Tag Archives: Flag Service Organization

The Friedman’s Break Free

Some of you may know Marsha and Steve Friedman, but for those of you who don’t, here’s a little information about these two new independents. 

Marsha became a Scientologist in 1969 and introduced Steve to Scientology in 1973.  They are well-known as Scientologists in the Clearwater community, where they moved in 1989.  They are also well-known as successful business people who own and operate a national PR agency, founded by Marsha 22 years ago.  The firm, headquartered until recently in downtown Clearwater, represents professionals, high-profile individuals and corporations in a wide range of industries. Their staff is comprised mostly of media professionals, and each month they arrange an average of 160 radio interviews, 20 local and national TV appearances and millions of potential readers in offline and online print. As well they market online, with Marsha having 70,000 friends and followers on the various social networking sites.  She is also the author of the book, Celebritize Yourself, and is co-host of a recently launched national talk radio show airing weekly on Sirius/XM.

– Mike Rinder

Here’s Marsha’s story in her own words.

Dear Friends,

As I don’t know where this post will wind up in the wild world of the Internet, consider this an “Open Letter” to friends I know and those I don’t, people in the church or on the fence, public and/or staff.

While writing this letter might seem as evidence to those within the church that we have gone “to the dark side,” I’m actually writing this for the purpose of telling the truth and filling in the vacuum of data for the friends and family who have chosen to disconnect from me and Steve, and others who might become new friends.

To start, I’d like to share a little of my background. I became a Scientologist in 1969 and joined staff at the Miami Org as Marsha Ulan.  I have fond memories of being on staff during that era, and can vividly recall those exciting days when new HCOB’s and HCO PL’s were released.  Whenever this happened, we always stopped whatever we were doing to read LRH’s new breakthroughs.  The energy and excitement were beyond compare; we knew we were part of a great new movement.

While still on staff in 1973, I introduced Steve to Scientology and shortly thereafter we got married. (We were raised together in Queens, NY, and have known each other since we were 7 and 8 years old.)

I finished my contract and left staff in March of 1974 to have our first child together. We’ve now been happily married going on 39 years in May, and are the very proud parents of 2 sons, a daughter, 3 grandchildren and a new great-grandson (whew…even hard for us to believe!).

In 1989 we moved to Clearwater to be close to Flag, and while I never went back on staff, I always volunteered for OSA whenever called upon.  Over the years, we did a lot of services at Flag, including auditing on OT 7 until about a year ago when we routed off the level.

I had no idea when I routed out of the Flag AO last year that this journey would lead me here.  And, quite honestly, in a strange sort of way, I have my auditor and FSM to thank for finding my path to this portal.  You see, when Steve and I chose to route off of OT 7, it wasn’t conceivable to anyone in the Church that we could have made that decision without being influenced by people we were told are “the enemy.”  Our instantaneous response was, “What enemy? Are we in some kind of war?”

Then we were accused of being associated with “friends of LRH.”  We thought, “How strange, of course we’re friends of LRH and, yes, that is who we associate with.”  And this wasn’t said tongue-in-cheek at all, even though it may seem that way.  Truly, we were the best of soldiers.  We didn’t dare read anything on the Internet about Scientology.  We were told it was evil, enturbulating and could cause us great harm.  While neither Steve nor I believed anything or anyone had that kind of power over us, especially considering we were OT and armed with ethics and PTS tech, we chose to simply follow the rules and do as we were told.

But, after routing off services and being free to think, read and experience whatever we desired, I decided to look and see who those “enemies” were and what exactly was meant by “friends of LRH.”

Once I started to look, I anticipated finding a volume of success stories and well publicized good works of the church by independent media coverage.  However, the only pro-church coverage I found were press releases the church wrote and paid to have distributed by PR distribution services.  But most important was what I found from independent news coverage – the harrowing stories of people who had been on staff, and the violation of their human rights.

After doing a lot of research online, when Debbie Cook’s email hit my inbox at the beginning of this year, I found myself in complete agreement with the points she raised.  And, for the reasons listed below, on Tuesday, February 28th, I learned the church was planning to issue a declare on me and Steve.  This was told to me over lunch by one of my closest Scientology friends of twenty years.

My crimes?  Since I’ve received no communication from anyone at the church, or OSA, I can only speculate on their reasoning:

1.  On January 2, 2012, I forwarded Debbie Cook’s email to 3 people with whom I had a close relationship: my brother and two friends.  My brother did not respond to my email nor did he call or try to engage in any conversation.  Rather, he sent me a Knowledge Report in the mail and after a 60 plus year relationship, he just disconnected from me.  My sister-in-law disconnected shortly thereafter.

The initial response from my two friends was to say that while they didn’t agree, they still loved and treasured my friendship and would like to just agree to disagree.  However, they have both since disconnected.

2.  On February 8th, after receiving an email from two Scientology business associates asking to contract my company for services, I sent them a response letting them know of my agreement with the points Debbie Cook raised in her letter.  As lines in the sand were obviously being drawn at this point, I felt it was only appropriate they should know my feelings, in case they preferred not to engage my company for this reason.   (I never heard back from either person,      even though one of them was someone I’ve known over 30 years.)

3.  Around this same time, I got about 5 or 6 messages on Facebook, stating I was Facebook friends with Debbie Cook and requesting I un-friend her.  I didn’t un-friend Debbie Cook; I un-friended them instead.

The close friend, who over lunch told me of the declare coming down, said he was meeting with OSA’s Kathy True that following Saturday to “right this wrong.”  He said he would contact me after the meeting to let me know what occurred.

I never heard from him again.  After a very close 20-year friendship, he has disconnected from me, un-friended me on Facebook and had all of his family do the same.

At that point, I assumed a declare had been issued.  Then, a couple weeks ago, I learned about a Facebook posting below, by someone I don’t know, which resulted in a lot of FB disconnections from Scientologists.

Russell Posyton

1:07am Mar 9

“Marsha Freidman and her husband Steve Friedman have been Declared Suppressive, I know this as a fact. This Declare can be seen and verified with any MAA or OSA terminal.

“As your Facebook Friend, I would most appreciate your removing them as your Facebook friend ASAP.

“Thanks in advance for your action on this,

“Russell”

Lastly, I learned from my son who works for a Scientologist (and former friend) of some false things being said about me by the church:

1.  That the church has been trying to “handle” me for a year but I refused to take any calls, return any calls or speak to anyone. 

This is completely false.  No one from the church ever called, emailed or even stopped by my office (located until recently a few blocks away from Flag) to talk to me about any problems they had with me.

In fact, it’s quite to the contrary. This past Christmas I was very involved as usual in an event the church is associated with.  In 1989 I founded a group that I later established as a non-profit called Cherish the Children Foundation, which championed for abused, abandoned and neglected children.  For 22 years me and my organization sponsored a Christmas party for these foster children in which the church played a role as a co-sponsor.  This past year was no different and one of OSA’s staff even attended the event, without one word spoken to me throughout the planning or at the event itself.

If perhaps this statement was referring to “handling” my husband, the situation there is that when he turned in his confidential materials and said he would no longer be auditing, both his auditor and FSM (at different times) visited him at our office.  His auditor was furious about his decision, yelling at him in the driveway with accusations that he’s been “influenced” by enemies.  His communication was nasty enough that he called Steve back later that same day to apologize.  Then, two MAA’s called Steve (on the phone at the same time) yelling and threatening him about what would happen if he didn’t come into the Org to see them.  Well, if you knew Steve, you’d know he doesn’t take kindly to being threatened. Without raising his voice, but with tons of intention he told them their threats were meaningless and they wouldn’t be seeing him. They hung up the phone on him and he has never heard from anyone at the church since then.  So, if no longer wanting to audit on OT 7 is a suppressive act, he’s guilty.

2.  That I broadly spread Debbie Cook’s email.

Completely untrue. I sent Debbie Cook’s email to three people.

3.  That my FSM came to my house to talk to me but my husband slammed the door in her face.

Completely untrue.  My last home in Clearwater that we lived in for two years was very close to Flag and my FSM had never seen it.  It’s a high security condo building.  No one can even enter the building to get to our unit to have the door slammed in their face.

What did occur was our FSM stopped by one day at the office while we were working.  She arrived unannounced and went into Steve’s office.  He was not happy about a prior conversation where she called him an “a-hole.”  He told her that she didn’t have an appointment and asked her to leave.  He never left his desk to close the door or slam it in her face.  She got up and walked out and it was apparent she was upset.  Right or wrong, I asked him to call her afterwards to apologize.  He did and she accepted his apology.

To date, Steve and I have still have not heard from anyone from the church about a formal declare.  Nor do we know what other untruths have been said about us in a goldenrod, which we understand is apparently available at Flag.

So, after being an upstat, loyal and dedicated Scientologist for 43 years, my journey has led me here.

It’s been very difficult at times to confront the lies I believed for so many years and the aberrations that exist within the church at the most senior level.

During this journey, I was so careful not to speak to my friends in any great depth of what I found. I was concerned it would enturbulate them and I didn’t want to create that effect.  While I was being so careful to protect those I loved, they disconnected from me without any thought or reason when they were told the church had declared me a suppressive person.

If any one of those people were asked what they thought of me a few months ago, they would have declared me not suppressive, but rather their sister and friend, whom they loved and cherished.  Yet with nary a question, they have disconnected because they were told we have gone to the “dark side” and are now suppressive people.

As I didn’t take the opportunity to speak candidly with friends before our declare, and had I known they would have disconnected from me so easily without even a question, let me say, here and now, what I should have said to them when we were still speaking.

To them I would say, honestly and truly, the only “dark side” that exists is at the senior level of management of the C of S and OSA.  The entheta embroiled in the activities of disconnection and declares becomes very apparent when one is on the other side and subjected to disconnection and being declared.

But, like an auditing session – where you blow chunks of charge and see the world as bright and shining – that’s what it’s like to be on the other side, where suppression is non-existent.  I’m talking of the suppression of being told who you can and can’t talk to, what you can and can’t read, what you can and can’t think, what you can and can’t do, where and how you spend your time and your money.  Now that we’re on the other side, that suppression doesn’t exist anymore. It’s the most wonderful freedom Steve and I have experienced in a long time.  The sad part is that until the suppression came off, we didn’t even realize how other-determined we had agreed to be.

We have personally experienced the off-policy regime that currently exists within the church.  The following are just a few specifics that speak for themselves.

1.  Steve and I have been declared but we never received any communication from the church about this status.  Instead, we have heard only rumors that we have been declared – with NO prior ethics or justice actions, or Committee of Evidence held as clearly defined in policy.

2.  Parishioners have disconnected from us, some who are directly in comm with the MAAs office, even though the policy on disconnection was cancelled in Ron’s Journal ‘68, (an LRH lecture of 1968).  The existence of this LRH reference is completely ignored by the church.  At the same time they have reported to the media that disconnection is not practiced.  Is it really okay for any person or entity to force you to disconnect from those you love, be it family or friend?  What kind of a church does this?

3.  We have been “crush-regged” for the IAS and for fundraising for Ideal Orgs.  Yet there are numerous LRH policy  references against fundraising, many of which can be found on http://www.friendsoflrh.org/COBvsLRH/.  Can anyone truly deny that crush regging exists?  We’ve all experienced it.  On many occasions I have been regged by my auditor after finishing up at the examiner, by my D of P, Board I/C and examiner.  Finishing a checksheet cycle in qual was usually accompanied by a reg cycle with the Cram Officer, Qual Consultant or MLO.  And, the bigger reg cycles usually included the D/ED and MAA, and oftentimes an FSM (other than our own) or an OL in town.

By no stretch of the imagination could we be considered wealthy.  But we gave when we could – $100k to the IAS and thousands more to library donations in addition to the hundreds of thousands for bridge cycles over the years.

But the reg cycle that took place in the last quarter of 2010 turned the corner for us.  After being detained for over 3 hours with a host of people, some using verbal force to try and close us to take out a $100k second mortgage on our home (to no avail), we realized we were no longer giving because we wanted to; it was now being demanded of us.  I was told the donations were necessary because the church was building a “war chest.”  The irony is that while one of LRH’s stated aims for Scientology is “a civilization without war,” money is being accumulated for a war, which flies in the face of LRH’s intention.  When I finally got to look at this, I asked myself, “What war is the church fighting?”  I know what I was told by the Church powers that be, but I didn’t feel I had enough data to really understand what I was told.  When I started looking, I saw the evidence to support the fact that, yes, this church IS at war.  But unfortunately, I found that the war is against anyone who dares to expose the off-policy injustices and crimes being perpetrated.

Debbie Cook is just one example.  There are many, many other individuals who have come forth with similar or worse stories of their own.  And these very well documented stories all live online.

The question you have to ask yourself is, “What if? What if any of these reports of abuse at the highest level of the Church are true?”  When I asked myself that question, I realized I could never stand proudly and look myself in the eye, if I didn’t do something to expose the dirty secrets that are very well-known to the rest of the world, but unknown to those on the inside who choose not to look.

To those still in the church, think of LRH’s essay on Personal Integrity.

“Personal integrity is knowing what you know. What you know is what you know and to have the courage to know and say what you have observed. And that is integrity and there is no other integrity.”

And, think of the Code of Honor which says: “Your self-determinism and your honor are more important than your immediate life.  Your integrity to yourself is more important than your body.”

Another important reference is an LRH quote from 9 Dec. 1952 PDC tape called “What’s Wrong With This Universe:” LRH says, “Man’s degradation always stems from his first desertion or breakage of really the Code of Honor.  He breaks the Code of Honor and after that he starts downhill and he gets worse and worse and worse and worse because his trust in himself is worse and therefore he can’t trust what his own energy is or anything else.”

If anything I’ve said resonates even to the slightest degree, then you owe it to yourself to do as LRH says, “Look, don’t listen.”  Even if you decide the data you find is not true for you, at least you’ve taken responsibility to “know.”  The other side of the coin is to not know, and that’s when you mess with your integrity.

Personal integrity is the one thing no one can ever take from you.  Only you can give it away.

While our SP declare was intended to negatively impact us, it’s actually been a very freeing action for both of us.

Our lives are good.  Steve and I feel very fortunate that we’ve never been solely dependent on Scientologists for friends, employees and clients.  We have a successful business with a wonderful staff and a great stable of clients.  And, thankfully our business is doing well.

I know many people who have experienced disconnection from the church are not as fortunate as we are in this way.  But, just as we have created close friendships and business relationships with people outside the church, from all walks of life, we know others can do this too in time.

At the end of the day, Steve and I have chosen to maintain our Code of Honor and our personal integrity.  We’re able to freely enjoy our family and friends, to keep our business flourishing and prospering, our clients happy and to live our lives to the fullest, all while contributing to the happiness and survival of others.

In summary, due to all that has happened and the off-policy regime that exists, we’re happy to announce our formal resignation and disconnection from the current C of S.

Love,

Marsha

Miscavige Surrenders at the Alamo

Latest from Tampa Bay Times: Video of Miscavige Surrender, attorney Ray Jeffrey and Debbie Cook. 

More coverage:

Tampa Bay Times Article and Video of Debbie’s testimony yesterday

Village Voice updates from inside the courtroom

MikeBoard1200 Twitter feed from inside the courtroom

Scientology Inc.’s explains decision to withdraw injunction

Tampa Bay Times wrap up of events today

San Antonio Express wrap up of events today

Village Voice: Debbie and Wayne speak to the press

Telephone interview of Ray Jeffrey on WOAI

International Business Times article

I will be adding links to the post as they become available. -Mosey

“My Name is Ulf and I’ve Had Enough”

Many people have asked me since 1 January what they can do to help get Debbie’s New Year’s Eve email message disseminated.  I have answered a) do all you can to further the original email on “in-good-standing-folks’ lines”, then later b) contribute to her defense.  Step “a” as a front has dried up considerably after a month of “dead agenting” by Scientology Inc.  To “dead agent” someone means in Scientology parlance “discredit” her.  Scientology Inc has scrambled for more than a month now to accomplish that by telling their public that Debbie is declared suppressive and is in league with the forces of evil, and by providing them with a “dead agent” pack to counter the substance of Debbie’s email.  

One very bright recipient of that ‘dead agent’ pack did not shudder into fear, silence and  feigned agreement.  Instead, he turned it right back around and communicated directly to Flag Service Org’s chief sheeple herder, External Security Chief OSA Flag, Kathy True.  Ulf Olaffsen addressed each and every section of the “Debbie Cook Dead Agent Pack”  and wound up producing the definitive “dead agenting of the attempted dead agenting”.   

Ulf Olofsson got into Scientology in 1989 in Sweden but moved to the US
where he shortly thereafter joined the Sea Org. He went to Gold and
held various positions in the Audio division at Golden Era for 16
years. In 1993 he joined the Event Crew and participated in the
production of International Events both in the production phase at
Gold, as well as the live events themselves.

From the mid 90’s to 2006 Ulf served as a section head and then
department head over the audio productions for all films and
videos, while remaining on the event crew as the head of audio
production for the events.

Between 2007 – to 2010 Ulf did the RPF at Flag where he thoroughly
absorbed the tech of Scientology and held positions within the tech
delivery unit throughout the RPF program. In early 2010 Ulf routed
out of the Sea Org.

What follows is Ulf’s account. Please feel free to link it, or copy-text portions of it to carry on the debate and dissemination of the message of Debbie Cook’s New Years Eve email – on Scientology Inc turf. 
Hello,

 

My name is Ulf and I’ve had enough.

 

Back in the beginning of January I received Debbie Cook’s email. I left a comment on her Facebook page as I agreed to her view on KSW. I didn’t know Debbie well personally, but had dealt with her, mainly at Int. My impression of her was that of a genuine person, strong executive and well trained in LRH Tech.

 

Having been in the SO for 20 years – 16 at Int/Gold – including when Debbie was at Int, I can very much relate to her experiences and observations.

 

Later I was contacted by External Security and Kathy True (OSA Flag) about having commented favorably on Debbie’s Facebook page. I was sent a DA Pack (Dead Agent – LRH term taken from chapter 13 THE USE OF SPIES by Sun Tzu where 5 types of agents are described and one is a “Dead Agent” – term meaning to correct false information spread in a propaganda campaign.)  This pack was supposedly consisting of references by LRH which DAed or countered what Debbie had written in her email.

 

I went through this pack with an objective view, but by the time I finished I couldn’t but sit down and write a communication to Kathy as I found so many things either out-of-context or simply non sequitur.

 

I think Debbie wrote her email because from her perspective and knowledge she was applying KSW. Despite anything else that might have been “inappropriate” in the fashion she did it, I felt the same way and hence I spent quite some time putting together a DA pack of the DA pack. This was for the benefit of Kathy, but I had little hope anything would come of it. But at least I was going to give it a shot to write what I felt was true to me, AND, put it on the proper lines.

 

That was over a week ago. Then suddenly I get an email from Kathy True. Any acknowledgement(s)? No! Instead I get the following: It is NOT a communication (from an organization that is supposedly based on a philosophy centered on communication) and is creepy at best.

 

Kathy: Ulf – sent [send] me your address for snail mail.  ml, KT

 

Ulf: Kathy, as you didn’t acknowledge or comment on anything I wrote to you I am highly curious why you’re inquiring about my mailing address. What should I expect in the mail? My declare for expressing my views? Or should I expect a visit? Spencer [Flag External Security] at least had my address unless he has lost it.

 

Kathy: I’m taking this off email lines.  This is not the correct line for this.  KT

 

Ulf: Each new communication from you is non sequitur to what I wrote or asked. If you need something from me, why don’t you call me? Spencer has my number.

 

Well, I wonder what the “correct line” for this is. So far I haven’t found it, as there isn’t any correct line for “critical” thought against the Church’s actions – such activities are simply not acceptable seemingly, at least, whatever the reasons, they are justified strong enough to utterly abolish basic LRH data on communication, integrity, evaluation of data, free thought and just about any other subject that deals with decency, ARC and human compassion.

 

After I read what happened to Annie Tidman – one of my favorite staff members at Int – and after mainly reading and getting communications from people – who are all “Scientologists” – about all the “enemies” of the Church; disconnect from so and so; that person and this person is disaffected, ad infinitum, I just couldn’t take it anymore.

 

What happened to the Church I joined? Why all these internally assigned “enemies” instead of fighting the real enemy out there, and the 4th dynamic reactive mind? This is not the Church I chose to join.

 

As I believe other people have received the same or similar DA packs from OSA terminals such as Kathy, I can’t think of a better place than to provide my own DA pack at this blog, so at least the data can be made known and hopefully useful.

 

If someone like me, who so far has only communicated on “proper Church lines” gets such odd and creepy communications and responses, it may also provide a tell tale sign of the measures drummed up by the Church to attack Debbie and Wayne.

 

If you wish to communicate to me personally, you can email me at warewhulf@hushmail.com just ensure you clearly state who you are and your intentions and I will answer you.

 

Here’s the original communication to Kathy:

 

 

Kathy True                                                                                                    27 January, 2012

OSA Flag

 

Ulf Olofsson

 

Re: Debbie Cook DA references

 

Hello Kathy,

 

Thank you for providing the references I asked for in regards to the email Debbie sent out.

 

I have had some time to digest these and what you wrote raised many more questions.

 

Right off the bat I want to emphasize that my answers are not intended to snap terminals with you, nor minimize anything you lay out. Being an ex-SO from Int I quite often get communications asking about facts and figures as a means (for them) to verify if the information the inquiring person received is indeed accurate, especially after Debbie’s email. This is in addition to general Scientology inquiries from my wife and friends who know I am a Scientologist. The DA reference pack you provided me does shed some light on some aspects, but unfortunately raises more questions for me, AND not just because I don’t understand or have an MU, but because I apply key pieces of tech in my life such as “look, don’t listen” and simple evaluation of information.

 

Hence I am presenting some questions which arose while going through your DA references and which put me in a position where I feel I am not able to fully handle the originations of those inquiring, nor my own reality of the actual state of things.

 

I have highlighted in italics what you wrote and I have highlighted in bold any questions I still have which I felt were not adequately answered with the data you provided me with. If your busy schedule permits, it would be very much helpful if you could provide answers or further data on this.

 

Thanks in advance, Ulf

 

 

The result of these efforts is unprecedented expansion in the actual delivery of Scientology religious services—an increase of 40 times over previous levels—and the religion now measured in terms of more than 10,000 Churches, Missions and affiliated groups, with millions of members in 167 countries.

 

This is the first and most commonly used statement in DA material, both from your press spokesmen as well as OSA affiliated terminals. It is, in my view also the least credible and hardest one for me to honestly defend. Let me elaborate:

 

40X Expansion. Expansion is measured by comparing one unit or units at some earlier time period with the same unit or units at a later time period. Without stating the units you are measuring and the time period, it becomes very vague to argue what that expansion actually is.

 

Are you comparing total org delivery in 2012 to that of Phoenix, AZ 1952? I’m not trying to be sarcastic here. NOTS auditing hours went up in the mid-90’s after the 20 NOTS auditors fired back to each AO but has dropped ever since – a verifiable fact. Maybe Solo NOTS solo hours are up, and maybe Div 6 services such as the Basics course completions and the new TR’s & Objectives courses are up over previous times, but then this should be specified. I know for a fact that the training of classed auditors (one of the major VFP’s of an org) is not 40X, nor is the WDAH’s for general Bridge delivery.

 

  • What exactly is the 40X – what training and/or services and what time periods are you comparing?

 

10,000 Churches, missions and affiliated groups is a datum very hard to explain. No new orgs, and if I missed one or two, it still doesn’t explain the numbers, have been announced in almost a decade. Athens was one of the last, and maybe a Celebrity Center. The total number of orgs never exceeded somewhere around 160 from the time I was at Int, and from your events no new orgs have been announced since that time.

 

When I worked at Gold I routinely did A/V products tailor-made for the active missions and groups and I would get updated lists of ALL the missions in the world. The total never exceeded 600, and I got my lists directly from SMI Int, and the lists contained ALL registered missions with contact information. The numbers were roughly about 60 in Russia, less than 40 in Hungary, less than 100 in the rest of Eu, less than 10 in all of Asia, less than 40 in Africa, less than 10 in ANZO, less than 70 in all of South America and less than 200 in North America. In total the numbers were 500 – 600.

 

Yes, my information is not current, but these figures are not from the Ice Age either (2006.)

 

I know from my time at the Flag RPF that $50,000 mission starter packages were sold a lot, but a package sold doesn’t equate to a mission delivering services and it would seem to me that a Scientology org, mission or affiliated group should in some way be delivering Scientology training and auditing, even if just on an introductory level.

 

If you combine the existing orgs and missions from my 2006 verified statistics the number doesn’t exceed 750, and I used all of your websites to look for additional centers and groups and I couldn’t even locate 400 contacts in all of your websites combined.

 

Even the number of 750 is probably too high. For example, here in Hong Kong there is a Dianetics Group run by a local OT VIII. The place is open 3 evenings a week. There are never more than 1-2 people there when it is open. I’ve been there 3 times and each time it was empty. There is no sign on the street so you can’t possibly run into it, but it is located in a regular, cheap apartment on the 4th floor of a building. This is in addition to a serious amounts of outpoints observed when I went there which I initially reported in proper form to SMI Taiwan, but got no answer after 3 emails, and then to SMI Int and still got no answer, but this is a separate subject to this communication. 

 

I’m sure this is counted, but it is hardly delivering at all, and I’m sure this is the case in many places around the world. I have a close friend in Malmö in Sweden. She went to the local org in November last year. She said the place was almost empty other than some staff. I also have friends in Stockholm and Gothenburg who are on lines and they also tell me those orgs are almost empty.

 

So, with the 750 number being in question, I can only suppose that the remaining 9,250 must fall into the category of “affiliated groups”. But what is an “affiliated group”? Do you count a school teaching TWTH, or a school using study tech, or a WISE member using LRH tech in his business? Though these are using LRH tech, they are not delivering Scientology and should not be included in counting a group delivering Scientology.

 

Less than a year ago, the Scientology PR statement was 8,000 Orgs, missions and groups, and in less than a year that total has increased by 2,000.

 

I know Mr. Miscavige himself stated these figures at International events and with all due respect I don’t want to doubt the figures, but in applying logic based on the actual statistics which I was privy to I can’t get the math to add up.

 

LRH states in PR policy which you, Kathy, are very familiar with, to NEVER use lies in PR. I know how these figures were put together when I was involved with events. Marc Yager used to be the appointed “Stat Man”, i.e. he was responsible for summarizing various statistics to be announced at the events. All the information was collected by the IMPR office staff. I read through all of this information many times throughout the years. NEVER did the actual figures even approach 10,000.

 

  • What exactly is the “10,000 orgs, missions and affiliated groups” comprised of? Is there a list available, or a basic breakdown? Anyone who tries to look it up on the internet can’t even get a number 1/20th of that, so this is one of the hardest pieces of information to defend.

 

Another hard to defend datum is the “millions of members”. In all the years at Int, the total international event attendance statistic never exceeded 50,000. Most of the time it was around 30,000 – 35,000.

 

To be a member, one has to officially apply to be a member, such as becoming an IAS member, going on staff, or such a thing. When I was on the Flag RPF there were several IASA staff members on the RPF who had recently been in IASA. As I was a tech terminal within the RPF I dealt with them both as a C/S and auditor and supervisor. From this I learned that the total IAS membership number was in the hundreds of thousands – this was from 1984 to 2010. There are less than 10,000 staff around the world.

 

Again, I don’t want to just negate and I know this datum was announced by Mr. Miscavige, but with all the information I have and with all the information that can be verified on-line I can only come up with at most 25,000 active members in the US and maybe twice that amount in the rest of the world, and maybe a couple of hundred thousand others who are currently inactive but have a valid IAS membership.

 

  • What comprises “millions of members”? Anyone who ever bought a book?

 

…LRH covered this phenomena in HCO PL 7 August 1965, Issue I, SUPPRESSIVE PERSONS, MAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF:

 

“Soft sell” is another recommendation of the SP.

 

 And “build it quietly” and “get only decent people” are all part of this.

 

When somebody is demanding less reach, that person is an SP.

 

Therefore, we have another characteristic:

 

2. SPs RECOMMEND INEFFECTIVE DISSEMINATION AND FIND FAULT WITH ANY BEING DONE.

 

LRH

HCO PL 7 August 1965, Issue I

SUPPRESSIVE PERSONS,

MAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF

 

You included this reference in regards to Debbie’s email, but I couldn’t relate it to the content of her email. There is nothing in Debbie’s email that suggests soft-sell, or hard-sell for that matter in regards to the subject of SERVICES, which is what this policy is talking about. Debbie objected to the crush regging for the IAS, which regardless of validity has nothing to do with disseminating services of Scientology.

 

  • How is Debbie’s email or the content therein advocating soft-sell of Scientology?

 

3. International Association of Scientologists

 

Misinformation and wrong information has been spread on what the IAS is supposed to be.

The IAS did not replace the HASI. They are entirely different entities existing at different times with different purposes.

 

On March 12, 1966, L. Ron Hubbard announced in HCO Executive Letter that the Hubbard Association of Scientologists International, Inc. had been replaced by the Church of Scientology of California as the senior corporate entity in Scientology. This announcement included that effective 5 April 1966, all of Saint Hill, including the International Executive Division of Scientology, would be under the corporate control of the Church of Scientology of California. This ended the role of the HASI as the senior corporate entity in Scientology.

 

The International Association of Scientologists is a membership organization founded by individual Scientologists in October of 1984. It is not a management organization, but a membership organization, the purpose of which is to unite, advance, support and protect Scientology and Scientologists in all parts of the world so as to achieve the aims of Scientology as originated by LRH.

 

As with the HASI, the IAS has annual and lifetime memberships. Beyond that, there are levels of honor statuses to acknowledge the contributions of Scientologists.

 

This is a bit confusing. First you state that the IAS did not replace the HASI and that it is completely different, and, you state that it was not implemented by LRH, but founded by individual Scientologists.

 

Then you state, ”As with the HASI, the IAS has annual and lifetime memberships.” So first you lay out how they are different, and then you lay out how they are similar. Not only is this confusing and doesn’t really answer anything, but it also doesn’t explain why the IAS should exist at all as Debbie laid out as there is no LRH to back it up, neither of which is included in the material from you.

 

To DA this to someone questioning it one would have to understand how a membership organization could be created, not based on LRH, and which collects huge sums of money, compared to the relatively affordable HASI annual fees (even with inflation considered.) One can argue that the IAS funds dissemination campaigns and org buildings, but when reviewing the accounting of Ideal Org buildings, they were mainly sponsored by individual fundraisers from their local area. Also, I haven’t seen a single Scientology ad on TV since I left the SO in 2010. Apparently there was one playing on American Idol recently, but to quote from International events, “…we will flood the airways with advertising campaigns” seems to imply a large presence of Scientology media across radio, TV and the internet and I have searched and looked for it and other than what is playing on your internal websites, I have seen no sign of it.

 

These contrary facts, in my personal experience, have raised some doubt and questioning with those who read Debbie’s email and then asked me about it. Again, lots of fancy words are being proclaimed that sounds good and all, but in the physical universe the evidence is not there. How can one not question the massive IAS donations when it isn’t exchanged with tangible services or means to disseminate with verifiable, non-PR evidence?

 

Yes, I know this is what you say they do, but can any specifics be provided? Obviously an accounting would be out-security, but if new places were opening up and delivering, if ads were playing all over the place, if print ads were placed in papers all over the world, if people were sponsored to open up and run new groups instead of being charged $50,000 for a starter package, then I believe the arguments about the validity of the IAS and the questioning about the money aspect would be insignificant.

 

  • Regardless of the validity of the IAS, how is the money donated to the IAS used exactly, without generalities?

 

SCIENTOLOGY FIVE:

 

Scientology applied at a high echelon to social, political and scientific problems. This requires the earlier levels and a high state of training on theoretical and wide- application levels and the personal state of OT.

 

LRH

HCO PL of 2 August 1963, Issue I

URGENT, PUBLIC PROJECT ONE:

 

In fact, the existence of the IAS makes possible these specific Fourth Dynamic activities envisioned by LRH:

 

When considering all the policies written about the subject of what the parishioner’s money is used for, this excerpt and earlier mentions of the 4th dynamic campaigns not only fail to explain why HCO PL “WHAT YOUR FEES BUY” states that money paid for services is what provides these things, but seem non sequitur in context.

 

Here a policy about the importance of relative marketing for various categories of public is being used to justify the donations for the IAS, when there are numerous finance policy which states exactly how these campaigns are supposed to be funded, etc.

 

The hardest argument for me personally has been to explain the extreme fundraising activities which have gone on in escalating order for the last 15 years, despite very clear and non-interpretable, step-by-step direction from LRH of how to manage and deal with finances within the Church. The only “DA” I have seen so far is out-of-context excerpts which don’t “handle” the full LRH policies which Debbie quotes from.

 

  • How can this be justified despite cleat-cut LRH policies which state otherwise?

 

4. Ideal Orgs are Fulfilling LRH’s Intention for Churches of Scientology

 

The Ideal Org program is about delivering quality of service.

 

One can’t argue this, but one can argue how very posh and expensive, new buildings equal to quality of service. They are not synonymous. I wasn’t there, but I dare argue that LRH ran top quality service at Saint Hill and on the Apollo and none of these required posh buildings.

 

  • How does quality of service equate to expensive, new buildings?

 

The sole purpose of our Ideal Org strategy is to be able to deliver ALL the services LRH intended to make available to mankind and to do it in an environment conducive to people rapidly stepping onto and moving on the Bridge. And to expand all orgs to a level they can deliver that quantity and quality of service at once.

 

In lectures and policies, LRH described his vision of an Ideal Org. It is this vision that is now being put into reality, as the following excerpts show:

 

These are awfully good people in Central Organizations. These are terrific people. At a sacrifice of considerable income and a lot of other sacrifices, these fellows and girls stay on the job and get the job done. One could not render a high enough tribute to them, because it has not been easy and they have done it extremely well. And they’re still there and they’ve still got the show on the road.

 

And now we’re thinking in terms of new buildings and designing new buildings all over the world. In other words, we’ve kept it there for a long time; now we’re going to keep it there with exclamation points. We’ve even got the designs for these buildings.

 

Actually, it requires two types of building in one of these Central Organizations. It requires a city building, one that is downtown and rises straight up from the ground to some height. And it requires one out in the country which sprawls all over the place.

 – LRH

Lecture 3 Sep 1962 YOUR SCIENTOLOGY ORGS & WHAT THEY DO FOR YOU

Here again we have a problem of magnitude in regards to explaining the current actions of building expensive buildings as this one excerpt from 1962 ignores almost everything LRH later states in actual HCO PL’s covering the subject of building acquisition and the steps to take to expand, not to mention all the traffic from LRH to the Building Investment Committee, which you may not be personally familiar with, but I am.

 

Outside of the factors of the buildings of Ideal Orgs, this also doesn’t explain how the Ideal Org Program has come to replace LRH 339R and the making of Saint Hill Size orgs. The latter was THE strategy for orgs and management from 1982, whereby the Ideal Org program was mentioned in a lecture from 1962. I’m not saying the 1962 lecture is invalid, but it doesn’t appear to me to take precedence over an LRH ED from 20 years later which lays out the steps for expansion in full and exact detail.

 

I know Debbie didn’t mention the now almost infamous and cliché-used quote (among those who are questioning the Ideal Org strategy) about blowing up the headquarters.

“We own a tremendous amount of property. We own a tremendous amount of material, and so forth. And it keeps growing. But that’s not important. When buildings get important to us, for God’s sake, some of you born revolutionists, will you please blow up central headquarters? If someone had put some HE under the Vatican long ago, Catholicism might still be going. Don’t get interested in real estate. Don’t get interested in the masses of buildings, because that’s not important.

“What is important is how much service you can give the world and how much you can get done and how much better you can make things. These are important things. These are all that are important. A bank account never measured the worth of a man. His ability to help measured his worth and that’s all. A bank account can assist one to help but where it ceases to do that it becomes useless.”

One could argue that this was 1960 – before the Ideal Org lecture, but:

  • How is a lecture from 1962 the overriding principle to concentrate on posh buildings despite a multitude of other actual policies on finances and buildings which stresses delivery of service and puts the quality of the building itself as one of the last priorities? (Not including cleanliness.) No matter how one views this in light of all the policies and advices, it just doesn’t add up, and it doesn’t DA what Debbie wrote and quoted from LRH, unless one just takes the excerpt you gave and ignores everything else, but this wouldn’t be a proper evaluation of all the data, would it?
  • How and why has LRH 339R and Saint Hill Size orgs been replaced by an Ideal Org strategy, only outlined in a 1962 taped lecture?

EXPANSION. It is upon expansion that victory depends. But how much expansion is EXPANSION? Well, to give you a hint, you all know how big and busy Saint Hill was in the mid-60’s. Well, I ran it up from six staff to that in very short order indeed. It was the last org I ran directly as its ED.

 

LRH

LRH ED 339R Int

13 March 1982

 

I find it interesting that you would include an excerpt from LRH ED 339R which talks about expansion mainly in terms of delivery and numbers of staff – not the building. I don’t see how this explains anything in Debbie’s email, nor does it DA what she stated. If anything is appears non sequitur and draws your attention to, “What happened to 339R?”

 

 

LRH personally built Saint Hill and Flag. Those are big, posh, impressive orgs!

 

This is one line I can’t use unfortunately in any sort of DA action because most Scientologists know that these buildings were NOT big, posh, impressive orgs when LRH set them up and ran them. They have been made so after LRH dropped his body.

 

In 1976 Flag was a rundown hotel and the total action ordered by LRH at that time was to thoroughly clean it. No renovations were done and it certainly wasn’t posh. Quality of delivery was the only thing stressed.

 

As far as Saint Hill goes, there was nothing posh or even big about it (building-wise) when LRH ran it. It was clean and set up to function and they coped with spaces as the place expanded. A large part of the BC delivery was done in the basement of the Manor and in the Solarium and the main Castle was not even available to them like it is to AOSH UK today.

 

So, using Flag and Saint Hill to show what LRH did, just acts to contradict the whole thing; as a matter of fact, while LRH was around, not a single organization had a posh and “perfect” building, but what was emphasized was cleanliness, putting in proper org form and delivering standard auditing and training.

5. Donations For New Buildings

 

And as for obtaining donations directly for the purchase of new buildings,in HCO Policy Letter of 2 December 1968, GUNG-HO GROUPS, LRH writes specifically about it in this fashion:

 

CONTRIBUTIONS

The most heavily worked-over income point of most civic-minded groups is the obtaining of contributions.

 

These can be quite sizable.

 

They do not however, come easily unless the group has a nonprofit status and the patron can thereby deduct it from his income tax.

 

A group, however, that registers as a charity and is a member of existing nonprofit organizations can obtain contributions.

 

Governments have been known to contribute large sums to groups.

 

Contributions should be worked at but should be regarded as an irregular source of income and not counted on for the general running expenses of a group. Rather, they are like an affluence, and major projects are the best use for contributions and the best reason to get them — such as a new building for the group or a new hall, things like that.

As anyone who has done OEC Vol 0 knows, Orgs are about selling and delivering services to the public and get in public to sell and deliver to. No doubt this PL about Gung-Ho groups has its own application, but Gung-Ho groups don’t even sell and deliver services.

 

Debbie quoted LRH policies which state the opposite about fundraising as it applies to orgs.

 

  • How does a policy about Gung-Ho group explain numerous HCO PL’s about Scientology organizations NOT getting involved in fundraising, but in delivering services and getting paid for it?

 

That ends this section.

I can see that there is much potential that by now I must be viewed as extremely disaffected and full of enemy lines.

It is my hope however, that what I have written and questioned above can be at least partially answered.

I consider myself a Scientologist because I use and apply Scientology to improve conditions of my dynamics to the best of my ability.

As you well know, I don’t have a very clean ethics record in my SO career. I am not and I never was a moralist, but in the here and now I try to do what I see as right and constructive and I judge others mainly by those same attributes. I want to add that my period on ethics lines and the RPF exposed me to all the Basics, the large majority of the tech vols coupled with having M9’ed the majority of Management volumes just prior to coming to Flag. With this under my belt, I believe I have a good reason to express my thoughts and points of view regardless of my actions in the past.

I have a tendency to want to tell my family and friends about Scientology and I actually find it easy to get people interested in the religious applied philosophy of Scientology. A good example is my own wife who has studied some basic material, including Science of Survival, the Tone Scale and is suing it successfully at her work place and she agrees and sees the workability of it. She agrees to basic concepts like the Code of Honor, Personal Integrity and TWTH.

However, when it comes to the Church of Scientology, here’s where the difficulty begins. Due to the vast exposure in media, even here in Hong Kong, it is very hard to explain the actions of the Church. To someone like my wife it does little good to state, “Well, honey, Mr. Miscavige said so at an event!” and hope that it will just explain everything.

Especially for the Chinese (which my wife is) family and friends are of utmost importance and I happened to show her the Code of Honor and the Code of Behavior tape transcript early on.

LRH states:

“7. NEVER PERMIT YOUR AFFINITY TO BE ALLOYED.

In other words, never permit a feeling of affection you have to be tampered with by somebody else. You can tamper with it if you want but don’t let someone else come along and tell you that ‘the reason why you should not like Jones is because…’ and tell you a lot of things about Jones.”

This made sense to her, but when I am told to disconnect from someone (as has been demanded of me on Facebook) who has been a personal friend for maybe 20 years because he or she now has different views of the Church, i.e. “disaffected” in your terms but not gone to the media or press or tried to sue you, it becomes an impossibility to try to explain the rationale, and factually it does violates some of the very basic principles of human decency.

It is stated as early as 1951 that Dianetics and Scientology is about raising an individual on the Tone Scale and increasing his self-determinism. There is even a slogan for the VM campaign which states, “Think for yourself!” Now, if one is routinely coaxed to think along a certain pattern and be told what is and what isn’t, it goes against the very core of the basics of Scientology and THAT I am not even willing to defend myself as I would be violating my own personal integrity.

LRH states:

“Those things I tell you are true are not true because I tell you they are true. And if anything I tell you, or have ever told you, is discovered to differ from the individual observation (be it a good observation), then it isn’t true! It doesn’t matter whether I said it was true or not. Do you understand?”

 –L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology and Effective Knowledge, 15 July 1957 lecture

“Personal Integrity:

 “What is true for you is what you have observed yourself, and when you lose that you have lost   everything…

 “Nothing in Dianetics and Scientology is true for you unless you have observed it.

  “And it is true according to your observation.

  “That is all.”

–L. Ron Hubbard, book Scientology, A New Slant On Life

I’m including these quotes here to simply try to state where I’m coming from in writing this communication.

As a note worthy of mention towards the end, I wanted to relay another personal experience. During the process of routing out Mike Sutter was stressing to me not to contact specifically Marty [Rathbun] and Mike [Rinder]. At the time I didn’t think much about it.

Then later in phone conversations with Spencer, he again brought up Marty and Mike at several occasions and how I should not listen to what they had to say. I guess, just like a child who does exactly what he is told not to do, I had to find out what all the fuss was about.

I looked up Marty and Mike on the net, and also located your own websites with the Church’s attempt to DA them. I was recently directed by a Swedish Scientologist who had seen my Facebook posting on Debbie’s site to watch a video about Marty. I did so.

Now, it is peculiar how one reacts when one is on the outside, versus being on the inside, but what struck me personally in watching this video was how it stressed how Marty was the violent person AND he ADMITS to it, followed by a graphic representation of what I gather is his O/W’s or confession or something.

Not only did it strike a disharmonious cord inside me to see the Church publicly publish something which per policy was intended for HCO and Qual personnel only, but I was also struck by the fact that in the end I had the image that Marty was indeed guilty of violent acts, but he admits to it – fully – and publicly. This was made into a big deal through the narrative of the video, but for me it actually increased the respect for Marty.

I knew Marty at Int, and I knew Mike even better. I know what they did do and how they acted. But I also know that a lot of faults were committed all the way up and down the org board which cannot be justified through any policy, out-of-context interpretation. I have however NEVER seen the Church admit to a single piece of wrong-doing.

This fact alone is the hardest to DA in speaking with my non-Scientology friends and family. How come there is so much bad exposure in the media about this Church but they deny 100% of it. Marty doesn’t deny what he did and that automatically makes him more credible, especially as I share some of the experiences and facts which Marty is stating.

I’m only bringing this up as, so far, Scientologists attempting to “get my ethics in” or providing me with “DA” material, only amounts to, in the end, a blind faith in what the current Church and Mr. David Miscavige are doing and that goes against the verbal tech checklist, the quotes above and about 100 hundred other references about evaluation of data, and self-determined thought.

That is why I publicly agreed with Debbie on her Facebook profile.

So, of course you can chose to answer this, or simply file it away as “disaffected entheta.” I for one would be very happy if you would engage in dialog, as this current situation is distressing as I believe in Scientology and I’m not interested in a war, but I will not waiver away from what I know is true, and I won’t accept explanations which are taken out of context and which are clearly stated otherwise in policy.

I believe in Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard and as I know you do too, maybe with this one thing in common we can somehow figure out how to increase our ARC and KRC. I will consider any full policy by LRH or statistic or other information as requested above.

One final thing – this communication is from ME and not written or dictated by anyone else.

Thanks for listening, Ulf

Motion to Dissolve Restraining Order

Here is an objective factual, albeit partial, account of today’s proceedings published in the San Antonio Express News.

And here is the rest of the story.

In San Antonio, each motion in a case gets assigned to a random judge.  The one assigned to Ray Jeffrey’s motion to dissolve the temporary injunction today was not too keen on listening to Ray’s constitutional arguments when the full hearing with evidence on the injunction is set to be tried next Thursday 9 Feb. The one issue that did catch Judge Littlejohn’s attention was the potential effect of the overbroad temporary injunction being used to prevent Debbie and Wayne from properly preparing their defense for 9 Feb.

Miscavige’s (FSO’s) counsel claimed not to have any intention of using the temporary injunction to hinder Debbie and Wayne’s defense.  Then Mr Jeffrey pulled out the letter Miscavige’s boys faxed to Jeffrey the day before last.  The letter threatened the Baumgartens with a motion to have the court hold them in contempt.  For what?  Allegedly conferring with her legal team consultants and witnesses, namely yours truly and Mike Rinder.

The judge denied the motion to dissolve only after being assured by Miscavige’s boys that they would drop their attempts to use the court’s order to obstruct Debbie and Wayne’s defense preparation.  Back to the salt mines in preparation for the main event – Feb 9.

To Those Suing or Considering Countersuing the FSO

I’ve got more than one hundred and fifty million reasons why Miscavige ought to watch his blustery, threatening step.

The following information gives the state of reserves of the Flag Service Organization Incorporated, as of December 2009.  It is written by its highest ecclesiastical officer at that time.  It was sent, as a similar report is sent weekly, directly to David Miscavige, Chairman of the Board Religious Technology Center (the organization that is alleged not interested in stats or money in the slightest, but only in the purity of the application of the technology).

Please let us know how they respond to discovery as to what the FSO’s liquid assets are; their ability to pay back what they hold for you; and perhaps in other contexts what the value of your services to them might have been worth. We’ll provide you with more reports on how these balances changed over time along with unimpeachable witnesses to corroborate the information.

I anticipate the FSO will be claiming (perjuring itself) in court that any number of these accounts do not belong to or are not in the control of FSO.  Well, technically, they’d be right – the guy who controls them is the guy who receives the direct report each week, David Miscavige (and that would seem then to justify roping him into deposition to find out why he is withholding your money in trust when he’s got 150 million to play with).  But, legally they’d be wrong – this report is generated every single week by the highest ecclesiastical officer in the Flag Service Organization Incorporated to the highest ecclesiastical officer in all of corporate Scientology, certified weekly as the RESERVE ACCOUNTS OF FLAG SERVICE ORGANIZATION INCORPORATED.

Just getting prepared.

THE INTERNAL FLAG SERVICE ORGANIZATION REPORT TO MISCAVIGE:

10 December, 2009

RESERVES

The following was added to reserves:

                                                This week        Added in:    Disbursed:         Balance:

SUPERPOWER accounts:

Superpower funds              $60,395,201   $44,626                                 $60,439,827

Org Reserves accounts:

FSO Reserves                           $679,532                                                       $679,532

FC Reserves                              $438,194                                                       $438,194

Total Org Reserves:            $1,117,726                                                       $1,117,726

 

SOR Accounts:

BFA FC                                     $562,750          $15,744                                $578,494

GLF FC                                      $1,090,806       $15,744                                $1,106,550

BFA FSO Accounts                    $3,114,524       $129,084                           $3,243,608

GLF FSO                                    $37,679,781    $140,054                            $37,819,835

Other SOR accounts at Flag      $6,369,020                                               $6,369,029

(CMU, Property)

 Total SOR accounts:            $48,816,881    $300,636                             $49,117,517

 

HCO Book Accounts:             $39,270,463    $242,324       $141,013    $39,371,774

TOTAL IN ACCOUNTS:       $149,600,270   $587,585      $141,013 $150,046,845

________

Reformation – Division Within Corporate Scientology

Wonder if the times are really changing? On the first day of 2012 a very prominent self-professed corporate Scientologist in good standing has overtly announced a clear division within the ranks.

Former Captain Flag Service Organization Debbie Cook, who avows to abide by the disconnect policy as administered and adjudicated by David Miscavige, has announced to fellow corporate Scientologists that as far as certain policy violations go, enough is enough.

In a skilled use of the Public Relations series, Debbie characterizes abuses in a euphemistic manner so that corporate Scientologists might read and think about the gaping holes in the side of the corporate Scientology ship.  Note the Monique-Yiglingesque disavowal of the outside world having any role in correcting the beast; for many this letter will be somewhat safe to read.  For the unvarnished truth of what Debbie Cook experienced, please see:

The Final Purges Part I

The Final Purges Part II

The Final Purges Part III

This latest development will have no radical, immediate results.  However, many corporate minds that have been well-steeled against truth will be penetrated and begin to ponder what is really going on.  The letter represents the current well-withheld thoughts of a number of other prominent corporate Scientologists.  Look for some of them to make some noise in early 2012.

This year has begun with a most interesting, if predictable, development.

Prepare to deliver.

Debbie Cook’s email:

Dear Friend,
I am emailing you as a friend and fellow Scientologist. As we enter a new
year, it is hoped that 2012 can be a year of great dissemination and a year
of real progress up The Bridge for all Scientologists.

Although I am not in the Sea Org right now, I served in the Sea Org at Flag
for 29 years. 17 of those years were as Captain FSO. I am a trained auditor
and C/S as well as an OEC, FEBC and DSEC.

I am completely dedicated to the technology of Dianetics and Scientology and
the works of LRH. I have seen some of the most stunning and miraculous
results in the application of LRH technology and I absolutely know it is
worth fighting to keep it pure and unadulterated.

My husband and I are in good standing and we are not connected with anyone
who is not in good standing. We have steadfastly refused to speak to any
media, even though many have contacted us.

But I do have some very serious concerns about out-KSW that I see permeating
the Scientology religion.

I have the utmost respect for the thousands of dedicated Scientologists and
Sea Org members. Together, we have come through everything this world could
throw at us and have some real impingement on the world around us. I am
proud of our accomplishments and I know you are too.
However there is no question that this new age of continuous fundraising is
not our finest moment.

LRH says in HCO PL 9 Jan 51, An Essay on Management,
“drop no curtains between the organization and the public about anything.”
-LRH

Based on this policy I am communicating to you about some situations that we
need to do something about within our religion, within our group.

Actions that are either not covered in policy or directly violate LRH policy
and tech include the extreme over-regging and fund-raising activities that
have become so much a part of nearly every Sea Org org and Class V org as
well as every “OT Committee”. This fundraising is not covered anywhere in
LRH policy.

Hardworking Sea Org members and the dedicated staff of orgs around the world
aren’t choosing to do these actions. Nor are the OTs. I am sure they would
be more than happy if they could just get on with direct dissemination of
Scientology as they have done for so many years.

But the truth is that this is being driven from the very highest echelons
within the Scientology structure and clearly there is a lot of pressure to
make targets that are being set.

The IAS: The IAS was created unbeknownst to LRH in 1984 by Marc Yager and
David Miscavige. This was supposed to be based on LRH policies on the
subject of membership and the HASI, however the IAS is nothing like the
membership system described by LRH which only has two memberships and is
covered in HCO PL 22 March 1965 “Current Promotion and Org Program Summary,
Membership Rundown” and states:

“There are two memberships…”- LRH

LRH lists there the INTERNATIONAL ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP and gives its cost at 10
pounds sterling or $30 US. He also lists a LIFETIME MEMBERSHIP which is
priced at $75 US. There are no other memberships or statuses approved or
known to LRH.

Furthermore, membership monies are supposed to go directly to the org where
the membership is signed up, and the money used for dissemination by that
org, in that area. This is covered in HCOPL 1 Sept 1965R Membership
Policies.

“It all goes into the HCO Book Account in the area where the membership is
brought and is not part of the organization’s weekly gross income.
Membership monies go to dissemination”.- LRH

Currently membership monies are held as Int reserves and have grown to well
in excess of a billion dollars. Only a tiny fraction has ever been spent, in
violation of the policy above. Only the interest earned from the holdings
have been used very sparingly to fund projects through grants. In fact many
of the activities you see at IAS events are not actually funded by the IAS,
but rather by the Scientologists involved.

Think about it, how many ads disseminating Scientology, Dianetics or any Scn
affiliated programs have you seen on TV? Heard on the radio? Seen in
newspapers? I haven’t seen one in the 4 years I have lived in San Antonio,
Texas, the 7th largest city in the US. How many have you seen?

Donating anything more than a lifetime membership to the IAS is not based on
LRH policy. The article “What Your Donations Buy” (The Auditor, The Monthly
Journal of Scientology No. 51, 1970) is clearly talking about how the church
uses your donations for Dianetics and Scientology services. Next time you
are asked to donate outside of services, realize that you are engaged in
fundraising and ask to see something in writing from L. Ron Hubbard that
this is something he expects from you as a Scientologist.

New Org Buildings: LRH also never directed the purchase of opulent buildings
or the posh renovations or furnishings for every org.

In fact, if you read HCO PL 12 March 75 Issue II, “The Ideal Org”, which is
what this program has been called, and nowhere in it will you find 20
million dollar buildings or even any reference to the poshness of org
premises at all as part of LRH’s description of an “Ideal Org”. Instead, an
Ideal Org was one that delivered and moved people up The Bridge – something
that is not part of this “Ideal Org” program.

LRH says in the PL that an Ideal Org:

“would be clean and attractive enough not to repel its public” – LRH.

This is all it says about the state of the building.

As a result of this off-policy alteration of the Ideal Org PL, we have the
majority of top OTs, now deemed “OT Ambassadors”, heavily engaged in
fund-raising activities that include “bingo”, “pirate dinners”, “knitting
classes”, “hay rides”, and many other activities strictly revolving around
raising funds for the required multi-millions of dollars to fund their
“Ideal Org”. As part of this, people around every org are now asked to
donate to their local “Ideal Org” instead of their own services or their own
Bridge.

LRH says in HCO PL Org Ethics and Tech:

“GET RID OF DISTRACTIONS FROM SCIENTOLOGY in your org. Baby-sitting or
raffle tickets and such nonsense.”-LRH

Yet these distractions are rampant as they are being used as fund-raisers to
get money for the huge quotas being issued to fund the “Ideal Org”.

“If the org slumps… don’t engage in ‘fund-raising’ or ‘selling postcards’
or borrowing money. Just make more income with Scientology.
It’s a sign of very poor management to seek extraordinary solutions for
finance outside Scientology. It has always failed.”

“For orgs as for pcs, ‘Solve It With Scientology’.

“Every time I myself have sought to solve financial or personnel in other
ways than Scientology I have lost out. So I can tell you from experience
that org solvency lies in more Scientology, not patented combs or
fund-raising barbeques.”

HCO PL 24 February 1964, Issue II, Org Programming, (OEC Vol. 7, p. 930)

The point is that Scientologists and OT’s need to be training, auditing and
disseminating to raw public- not regging each other or holding internal
fundraisers.

Out Tech: Over the last few years we have seen literally hundreds and
hundreds of people who were validated as clear using the CCRD as developed
by LRH now being told they are not Clear. This included hundreds of OTs who
were then put onto NED as a “handling”. LRH clearly forbid any Dianetics to
be run on OTs in HCOB “Dianetics Forbidden on OTs”. This is out tech. This
entire technical “handling” was directed personally by COB RTC and was done
on thousands of OTs. But it was based not on an LRH HCO Bulletin, but rather
based on a single C/S instruction where LRH C/Sed one pre-OT who had not
achieved the state of clear but was mid OT III and not making it. LRH
directed a solo handling that the pre-OT was to do to get himself to achieve
the state of Clear. This LRH C/S taken out of context was then used to
implement a technical handling that was in direct violation of an LRH HCOB.

This and other “technical handlings” done on Solo NOTs auditors created
great expense and hardship on Solo NOTs auditors around the world as they
were made to do these handlings to continue on the level.

Then there are the “fast grades at Flag” that no other org has. How can it
be that Flag has been delivering grades differently to the rest of the world
for the last 3 years? Whatever the problem is, the fact is that having “fast
Grades” at Flag creates a hidden data line and is a HIGH CRIME and the
subject of an entire policy letter called HCOPL “TECH DEGRADES” which LRH
has placed at the start of every Scientology course.

More recently the fad seems to be that nearly everyone needs to “re-do their
Purif and do a long objectives program”, including many OTs mid Solo NOTs.

There is nothing wrong with doing objectives, but it is a clear violation of
HCOB ‘MIXING RUNDOWNS AND REPAIRS” to have a person mid a rundown or OT
level be taken off it and placed on an objectives program.

Solo NOTs auditors are also being made to get their objectives from a Class
IX auditor at great expense as they are not being allowed to co-audit.

Flag has made many millions of dollars on the above listed out tech
handlings because OTs mid Solo NOTs are forced to get these out-tech actions
to be able to get back onto and stay on the level and complete it. Not to
mention the spiritual effects of the out tech that this has on each OT.

I myself was subject to these out tech “handlings”, including extensive FPRD
mid Solo NOTs. It took its toll in many ways, including physical situations
I am still dealing with today. So I have some reality of the hardship
caused.

LRH Command Structure: LRH left us with a complex and balanced command
structure, with our orgs led by the Office of ED International. This office
was considered so important that LRH created a special management group
called the Watch Dog Committee whose only purpose was to see that this
office and the other needed layers of management existed. LRH ED 339R speaks
of this extensively as the protection for our Church. But these people are
missing. And not just some. As of just a few years ago there were no members
of the office of ED Int on post, not to mention top execs throughout the
International Management structure.

You may have also wondered… where is Heber, the President of the Church?
What about Ray Mitthoff, Senior C/S International, the one that LRH
personally turned over the upper OT Levels to? How about Norman Starkey,
LRH’s Trustee? What happened to Guillaume – Executive Director
International? And Marc Yeager, the WDC Chairman? What happened to the other
International Management executives that you have seen at events over the
years?

The truth is that I spent weeks working in the empty International
Management building at Int. Empty because everyone had been removed from
post. When I first went up lines I was briefed extensively by David
Miscavige about how bad all of them were and how they had done many things
that were all very discreditable. This seemed to “explain” the fact that the
entirety of the Watchdog Committee no longer existed. The entirety of the
Executive Strata, which consisted of ED International and 11 other top
International executives that were the top executives in their particular
fields, no longer existed. That the Commodore’s Messenger Org International
no longer existed. All of these key command structures of Scientology
International, put there by LRH, had been removed.

There were hundreds and hundreds of unanswered letters and requests for help
from org staff, written based on LRH ED 339R where LRH says that staff can
write to these top executives in the Exec Strata for help. But this is not
possible if all these execs have been removed and no one is there to help
them or to get evaluations and programming done to expand Scientology.

Well, after that I got to spend some quality time with Heber, Ray Mithoff,
Norman Starkey, Guillaume, as well as the entirety of International
Management at the time, who were all off post and doing very long and harsh
ethics programs. These have gone on for years and to the only result of that
they are still off post. There is no denying that these top executives have
all gradually disappeared from the scene. You don’t see them at the big
events anymore or on the ship at Maiden Voyage.

David Miscavige has now become the “leader” of the Scientology religion. Yet
what LRH left behind was a huge structure to properly manage all aspects of
the Scientology religion. He put a complete and brilliant organizational
structure there, not one individual. There never was supposed to be a
“leader” other than LRH himself as the goal maker for our group.

There is a situation here and even if you have not been to the International
Management Base you should be able to see that over regging and frequent
tech changes are not OK and you have a responsibility to do something to
Keep Scientology Working. You should be able to find and read the
references on membership in OEC Volume 6. Find and read the HCO PL entitled
“The Ideal Org” (Data Series 40). Find and read the references on org
buildings, including HCO PL 24 Aug 65 II, Cleanliness of Quarters and Staff,
Improve our Image. Also, HCO PL 17 June 69, The Org Image.

If you don’t want to make waves or put yourself in danger of being taken off
the level or denied eligibility, then there are some simple things you can
do. First and foremost, withdraw your support from off policy actions. Stop
donating to anything other than your own services and actual Bridge
progress. Simply demand to see an LRH reference that says you are required
to make other such donations. No one will be able to produce any references
because there aren’t any.

Stop supporting any of the activities that are being done to forward
off-policy fund-raising in your area.

LRH says what he expects of a Scientologist – that is what he expects you to
do. In fact he put it in HCOB 10 June 1960 Issue I, Keeping Scientology
Working Series 33, WHAT WE EXPECT OF A SCIENTOLOGIST. Read it and follow it.

The other thing you can do is to send this email to as many others as you
can, even if you do it anonymously.

Please keep this email among us, the Scientologists. The media have no place
in this. You may wonder why I have not written a KR and gone about my
business. The answer is, I have. But there is no longer anyone to send that
KR to.

But you can and should write reports and bring off-policy to the attention
of local org executives and local Sea org members.

We are a strong and powerful group and we can affect a change. We have
weathered many storms. I am sorry that I am the one telling you, but a new
storm is upon us. It’s waves are already in the media and the world around
us.

The truth is that as a Scientologist you are more able, more perceptive and
have a higher integrity. Scientology is supposed to allow you to “think for
yourself” and never compromise your own integrity. And most certainly LRH
held every Scientologist responsible to KEEP SCIENTOLOGY WORKING.

I am not trying to do anything other than affect a change in serious off
policy actions occurring. My husband and I have most of our family and many
many good friends who are Scientologists. I have not been real interested in
sticking my neck out like this.

However, I also know that I dedicated my entire adult life to supporting LRH
and the application of LRH technology and if I ever had to look LRH in the
eye I wouldn’t be able to say I did everything I could to Keep Scientology
Working if I didn’t do something about it now.

We all have a stake in this. It is simply not possible to read the LRH
references and not see the alterations and violations that are currently
occurring.

You have a very simple obligation to LRH. Don’t participate in anything off
policy, and let others know they should not either. If every person who
reads this email does nothing more than step back from off-policy actions we
would have changed direction. If we took all that energy and directed it
into auditing, training and raw public dissemination, we would be winning.

And that is what I wish for you and all of us as we ring in this new year.

ARC,

Debbie Cook

See Village Voice Coverage:  Tony Ortega’s take