cans to tell you what happened.”

And on the cans, I did. After she was satisfied about my recounting of the episode, and I FNed throughout (she never indicated it, though; I could see her making big circles on the worksheet) she then showed me the “Knowledge Report” written by the Dir I&R CLO which was contrary to my KR. Every paragraph in that report was an alteration of the facts. I told the lady giving the interview that this was the case and that I never got a copy of this report and wanted to have it (Ref: HCO PL 1 May 1965 Iss I Staff Member Reports) and she assured me I would. She did not give me a copy, and (over a month and a half later, on the 28th of September) I finally received a copy from the Chief MAA FSSO. (See attached, and the False Report Report regarding it.)

After that the questions turned to the subject of the IAS. What did I think of it, how are my finances, do I have off‐shore accounts, any illegal activity with my business, any missing licenses or permits, who are my friends, do I have a 2D, a husband, a boyfriend (she really pressed on this one), what do I do on my spare time, am I connected to disaffected people?

I am an OT VIII with an incredible ethics record as an examination of my file shows. And yet the assumption of the interviewer and these questions was that I was out‐ethics and even criminal. I had to prove the contrary through my answers and while holding the cans (illegal use of auditing, Ref: HCO PL 18 Oct 1967 Iss III Policy and HCOB Alterations High Crime.) She also asked about my children‐ my son Greg, does he write a lot of reports? My answer‐ yes, I taught my kids well, to write reports of any Out‐ KSW or out‐tech. Greg has had a lot of trouble at LAD just staying on his Academy levels when he is pressured to do “Basics lineup”. What about my daughter, Joanna? All my answers were satisfactory to this terminal. I was FNing and in comm.

I asked her why this whole cycle was so heavy‐handed and she said the “field of OTs is very disaffected and very disenchanted and there is an investigation going on. We have found a lot of enemy line regarding the Ideal Org program and the Dir I&R often has doors slammed in his face. He thought you were acting in a disaffected fashion so he thought you needed to come in” – words to that effect. What confirms this is that this “False Report” he wrote was not acted on until two weeks after my report was written and delivered. But really, the reason for his report and “Ethics Summons” was the IAS interview and the 10 million dollars quota of parishioner money the CLO had to collect from us NOW.

When we were done I was told by the Snr HAS CLO that I needed to watch the MV4 event, the IAS event and then stay for another interview. Because of the way this was communicated, I asked if this was mandatory? The Snr. HAS CLO responded, “Yes! Absolutely, you need to do this now.” I said I had two previous appointments I could not reschedule so I would return around 5 PM.

I then saw the MV event and then it was time for the “interview” – Teddy, Jon Lundeen and Snr MAA CLO.

I made it clear I was handling debts as I had donated to the IAS 250 thousand dollars in the course of a year and was still heavily in debt (in addition, over the years I had donated 105K to SuperPower and approximately 60K to the Ideal Org program, and 20K to other programs such as the Library Campaign and Basics campaign). I shared that my business had not done as well this year but I was going up the conditions and my application of ethics tech was working and going well. Then they started with the doom and gloom that times were so bad and things were so desperate, I needed to go ahead and “do or die in the attempt” and other quotes from KSW1 completely out of context. Despite a rising emotion from my interviewers, I remained calm and told them I was not going to go into further debt and that I was not turning over my credit card. Teddy screamed at me saying I had a closed mind and was not allowing him to do his job, that I had to tell him my personal finance data (and then he referred to the Les Dane “Sales Techniques” as his source for that) and kept invalidating me, cutting my comm., saying he did not like how I grimaced, etc. When I could say something he would write it down and often he would leave the room to talk to someone else about these notes he was taking.

Then Jon Lundeen, whom I know well and who even trained me on being a Registrar when I was in the Sea Org at Flag, told me the IAS cycle was so important he was spending 90% of his post time wearing that hat. And the Snr MAA said she, too, was doing that, that she was in charge of the entire PAC Base IAS quota. They said this with pride! That they are off‐post and off‐hat 90% of the time!

At one point Jon and I were alone and he told me a story about his daughter stealing things as a youth in the SO and that he got a knock on the door in the middle of the night, a dreaded moment, where he was told he had to leave the SO unless he handled his daughter. He told me he was not about to give up the SO and his life in it, so he borrowed 30K to send her off to Delphi in Oregon. (As an afterthought he said he didn’t remember if he ever paid that debt) and that his daughter was shortly after that expelled from Delphi for her “stealing” (i.e. kleptomania). Her mother, Edie Lundeen, (Class XII) (finally) gave her some auditing and it quickly resolved and now his daughter is posted at Int. But the point of his story was that, in his words, COB had gotten that “knock on the door in the middle of the night” and we all had to do the impossible to raise this money; that any bad consequence for incurring more debt was not important. It really sounded like the end of the world. Jon was very agitated.

Teddy said we needed to complete establishing an AO in Latam and I said that was years away as each org in Latam had to become Ideal and as far as I knew they were not even solvent. I was bewildered that they would say this was such an urgent cycle, and expressed that to them. Teddy would write all this down on a paper and would not answer my questions. He then became angry and went for the full‐out make‐wrong and invalidation technique I had previously experienced from him (see my KR of an IAS interview with Teddy in 2007). I remained calm during the whole interview. They, instead, turned quite upset and were often screaming and turning red. And as they saw that this did not have an effect on me, it became worse, i.e. intensifying their misemotional outbursts.

As I persisted on my position that I was not going to donate, Lundeen screamed at to me that I was an out‐ethics OT to have taken so long to pay off the IAS donation and that to doubt my ability to handle a large debt was a gross out ethics! He shouted that LRH had expected the impossible from him and I was very able and the same was expected of me. I then said I had arrived there earlier in the day with two hours for the interview, but ended up remaining there most of the day and night, and the cycle had been over 6 hours long and I was now leaving. As I stood up they all started to scream and at that point the Snr Dir I &R (Lon) walked in, crossed his arms and stated in a menacing tone, “You are not participating and what is going to happen is you need to get a roll back right now. You have been spouting enemy line all night”. I said, “Not participating? You mean I am not turning over my credit card? Absolutely not. And I already had a one‐hour interview where I came out clean and I am not doing another. It is 10 PM!” He said, “We will give you some vitamins to put down your throat, it will be fine”. At that point I said, “I am leaving” and the Snr. MAA blocked the door. I told her she could not do that and motioned her to move. At that point the auditor who had interviewed me knocked on the door and told me to go with her. Everyone in the room was screaming at the same time and I gladly walked out with her.

Once we were outside, the HCO auditor said she could overhear that things were getting intense and out of hand in there so thought she’d knock to get me out. I thanked her and told her I was not doing another interview, I was going home. She said we should at least walk a bit so I told her we could walk to where my car was parked. She asked me more questions about my debt and when I told her I was 300K in debt, she asked if that was the mortgage and I said no, that is separate from mortgage. She asked me why I didn’t tell them this and I said these were my personal finances and it was nobody’s business. She told me we needed to do this second interview anyway, she was holding a piece of paper that contained all the “enemy line” I had said, and I told her anything I said I meant, it came from me and was very straight forward. She said she could not do it during the week but next Saturday and she would call me to schedule me. I acknowledged her though I did not intend on picking up the cans again for this cycle.

She never called and then on September 15th, 5 weeks later, the Dir I&R CLO and Snr. HAS CLO came to my house while I was out. They told my son that I had blown an ethics interview and needed to go to the CLO. They left a hand written note for me to call the Snr. HAS as soon as I got the note. I called and got a voice mail. I left a message. I said, “This is Mary Jo Leavitt, I got your note. I am not going in for your ethics interview. Do what you have to do. Do not come to my house anymore.”

I have not heard since.

Summary of outpoints and LRH references

‐Overt misapplication of ethics tech with the purpose of collecting funds with no exchange, under duress. Many references exist including HCO PL 7 Feb 1965 Keeping Scientology Working Series 1, HCO PL 7 Mar 1965RA Iss III Offenses and Penalties, HCOB 15 Sep 1981 The Criminal Mind, HCO PL 1 Apr 1981R Interviews (“An Ethics Officer never spends any time sitting and arguing with someone.”‐LRH),

HCO PL 24 Feb 1972 Injustice, HCO PL 1 Sep 1965 Iss VII Ethics Protection, HCO PL 30 Oct 1971 How Ethics Gets Harsh, and others including standard Finance policies.

‐ Use of positions of power and executive postings, use of CLO HCO to collect money for the IAS, under duress. Refs: HCO PL 2 Nov 1970 Iss III Responsibility (“The power of choice is still senior to responsibility.”‐LRH), HCO PL 15 Dec 1965 Iss I Ethics Chits (“No person may be penalized for issuing an ethics chit.”‐LRH), HCO PL 7 Dec 1969 Iss II The Ethics Officer, His Character (“The job of the E/O is to disconnect and depower the criminal and so protect the group.”‐LRH), HCO PL 11 May 1965 Issue I Ethics Officer Hat, and others including many Div III and Div VI policies.

‐ Abuse of an OT VIII, outright invalidation and nullification of an upstat member. Ref: HCO PL 4 Aug 1966, ETHICS, Clears, Invalidation Of, HCO PL 23 Dec 1965RB Suppressive Acts, Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists. See also, HCO PL 2 November 1970 Issue III, “Responsibility” “The power of choice of an individual is considered as opposition and as an overt act. When in fact, “the power of choice is still senior to responsibility. What one does against his will operates as an overt act against oneself. But where one’s will to do has deteriorated to unwillingness to do anything, lack of will is itself an aberration… In the decline of any state into slavery, as in Greece, or into economic strangulation of the individual as in our modern western society, doingness is more and more enforced and willingness to do is less and less in evidence. At length, people are doing without being responsible.” –LRH.

This is the kind of behavior and actions that indeed breed disaffection, and result in bad PR for the Church of Scientology.

This is true,

Mary Jo Leavitt 

Seattle Independents

Marie-Joe & Tony DePhillips with Marta

Tony and Marie-Joe DePhillips ARE two very dedicated Scientologists. I have included their declaration of Independence, and two write ups telling the story of each of them. I have also included two links at the end of the write ups.  I think this material should be read in full by anyone wanting to know how the church of Scientology currently treats quests for the truth even by some of its most steadfast supporters. Thank you Marie-Joe and Tony for holding your positions in space and for standing up and speaking out.

Declaration of Independence
Tony & Marie-Joe DePhillips
a.k.a. “Alex Metheny” & “Freetothink”

Preamble:

We have always loved the writings of L Ron Hubbard. One of my favorite LRH statements is from the lecture Differences Between Scientology & Other Philosophies: “ If it is true for you, it’s true. And if it’s not true for you, it still isn’t true. Not even if Ron told you is it true. It’s just not true, that’s all.“ ~ LRH

In addition to this as a foundation, the ARC triangle, the granting of beingness, the code of honor and not needing a license to survive, are just a few of the building blocks we’ve used to improve our lives. We have had many great wins in Scientology and know many well intentioned staff and public Scientologists.

How we got here:

Our personal story of shock, disbelief and declare will be added as an attachment for those who are interested. You will be able to see how we went from among the top opinion leaders and contributors in our area to SPs, in just a few months.

After reading The Truth Rundown and Geir Isene’s Doubt formula we were deeply troubled about what was going on in the church. These stories were believable to us because they aligned with many of our own observations and experiences. After trying to communicate about the things that were troubling us in the church, we started to get attacked as ourselves being the problem – for speaking out with any disagreement or questioning. It became very apparent that we did not have the right to say what we were observing in regards to our own church or its management. It also became very clear that we did not have the right to associate with people who the church had deemed were “BAD”. Evidently, we were supposed to give up the right to decide who we would or wouldn’t associate with. To us, these are fundamental rights of an American, fought and died for by many!

I have never been good at being bossed around. Some might think it’s a “button” (problem or character blemish) that I haven’t dealt with yet but, on the other hand, maybe it’s an ability that’s helped me retain my self-determinism and freedom of thought. We quickly realized that we had been PTS to the Church for many years, and applied handle or disconnect. When each attempt to handle was met with bigger and stronger messages to cease, desist, and “get handled” (including a Non-Enturbulation Order and ethics interviews), we decided to disconnect by officially resigning from the Church. Our resignation letter to the church pretty much sums it up:


IJC 13 January 2010
Flag AO MAA
Seattle Org Day and Fdn HCO
AOLA MAA
ASHO Day MAA
Tony and Marie-Joe DePhillips
This is a letter to let you know that we have decided to resign from the Church of Scientology.
We have given this decision a lot of thought.

We have both been in Scientology for over twenty years. We have contributed about xxxK to the Ideal Org and over xxK to the IAS. We have spent in the neighborhood of xxxK on services from the Church and donated a decent amount of time participating as volunteers.

We have had some great wins.

Over the last few years however we have noticed more and more things that we do not like about how the church operates. Heavy ethics, make wrong, heavy regging etc. We have made attempts at correcting these things with reports with no result.

We have seen and heard of too many abuses, human rights violations, misuse of resources [people, money,…], and worst of all, too many LRH policies being violated. We can’t, in good conscience, continue to participate and support the church as it is being managed at this time.

After making our own observations and hearing the stories of Marty Rathbun, Geir Isene, Mike Rinder, Amy Scobee, Jeff Hawkins, Mary-Jo Leavitt and many more Sea Org members, OT’s and highly trained auditors, we have made our decision.

We have always been told that these people on the internet were crazy SP’s. After hearing their stories we were not able to come to that conclusion. We were shocked to realize that many who had been painted to us as evil and suppressive were in fact whistleblowers trying to expose the abuses and violations.

We both have experienced excessive sec-checking and heavy ethics even when our contributions (money and time participating) were showing that we were stellar members of the public.

We love Scientology when it is applied with ARC and not with enforcement to get everyone to conform.

We came into Scientology to find our own self determinism and to have gains. Progressively over the years we feel that we have been forced overtly or covertly to “toe the line”, or follow “command intention”, without being able to use our own judgment or our own ethics. If you do not do what is “expected”, you are shunned/punished in various ways. When you assert your own independent thought and it doesn’t align with command intention you are quickly shown you are not a good group member.

In conclusion, we no longer feel confident in this Church’s ability to operate in a manner that we can be proud of and disseminate to others.

We hope that the Church of Scientology will get it’s ethics in and make the changes necessary for it to be a church we can once again be proud of.

Sincerely,

Tony DePhillips Marie-Joe DePhillips

We heard the church lie about its not having a policy of enforcing disconnection – We’d already received many reports of our friends being told not to talk to us.

As someone once said “If they lie about this, what else will they lie about?”

Our conlusions:

After exhaustive research and communicating, we decided that the abuses did occur and that they were and are extensive and widespread. We also saw that the church was actively involved in creating their own enemies and seemed to take very little responsibility in remedying their wrongs. Furthermore, we wondered what kind of a leader would allow these things to continue to go unhandled and in fact seemingly encourage such activity.

We got into Scientology to become more at cause in life and to do better in life based on our own realities. We still feel that this is what LRH intended. We didn’t, and still don’t, believe or agree with everything that LRH ever uttered. But as he himself said, we don’t have to.

We believe that the church is being run in a fashion that, to us, is destructive overall, as well as destructive to our personal goals of being at cause over our own lives. The Grade Chart states that on OT 7 you will be cause over life. That may be possible, but not if the church refuses to let you be at cause over your own church!!

Also, first and foremost to us is the abuse of the Sea Org members. This to us is obscene. These people dedicate their lives to Scientology only to be treated as sub-humans. And when fed up with that treatment and wanting to leave, they are treated in an abhorrent fashion. These people are some of our best and brightest. This cannot stand. What gives DM the right to run roughshod over these people? Who anointed him to be above the law? The out-points are too many to be listed here, we’re sure you all have examples of your own.

We believe that everyone who stands up and throws off their shackles will make it that much easier for others to do so. That has been true for us. The others coming out before us have made it more real for us to take our stand.

We could not live with the idea that we were too scared or bullied into having to hide our god given rights to be here and communicate. Especially when it is the right thing to do!

So we hereby declare ourselves Independent Scientologists.

Independent: One who is independent in thinking, action, etc.

That is how we see ourselves. We do enjoy the Scientology philosophy by LRH, when we are practicing it as independent people, not having it forced down our throats.

Final thoughts:

We also very much appreciate LRH’s views on infinity valued logic. The idea of two-valued logic such as right-wrong, good-bad is too simplistic. The idea that any man or woman is infallible or perfect is not realistic. All men and women have good and bad in them, it is just a matter of degree. And the fact that we feel Mankind is basically good means that there can be salvation for all and no person has a monopoly on that. DM is not totally bad or totally good just like the rest of us. He is not above the law or above the Scientology justice system. DM IS NOT SCIENTOLOGY. We believe that it is the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics that DM step down from his position as leader and that steps are taken to reform the church of Scientology so it reflects the values of this current culture and promotes ARC, tolerance and the values usually associated with spiritual goals. We have finally answered this question for ourselves: Does the end justify the means? For us the answer is NO!! Or another way of looking at it is: The means are the end. Scientology was supposed to give us a way of setting an example as good and honorable people. That is an end in itself. The way Scientology has been treating its own people is a disgrace and a degrade of Scientology, and has to be rejected.

Thanks for listening. Thank you all for what you are doing and will do in the future.

Much Love,

Tony DePhillips (Mid OTVII, Prov. Class IV Pre-GAT and Fully Hatted Ethics Officer)

Marie-Joe DePhillips (OT V,KTL/LOC, Level G SHSBC)

Church of Scientology’s Slippery Slope:
from Solo NOTs-IAS Patron-Ideal Org Humanitarians to Declared SPs

Tony’s Story: I got into Scientology in 1978, a confused Navy sailor. I joined staff in San Diego, married a Scientologist, subsequently divorced, and left staff in 1985 with a $12,000 debt to the church. I paid off that debt and moved up the Grade Chart through OT V in Los Angeles, just winning like mad through FPRD and PDC and right on up. I was a “Cadillac PC”.

And, all throughout, I was being a “good Scientologist”, deciding not to have children so I could get up the Bridge without distractions and living very modestly in order to pay for auditing. My wife, Marie-Joe, and I have spent hundreds of thousands on auditing. I spent close to $250k just on Solo NOTs, without completion.

I originally started Solo NOTs a couple of years prior to the “Golden Age of Tech”, costly even then in both dollars and time. From the time I arrived at Flag the customer service atmosphere was one of suspicion and distrust, right from the start. But, I let it go because I was at the Mecca of technical perfection and the “friendliest place on Earth” after all, so it must be “ok”.

After being on the level for about a year I was informed that I would have to retrain on everything at my expense. This was quite a shock. I’m not a wealthy man. It took me five years to regroup financially and get back onto the Solo NOTs level.

After seven intensives of sec checking prior to getting onto Solo NOTs the first time and another seven, plus the FPRD, the second time (plus the ever suspenseful wait for “eligibility”) I finally made it on again. Then 18 months into Solo NOTs round two, I was C/S’d for an advanced program of eight more intensives (five of which were sec checks).

Meanwhile, I wrote a KR on the Landlord Office regarding mismanagement of the local Ideal Org purchasing process, and in going over it with the local ED an argument ensued (I was going over my KR with him to ensure my facts were correct). He said “If you weren’t so critical and helped more we would be that much closer!” I had only donated about 30K at that point, so I guess I was down-stat. I retorted, “If I have to do whatever you want me to do to be your friend you can kiss my ass!!”

The local Org tried to issue a “non-enturbulation” order for that, but instead I got recalled to Flag at my own expense. I was upset, and when I got there I thought they would treat me as an OT and I would have a nice comm cycle and all would be good. It wasn’t. Silly me.

I was grilled for my crimes, on the meter, by the MAA. It was so frustrating I asked to get a sec check so at least I’d feel I was being heard. Those 25 hours of sec checking cost me about 14K and I felt like crap afterwards. I told Flag they could keep my Solo NOTs materials and left. To their credit, an auditing correction later handled the lingering upset.

I did a Liability formula for all of this and my wife and I donated another hefty chunk to the Ideal Org, bringing us to over $100,000 donated. My apologies, if this is boring – it certainly is therapeutic for me to write it.

Onto Solo NOTs again for the third time, after another grueling eligibility cycle (seven more intensives and the waiting “sweat out” period). The level was getting more and more solid for me. The gains I was getting on the solo auditing seemed to be negated by the sec checking and the feeling I was “bad” or a “slow case gain” or not “trusted’’.

I received PTS handlings when I didn’t feel PTS. I felt and said, “I don’t want to become what you want me to be. I want to be who I WANT TO BE!!” I have never been good at being bossed around. But it’s an ability that has helped me retain my self-determinism and freedom of thought.

I received ethics handlings on a report I wrote on DM speaking derogatorily about the U.S. President at an event, stating I thought his actions weren’t good PR for our Church or its leader. I caught flack for that! I guess they figured I had “crimes”.

This period seemed like a never ending blood bath of regging and stress. I had to live up to this state of OT being laid out for me. I had to be “helping” all the time, donating to this- that-and the other thing, buying books, going to every event…on and on and on. I started hating it. The IAS regges described the world as a nightmare, creating a very dangerous environment for all of us.

I know I’m describing what others have experienced and written. I am collaborating with you. I also witnessed it, lived it, experienced it. The more you do, the higher in the organization you get – even as public – the less respect and freedom there is if you don’t toe the line.

On my last visit to Flag, I decided if I didn’t finish it that trip, I would route off. I thought I could end off and remain friends. I figured that would be the worst case scenario. But I was nervous…why? Because of the previous heavy handed dealings I had. When, I found out that I wasn’t going to be allowed to attest, I just decided to turn in my materials, route off properly and go home in ARC with the group.

That was wishful thinking. It was off to Qual for a hefty attempt to convince me how abberated I was. Then ,to HCO where the MAA informed me that my auditor and Qual terminals were “enturbulated” by me. I said, ”They are enturbulated by me answering their questions??” Yes, that was indeed it, he confirmed, and threatened me with a Non-enturbulation order. I said, “You have to be joking!!” He wasn’t.

I wrote it up to RTC and no order was issued. But, needless to say, I wasn’t having much fun, or feelin’ the theta. The auditing was good but the other actions were painful. While I was trying to route off the Level I was informed by the Flag AO Tech Sec that if I left without my materials then all the people who’d worked with me there would be Comm Ev’d. I told her that wouldn’t be my overt but someone else’s. I held my position right up to leaving the Yachtsman motel to go to the airport. My Solo C/S, Mike, rolled up in a van with my Solo Nots D of P, Lill – Mike trying to persuade me to go home with my materials. I was in grief at this point. He told me he thought I was close to finishing the level and on hearing that, I decided to take the materials home.

Long story a little shorter (and this is abbreviated a lot!!) I sent my materials back a few months later after deciding that they couldn’t “handle” me, and that I wasn’t going to “go on hoping” while paying $7,500 per intensive for mostly sec checking and FPRD. This was the third & last time I took myself off Solo NOTs.

I continued doing volunteer work as Chaplain at the local Org, two nights a week, to good results. I let people talk and I called things as I saw them. Purely a help flow and NO REGGING…

Then, one weekend while scanning news articles, I ran across the St. Petersburg Times’ The Truth Rundown http://www.tampabay.com/specials/2009/reports/project/
– I read it all and watched all the videos. I was shocked!! Could this be true?? Marie-Joe and I spent hours filling the vacuum, looking at different web sites and blogs to fill the void.

WE WERE SHOCKED!!

I realized that I had been tricked. I was reading about, by and large, people who had been screwed over by the Church and then became enemies to it. These were not crazy SPs. These were primarily former members, “enemies” largely created by the Church!

I realized all the sec checking I had been getting was to help the church find these “enemies”. It hadn’t been for my benefit!!

By the way, I have had some great wins getting off overts and withholds. I am not rallying against that. I just think that it can get out of hand and be out tech and done for political reasons instead of for the betterment of the individual.

I was paying the price all along the way, for the CofS creating its own enemies and being afraid of its own creations. This endless sec checking was being done from fear, not because we needed or wanted it. C/S series 73 points this out nicely. There is a write-up on this subject by a woman named Virginia, that I think is definitive and awesome! I had to give her props on that!! http://www.freezone.org/reports/virginia.htm

Realizing this, I thought I would be a good boy and report in to Flag about it. My former NOTs auditor said that I had a major out-ethics situation because I said that I believed the people in the Truth Rundown article. He had asked me a question and when I started to answer, he cut me off – to which I said “don’t ask me a question if you don’t want to hear my answer”. He replied, “I don’t want to hear that natter!!”

I realized then that I couldn’t talk to the group anymore.

PTS?

I have been told at various times that I was PTS, and it’s come up in my programming. I have had many handlings on this topic but none of the items have indicated until now.

I have been PTS to my own Church! And, looking for the suppressive person behind the group, it would have to be its leader, DM. I was shocked at the tales of DM abusing his fellow team members. What gives him the right?? Where is it in writing that DM is above the justice of the group, not to mention the law? What makes him the unchallenged leader of our group?

I was PTS to this group and this leader because I was becoming more and more afraid to communicate about my concerns to them without retribution. I was becoming more afraid to state the out-ethics behaviors, as LRH said is our duty. I had come to feel that if I spoke up and stated what I saw that I would be attacked unjustly. It is not safe to communicate what you want without some kind of retribution, whether it is sec checking for political purposes, invalidation and evaluation from other members, ethics actions, withholding your ability to move up the Bridge, etc.

I was embarrassed to disseminate to my associates because I was no longer proud of how the group operates. Marie-Joe and I have been told that if you don’t disseminate you are PTS. Well it’s true! We have been PTS to our own church!!

I have experienced injustice for speaking up and saying what I believe. I have read about the many injustices on the internet that have occurred to good Sea Org members and good group members who could have, and were, very valuable to the group. I cannot just sit back and say this has nothing to do with me. No more.

We are not going to be afraid of the Church anymore.

I have tried to get at cause over this situation from the inside by writing reports, to no avail. I have been made wrong for bringing up out-points and situations that I see.

More recently, I’ve heard that prior to our written resignation, while volunteering at the Org, there was an interrogatory being conducted about me. I was not informed at the time. The “out-ethics” not ever discussed with me.

Things started to escalade when one day the Fundraising I/C sent us an email to attend an Event. You will find the whole exchange in a link below. Some might find it interesting since it lead us to being Dead Filed.

A report on me for forwarding Mary Jo Levitt’s KR to one of my friends, in combination with the email exchange, did the trick – a few days later a non-enturbulation order was issued on me.

Never once did I receive one phone call or communication from the Org about the non-enturbulation order.

I have since received unofficial word that our SP Declare has been issued.

How have we gone from Solo NOTs, IAS Patrons, and Humanitarians of the Ideal Org, to declared SPs?

It is because the group has gone off course and is following the dictates of a suppressive. I have been the effect of this for too long. I am disconnecting from that suppression and using the only ethics gradient I have left to put ethics in on the group.

How sad.

Did LRH ever envision that his own organization would be hijacked in this way? Was this LRH’s plan? Marie-Joe and I don‘t think so.

Nevertheless, we’re here now in this situation.

We have resigned from the current Church of Scientology. We will no longer consider ourselves a part of that group until we feel it has been sufficiently reformed.

We admire LRH’s auditing tech and many of his philosophic writings and are taking this action in our best efforts to create a better group.

Our sincere admiration for all the people who have helped Scientology make the world a better place and for those who have the guts to say what they see, despite its unpopularity.

Much Love,

Tony & Marie-Joe DePhillips

Marie-Joe’s Story
& Encounter w/the MAAs

I got in Scientology in the late 80’s. I’ve had many life changing wins. Many tools I learned in Scientology are now part of me and I can’t ever imagine not using them.

I spent the last four years serving as I/C (in-charge) of the files project, among other things, at my local Org. I did nearly 2000 hrs on the files project alone, while spending a lot of my own money for supplies and food for the volunteers. Within just a few months I went from being one of the most up stat Scientologists in my area to a declared SP. My crimes were standing up for my rights and the rights of others, pointing out violations of LRH policies and disconnecting from a suppressive source that I could no longer handle.

I agree with and can corroborate everything in Tony’s story. I would like to add a few comments.

For years I was given the impression that something was wrong with my husband, that most people were flying on OT VII and that Tony was one of the rare ones that was having a hard time with it. Many times I questioned how the Tech was used to handle him, and I also questioned Tony. Although Flag was allowing him on OTVII they were also treating him like he had lots of crimes (extensive Sec-checking). Although Tony is no angel, he’s a wonderful husband, a very hard worker and an extremely honest man. I was not seeing any crimes, but I often got introverted into thinking he might have hidden crimes, because of all the extensive sec-checking he was given and the resulting BPC.

I felt so betrayed by the Church when I found out that many were struggling on the Level and that the extensive sec-checking was out tech. I sincerely apologize for having doubted my husband and ever considering that he might be the problem.

As Tony mentioned, we were shocked with the Truth Rundown article. For many years, I worked on different social reform programs; Say no to drugs, World Literacy Crusade, Youth for Human Rights. I successfully used many of these tools to help others, but found myself constantly having to defend Scientology’s bad reputation and explain how it was not a cult.

In the last several months, I started realizing how it is actually, from my perspective, a cult. And that I had, in fact, been PTS. My whole world had been centered around Scientology. When I became aware of the abuses and stopped rationalizing all the out-points I was seeing, my universe started reeling. I so much wanted to handle it from inside the church, with reports and references. But, I rapidly realized it would not be possible. Even after our resignation, I spent hours with MAAs trying to sort things out. Here’s a brief description of what happened, to give you an idea of what to expect.

I met with the MAAs three times, a few hours each time. During the first two meetings I had asked them for stats of established Ideal Orgs. They showed me some of the stats of the newly opened Org in Rome, which were good, but as I pointed out to them it was not an established Ideal Org – it had just opened a few months before. These up statistics could easily have been from people flocking from all over Europe to visit the new Org. They also showed me the CGI from CC Nashville that had been opened 10 months earlier. Not bad (average 15k/week), but certainly not enough to sustain 100 staff with viable wages.

After the first few meetings, where they seem to be interested in my concerns and showed a certain willingness to resolve the issues I was bringing up, things definitely changed at the final meeting.   It was made clear that they were not there to assert that everything is perfect in the Church, but that they have certainty that any out-points were being or will be address and resolved.  They said that the sequence of actions would be for me to do a “standard” doubt condition and once I decide which side I’m on we could proceed with further steps.  Although they were nice they made it clear, from the references they showed me, that I had committed a suppressive act by resigning (HCOPL 17 March 1965 Issue IV – Organizational Suppressive Acts) and unless I “come to my senses & recant” I would be treated as such. 

Which pretty much means that I will have no contact person in the Church and can’t do any services until I first “come to my senses & recant”, then do A – E.  It also meant that, although they said they do not “enforce” disconnection, any parishioners that want to stay in “good standing” and continue going up the Bridge would have to cut communication with me.  But, it’s their “choice”, the Church will not “force” them.   If they want to give up their Bridge or to be in communication with me it’s “their choice”. 

It’s insane!  Especially if I respect my friends’ choice to be part of the Church and don’t try to convince them otherwise.  I asked them how someone stops being part of the Church if they choose to play another game.  Their answer was showing me a reference like “you can’t be half-in or half-out”.  If you’re in we treat you like you’re in if you’re out we treat you like you’re out.  I said many people have left the Church a long time ago but are not subject to this because they did not resign.  They admitted that my way of doing it was more honest but came with consequences.  My response was that for years I defended the Church not being a cult, but now I’m confronted with the fact that it has lots of the characteristics of a cult, especially since you can’t leave it without being considered “evil” even if you have no other “crime” than leaving.  They had no comments. 

“If a person or a group that has committed a suppressive act comes to his, her or their senses and recants, his, her or their only terminal is the International Justice Chief,…”  HCOPL 23 Dec 1965RB Revised 8 Jan 1991 (!!!!!) Suppressive Acts Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists

I asked if a CSW to declare me SP had been sent.  They said no.  They pointed out that whether I get declared or not I have still committed a suppressive act, so the reference still applies to me.  They pointed out that the reference doesn’t say “if a person has received a declare ” but “if a person … has committed a suppressive act”.  The MAA’s explained that no matter whether I think it’s not suppressive to resign, or whether anyone else agrees, it is a suppressive act since the policy (Organizational Suppressive Acts) states that it is.

They offered me a chance to do a “standard” doubt formula.  They said that by exposing myself to the internet I had put myself in a very narrow world, created by SPs that are taking specific situations in Scientology and making them a generality, and that the church wanted to give me the opportunity to come back to reality and look at the true data. I felt like telling them that I was looking at reality but that they were in their cocoon of ignorance.  I didn’t because I didn’t want to start invalidating them.   They wanted me to read Marty, Mike and Amy’s declares.  They said that a lot of the out-points had been created by Marty, Mike and Amy, and that’s why they had been kicked out.  They said the group was doing a lot better since they had left.  I told them I didn’t need to see their declares, because whether they are SPs or not doesn’t change what I have experienced and observed.  I told them 4 – 6 months earlier I was looking, inspecting and researching, but since I’m not in doubt anymore applying the doubt formula didn’t seem right to me.   In addition, I told them that from the references they just showed me the doubt formula is set up for me to either stay in the Church and conform or basically be “evil” if I choose to leave.  I told them I felt it’s an unfair way to look at resolving a doubt. 

Although I haven’t seen it yet, I heard that there is an SP declare now out on us.

I appreciate all that came forward before me and hope many others will follow. I will continue to listen, encourage and defend any whistleblowers that come forward. I will create new friends and I will flourish and prosper.

Now, Free To Think more than ever, Marie-Joe DePhillips.

LINKS:

tonyemail_exchange_with_fundraising_IC

non-enturbulation_order