||||| Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 06:37:56 -0500 From: Anonymous Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above. It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software. Please report problems or inappropriate use to the remailer administrator at . References: <20020903072001.30984.qmail@nym.alias.net> <829ee8d867b158fcad85d7274cb94389@paranoici.org> Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal Subject: (amicus) J, exhibit: Rank in the Sea Org Message-ID: <81a6a11317a50eafa3530b07224f3d20@remailer.xganon.com> Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@dizum.com Organization: mail2news@dizum.com Lines: 170 Path: news2.lightlink.com!news.lightlink.com!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.abs.net!news.itconsult.net!news.dizum.com!sewer-output!mail2news-x3!mail2news-x2!mail2news Xref: news2.lightlink.com alt.religion.scientology:1551127 comp.org.eff.talk:105662 misc.legal:433692 J. RANKS AND HIERARCHY IN TH SEA ORG. The following is a newsgroup article, but it quotes a primary source viz testimony of Robert Vaughan Young in Wollersheim, which gives details of Sea Org ranks. =========================================================== On Mon, 01 Oct 2001 17:47:32 +0200, Tilman Hausherr wrote: | |Could someone repost the RVY posting where he explains the difference |between the Brevet and the non-Brevet ranks? He explained this to some extent in his affidavit in the Wollersheim case: SEA ORG RANKS AND SENIORITY 48. There are two types of ranks within the Sea Org: brevet and earned.Earned ranks are awarded not unlike in military service, moving up one rank at a time, from enlisted to officer. As in the military, these are permanent, unless the person is demoted. They are given by a Sea Organization Officer Selection Board. However, as CSI explained to the IRS in their application for tax exemption: Brevet ranks are assigned to certain positions within the Church and have the purpose of equating rank and ecclesiastical authority. One holds a brevet rank as long as one holds the position to which the brevet rank applies. See Exhibit "II-99." 49. In other words, the most senior officer at an organization might have an earned rank of lieutenant or even an enlisted rank but they are given the brevet rank of "Captain" of the organization and wear that insignia while he/she holds that position. MISCAVIGE USED THIS TO DECEIVE THE COURT 50. David Miscavige used this brevet/earned ranking to hide his true Sea Org position and power from the court. In his declaration to this court dated September 24, 1999, he says (page 6, starting line 25): I currently hold the honorary rank of Captain. Many [sic] other individuals also hold the rank of Captain in RTC, CSI and other churches of Scientology. Many of those who hold the rank did so before I was a Captain. Just as I do not "outrank" them, they do not "outrank" me. On page 7, line 11, he continues: Any allegation that the "power structure" of Scientology stems from membership or rank in the Sea Organization is ludicrous. It is an invented story that ignores the realities of corporate separateness in an attempt to forward a legal strategy to extract monies from Scientology churches that have never had anything to do with Wollersheim. My authority stems from my corporate position, and I neither need nor use my rank in the Sea Org in the performance of my duties. 51. However, in CSI's response to the IRS (page 3-5), CSI gives the rankings of the most senior Sea Organization officers. According to CSI, the highest ranking officers in the Sea Organization are as follows: NAME RANK EARNED RANK David Miscavige Captain Captain Marc Yager Captain (Brevet) Lt. Commander Ray Mithoff Captain (Brevet) Lt. Commander Mark Rathbun Captain (Brevet) Ensign Mark Ingber Captain (Brevet) Ensign Guillaum Leserve Captain (Brevet) Lt. Commander Tom Ashworth Commander (Brevet) Petty Officer 1st Class Ken Delderfield Commander (Brevet) Ensign John Eastment Commander (Brevet) Lieutenant Cherie Eves Commander (Brevet) Lieutenant Greg Hughes Commander (Brevet) Midshipman Diana Hubbard Commander (Brevet) Midshipman Katherine Lemmer Commander (Brevet) Petty Officer 3rd Class William Lindstein Commander (Brevet) Warrant Officer Pablo Lobato Commander (Brevet) Chief Petty Officer Myles Mellor Commander (Brevet) Chief Petty Officer Ron Miscavige Commander (Brevet) Midshipman Amy Mortland Commander (Brevet) Midshipman Ellen Prager Commander (Brevet) Chief Petty Officer Cathy Rinder Commander (Brevet) Warrant Officer Mike Rinder Commander (Brevet) Ensign Norman Starkey Commander RA Commander RA Barbara Tompkins Commander (Brevet) Ensign Jens Urhskov Commander (Brevet) Warrant Officer Kurt Weiland Commander (Brevet) Midshipman Barbara Widmore Commander (Brevet) Petty Officer 3rd Class The court should note that David Miscavige is, by their own sworn document, at the top of the rankings and the only person holding a non- brevet rank of Captain. And this list is, according to them, the highest ranking officers in the Sea Organization. His claim that there are "many" others who hold the rank of Captain fails to point out that the others are brevet. His is the only non-brevet rank of Captain. This is a clear attempt to hide his true position from the court. See Exhibit "II-99." 52. Miscavige also told this court, "?I neither need nor use my rank in the Sea Org in the performance of my duties." That too is a lie and can be shown by Scientology's own internal documents. 53. Perhaps the most telling use of his rank and position in the Sea Org occurred in 1988 when David Miscavige cancelled what had been presented as the last message from L. Ron Hubbard, calling it a forgery. Hubbard's message was dated January 19, 1986, about a week before Hubbard died, and was issued as Flag Order 3879, "The Sea Org & The Future." A true and correct copy of this document is attached hereto as Exhibit "JJ-99." At that time, it was issued to all Scientologists and was even reduced in size and issued (with Miscavige's approval) along with a photograph of Hubbard so Sea Org members could put it on their desks. In that Flag Order, Hubbard said he was stepping down as Commodore and assuming the rank of Admiral. He also created a new Sea Org rank of "Loyal Officer" that was "directly above the rank of Captain" and appointed Pat Broeker as the first Loyal Officer. Pat Broeker had lived with Hubbard for years while Hubbard was in seclusion and had become his closest aide and confidant. This alone gave Broeker considerable power and the promotion meant that he would outrank Miscavige in the Sea Org. 54. With Hubbard's death, a power struggle ensued over the next two years, culminating in David Miscavige canceling this Flag Order on April 18, 1988, claiming (with no proof or evidence) that it was fabricated by Broeker. The cancellation was issued as a Sea Organization issue with no other authority but that of "Captain David Miscavige." A true and correct copy of the cancellation is attached hereto as Exhibit "KK-99." [Box B, flag conditions orders] It must be stressed that this is no small accomplishment, to cancel what had been represented as Hubbard's last message to all of Scientology, with no evidence or documentation but on the word and rank of Miscavige alone. 55. Captain Miscavige was once deposed on this exact issue. On July 19, 1990, Miscavige was in deposition in Bent Corydon vs. Church of Scientology, International, Inc., et al. Attorney for the Plaintiff, Toby L. Plevin, tried to ask Miscavige about this cancellation of Hubbard's last message. While Miscavige admits that he wrote the cancellation (p 246, line 13), when he is asked what "investigation" he conducted to reach the conclusion that it was a forgery, the three attorneys on his side of the table begin to object (starting page 247, line 13) before Miscavige is finally instructed not to answer and not say what evidence he had that Hubbard had not written that "last message." (Page 249, line 2-12) (See Exhibit "H-99.") COMMAND CHANNELS BOOKLET IS FURTHER PROOF 56. Further proof as to the importance of the Sea Organization is found in their "Command Channels of Scientology" booklet which was issued to all Scientology staff. In that booklet, they say on page 8 that, "International Management is the top echelon of the Church" that it "comprises several units, each with its specific responsibility and duties. The top level of this echelon is the WATCHDOG COMMITTEE." On page 9, they say, "Different types of organizations in Scientology are grouped into sectors and each of those sectors has management organizations to give them direction." The Sea Org is shown as one of those sectors, hardly the position one would give a loose-knit "fraternal order" that has no role in management . See Exhibit "X-99." 57. Also in their "The Command Channels of Scientology" booklet they say on page 6: The Chairman of the Board RTC [Miscavige] is the most senior position of the Religious Technology Center. The Chairman of the Board sees that RTC accomplishes its purpose and he has under him the Inspector General, who runs the day-to-day affairs of RTC. Then on page 7, of Exhibit "X-99," they say, "RTC is the organization which polices the command channels of Scientology?" 58. Since the command channels are those channels on which the orders are given and compliances are sent back, there is no doubt that the organization that "polices" these has the authority over them. ||||| From: Anonymous User Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above. It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software. Please report problems or inappropriate use to the remailer administrator at . References: <20020903072001.30984.qmail@nym.alias.net> <829ee8d867b158fcad85d7274cb94389@paranoici.org> Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal Subject: (amicus) J, exhibit: 'Long Rail of controversy' Message-ID: <68b69afd2a49ea7e54eb845fe6d4c048@remailer.havenco.com> Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 11:50:31 +0000 (UTC) Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net Lines: 469 Path: news2.lightlink.com!news.lightlink.com!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!eusc.inter.net!fr.clara.net!heighliner.fr.clara.net!newsfeed.vmunix.org!newsfeed.eunet.at!newsfeed.austria.eu.net!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news-x3!mail2news-x2!mail2news Xref: news2.lightlink.com alt.religion.scientology:1551129 comp.org.eff.talk:105663 misc.legal:433693 K. PRESS ARTICLES, GILLETTE AND RAWITCH (WORTH SKIMMING) Los Angeles Times, August 27, 1978 Scientology: A Long Trail of Controversy By Robert Gillette and Robert Rawitch On May 14, 1951, Lafayette Ronald Hubbard wrote to the U.S. attorney general to plead for help in fending off a Communist conspiracy, dedicated, he averred, to destroying him. "When, when, when," he wrote, "will we have a roundup?" Rambling through seven single-spaced typewritten pages, the letter was, to all appearances, the heartfelt cry of a troubled man. A successful science fiction writer in the 1940s, L. Ron Hubbard, as he signed himself, had gone on to bigger things. He had "discovered" (not invented, he insisted) dianetics, an amalgam of Freudian psychology and computer terminology which he propounded as the answer to human aberration, emotional anxiety, psychosomatic illness and the common cold. His book, "Dianetics - The Modern Science of Mental Health," had been an instant success in May of 1950, and Hubbard had poured the proceeds from his best-seller into the formation of the Hubbard Dianetic Research Foundation with branches in Elizabeth, N.J.; Chicago; Washington, D.C.; New York, Los Angeles and Honolulu. Only a year later, state medical authorities in New Jersey were investigating him on suspicion of conducting a medical school without a license, his foundation was on the verge of bankruptcy, his second marriage was in shambles and he suspected his wife and many of his associates of Communist activities. "The Communist Party have in the past year wiped out a half-a-million dollar operation for me, have cost me my health and have considerably retarded material of interest to the United States Government," Hubbard said in the letter, which the FBI released in 1977 under provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. Church spokesmen in Los Angeles were shown a copy of the letter by Times reporters in early August and have not challenged its authenticity. Russians, moreover, were trying to lure him to the Soviet Union to acquire his secrets of brainwashing while at the same time trying to destroy dianetics, "an American Science," Hubbard said. And there were mysterious attacks, three in all, each while he slept. The most severe, Hubbard wrote, occurred in February, 1951, in his apartment on N. Rossmore St. in Los Angeles. "About two or three o'clock in the morning, the apartment was entered, I was knocked out, had a needle thrust into my heart to give it a jet of air to produce a coronary thrombosis and was given an electric shock with a 110-volt current. All this is very blurred to me. I had no witnesses." It was not the first such communication the Justice Department had received from Hubbard and it would not be the last. Four years later, the FBI made the notation "appears mental" on one of his missives and ceased acknowledging them. Whatever the FBI may think of him, it is unlikely that the FBI or anyone else outside Hubbard's small circle of loyal followers quite anticipated his capacity for rebounding from misfortune. Twenty-seven years later, the 67-year-old Hubbard stands venerated by several hundred thousand followers in the United States, Europe and scattered parts of Africa and Asia as the founding patriarch of the Church of Scientology. >From a faddish metaphysical cult in the early 1950s, Hubbardian dianetics became Hubbardian Scientology and in 1954 began to assume the mantle of a new religion. Since the early 1960s, Scientology under the guidance of Hubbard and his third wife, Mary Sue, has metamorphosed into an elaborate Orwellian theocracy of imposing international scale, influence and wealth. In the intervening years Hubbard's expanding organization has left a trail of controversy across four continents as medical authorities attacked Scientology's therapeutic claims and governments resisted its efforts to gain the special protections that Western society accords to religious organizations - notably, tax-exempt status. Scientology in turn lashed back at its critics with vitriolic combativeness. "Don't ever defend. Always attack ... Only attacks resolve threats," Hubbard advised his expanding worldwide organization in a policy laid down Aug. 15, 1960. "If attacked ... always find or manufacture enough threat against them to cause them to sue for peace." "People who attack Scientology are criminals," Hubbard wrote in later church documents. "Politician A stands up on his hind legs in a parliament and brays for condemnation of Scientology. When we look him over we find crimes - embezzled funds, moral lapses, a thirst for young boys - sordid stuff." Accusations, in the late 1960s and early 1970s by orthodox psychologists and psychiatrists, that Scientology represented a detriment to community mental health and involved unscrupulous business practices prompted formal government inquiries in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, England and South Africa. The practice of Scientology was banned in much of Australia from 1965 until 1973, when the organization won recognition as a church. Britain in 1968 banned the entry of foreign nationals, including Hubbard and his wife, for the purpose of studying Scientology. Last March, a French court convicted Hubbard and two associates in absentia of fraudulent medical practice and set a fine equivalent to $7,000. Through it all, Hubbard has remained an enigmatic, reclusive figure, insulated by his church from the tribulations of the world, isolated from most of his followers, preoccupied with churning out doctrinal texts, policy directives and tape-recorded sermons that his spokesmen estimate exceed a cumulative total of 25 million words. Since the British ban was instituted in 1968, Hubbard has been barred from what Scientologists term the "Mother Church," a 20-room mansion on a 57-acre estate at East Grinstead, Sussex. Saint Hill Manor, as the estate was known in the days when the Maharajah of Jaipur owned it, has, since 1959, been the international headquarters of the Church of Scientology. In lieu of British residence, Hubbard spent much of his time until last year aboard his 3,280-ton converted ferry, the Apollo, plying the Atlantic and Mediterranean in the company of a Scientology elite called the Sea Org, whose members customarily sign a "billion-year contract" swearing fealty to "Ron". Church spokesmen say the Sea Org now has its headquarters on land (at a $2.8 million center purchased in 1975 at Clearwater, Fla.), that the Apollo was sold 14 months ago, and that Hubbard is currently "travelling in the United States and Europe" looking for a permanent place to settle in his retirement years. Reliable, independent estimates of Scientology's following do not exist. Although the numbers are undoubtedly large, figures provided by the church itself are often inconsistent and sometimes appear inflated. Spokesmen for Scientology, for example, often assert that theirs is "the world's fastest-growing religion." Hubbard himself said in 1964 that his followers were "in the millions" and were doubling in number every six months - a rate at which the membership of Scientology would have exceeded the entire world's population before the end of 1969. At various times and places in the past two years, Scientology spokesmen have put the organization's adherents at between 4.5 million and 15 million. The church currently claims 3.5 million in the United States and another 1 million abroad, but acknowledges that these figures include everyone who has either taken one Scientology counselling course or bought two of its books. When pressed for the number of people consistently involved in Scientology in the United States, spokesmen have - for the past two years - put forward the figure of 600,000. Whatever the precise numbers, Scientology plainly appeals to thousands of people here and abroad who, as church officials point out, would not continue investing in its counselling if they felt it were of no benefit. Testimonials from such celebrity-participants as former '49er quarterback John Brodie and actor John Travolta have helped enhance Scientology's public image. And there is no reason to believe that Scientology's parishioners have been cognizant of, much less a party to, the controversial activities of the church's worldwide Guardian Office. The grassroots organization of Scientology consists of churches in large urban areas supplemented by more numerous missions (formerly called "franchises") that are often small storefront operations. To non- members, perhaps the most familiar distinguishing characteristic of Scientology is the organization's aggressive sidewalk recruitment appeal to take a "free personality test." An organizational list that the California headquarters church in Los Angeles filed in a federal court proceeding on May 10, 1977, enumerates 16 churches and 72 smaller missions in the United States and an additional 33 churches and 47 missions in 16 other countries. According to an attractive book published by the California organization and entitled, "Scientology: A World Religion Emerges in the Space Age," all of these entities are "autonomous corporations operated on a separate basis but united by a theological bond of common doctrine, practice and belief." Although the book does not say so, the principal churches of Scientology around the world are also united with the Mother Church in England by the electronic bond of telex. Saint Hill Manor both as an advanced training school and as command center for the Hubbard Communications Office, an incorporated administrative body from which emanates a steady stream of doctrinal, internal management and fiscal policy directives complete with coded marginalia and security classifications that give them more the ambience of State Department cables to embassies overseas than ecclesiastic communications. Among material the FBI seized from the church, for example, is a Sept. 17, 1976, document listing 18 pages concerning codes and security classifications for "various communications." Saint Hill is also world headquarters for the Guardian Office, a secretive, parallel administrative structure that extends into the principal churches abroad. In a policy letter from the Hubbard Communications Office dated May 20, 1970, and transmitted to churches overseas, Mary Sue Hubbard explained that the Guardian Office's purview would include such sensitive matters as liaison with news media and government agencies as well as "Special Guardian relations," "Opposition Group relations," and "Troublesome relations." Federal investigators and former church officials have said that the Guardian Office's responsibilities include intelligence gathering and covert operations against those whom the church regards as its enemies, or "suppressive persons" or "squirrel groups," in Scientology's terms. While communiques flow out from Saint Hill Manor, money flows in. Of each church's and mission's gross receipts, 10% is tithed to world headquarters. The church does not provide a public accounting of its expenditures, except to say that L. Ron Hubbard lives largely on royalties from his works including his 1950 "Dianetics," now in its 26th printing. Although the essentials of dianetics have become the doctrine of Scientology, the church appears to consider the book itself obsolete. Indeed, the California branch said in 1974 that "the obsolescence of early dianetics is extremely well-known among Scientologists." The book's obsolescence has not deterred the Church of Scientology from promoting its sale, however. Last May the church launched a $650,000 national television and magazine advertising campaign in 21 cities to push sales of the 28-year-old book, which costs $2 in paperback. A similar campaign in Los Angeles last year helped sell 100,000, a fifth of all those sold in the United States in 1977. George Chelekis, a Scientology publicist in New York, said the church is also spending another $125,000 this year to promote a "revised version" of Hubbard's 1958 book, "Have You Lived Before This Life?" Data on the Church of Scientology's worldwide finances are as elusive as its membership figures. But the organization's practice of buying multimillion-dollar properties with hard cash suggests, along with other evidence, a robust financial condition. In January of 1974, for example, the Church of Scientology paid $1.1 million for a former Jesuit novitiate and 805 acres of land near Salem, Ore. In December, 1975, the church bought an old hotel and nearby bank building near Clearwater, Fla., for conversion to an administrative and training center, and paid in excess of $2.3 million by a check drawn on a Luxembourg bank. In June, 1976, the California church paid $5.5 million in cash for a disused Cedars of Lebanon hospital in Los Angeles which now serves as Scientology's North American headquarters. A variety of internal church documents, which were not intended for publication, suggest a phenomenal income growth during the 1970s - and in turn help explain the urgency with which the church has sought to protect its assets with the tax-exempt status of a religious organization. One such document, a mimeographed "Order of the Day," circulated April 9, 1973, aboard Hubbard's flagship Apollo, states that the worldwide organization's gross annual income grew from 390,666 British pounds (about $1 million at prevailing rates) in 1966-67 to $8.5 million in 1972-73. The document projected 1974 gross income at the equivalent of $24 million. Former church officials have estimated the church's annual gross income worldwide at $100 million or more. Most of Scientology's income derives from the fees or "fixed donations" that its churches and missions charge for the organization's novel form of psychological counselling or "auditing" that constitutes Scientology's main ecclesiastical activity. Parishioners are expected to spend sums ranging from hundreds to thousands of dollars for auditing courses that promise to relieve anxieties, expand one's self-esteem and "awareness," enhance the intellect and open the way to self- determination and "total freedom." These promises are founded upon Hubbard's conception of the human mind and its foibles and he began to elucidate on them in his 1950 book on dianetics. Hubbard wrote that the source of all human aberration and most illness was a primitive subconscious he called the "reactive mind." This, he said, was a "memory bin" of painful traumatic experiences recorded in the form of "engrams." As the root of all evil, engrams interfered with the workings of an unerringly rational, computerlike "analytical mind." In a theme of prenatal violence that weaves through the book, Hubbard said repeatedly that many engrams date from one's days in the womb. "Mama gets hysterical, baby gets an engram. Papa hits mama, baby gets an engram ... and so it goes." Only by dredging up painful experiences and guilt feelings during auditing could one identify and banish accumulated engrams and achieve the exalted, purely rational state of "clear." Had he gone no further, Hubbard's treatise on dianetics might have been remembered as an imaginative recasting of Freudian psychology and perhaps as a forerunner of assertiveness training. But Hubbard proclaimed an array of medical fringe benefits for "clears" that put him on a collision course with medical authorities up to and including the federal Food and Drug Administration. "The problem of psychosomatic illness is entirely encompassed by dianetics, and by dianetic technique such illness has been eradicated entirely in every case," he wrote. "Arthritis vanishes, myopia gets better, heart illness decreases, asthma disappears, stomachs function properly, and the whole catalog of ills goes away and stays away. "Clears," Hubbard added, "do not get colds." In a later publication he said that Scientology and the dianetic "therapy" if incorporated could "make the blind see again, the lame walk again, the ill recover and the sane saner." In the ensuing hue and cry from the medical profession, Hubbard's chain of dianetic foundations from New Jersey to California withered quickly. He briefly reestablished himself in Kansas, then retreated to Phoenix, where in 1954 he incorporated the Hubbard Academy of Scientology and then the Founding Church of Scientology in Washington, D.C., with branches in Los Angeles. Dianetics now reappeared, but under the banner of Scientology and embroidered with elements of Buddhism, Hinduism and the galactic wanderings of a migratory wraith called the "thetan." It was not the brain that harbored the obtrusive engrams, but the "thetan," or soul, Hubbard now held. Over the course of trillions of years (in contrast to the approximately 15 billion years astronomers assign to the age of the present universe) thetans had accumulated a weighty burden of engrams during successive reincarnations, and the challenge of purging them now seemed more formidable. Going "clear" became a more difficult, and expensive, endeavor. To help preclears disencumber themselves from eons of engrams, Hubbard in 1954 introduced the E-meter, a simple electronic device resembling a lie detector. It consists of a galvanometer in a wooden box, circuitry called a balanced Wheatstone bridge that is sensitive to small changes in skin resistance that might (or might not) be related to anxiety, and two metal cans wired to the device. The preclear clutches the cans while the interrogating auditor fires questions and watches for the needle to bobble about in the violent "theta bops" indicative of a sensitive engram. The Canadian inquiry into Scientology, conducted by the Ontario provincial government in 1968, observed that Hubbard, by reconstituting dianetics in the form of religious corporations, had realized a distinct advantage: "that the field of religion is much less restricted than the field of medicine." Hubbard's appreciation of this distinction is evidenced in a variety of internal memoranda, including a policy letter dispatched from Saint Hill Manor over his name to the Washington, New York and Los Angeles offices of Scientology on Oct. 29, 1962. Noting that the federal Food and Drug Administration was showing "interest" in the E-meter, Hubbard said that "Scientology 1970 is being planned on a religious organization basis throughout the world. "This will not upset the usual activities of any organization (within Scientology). It is entirely a matter for accountants and solicitors." The benefits of church status were demonstrated the following year, when the Food and Drug Administration raided the Founding Church of Scientology in Washington, D.C., and seized 100 E-meters and two tons of literature that the government said falsely branded E-meters as useful in treatment of ailments ranging from schizophrenia to radiation burns to polio and the common cold. The Church of Scientology fought the case in federal courts for 10 years, arguing that the FDA seizure had violated the constitutional protections afforded religious freedom. In a limited sense, Scientology won. Federal District Judge Gerhard Gesell ruled in 1971 that the church had advanced "extravagant false claims" that physical and mental illness could be cured through therapy involving the E-meter, and he said such claims were "quackery." But Gesell also said the church was entitled to First Amendment protection as a religion and could use the E-meters in religious counselling. In the interim, Scientology has retreated from claiming to cure psychosomatic or mental illness, and its publications now carry a disclaimer that the E-meter is not "intended or effective" for medical uses. The organization's literature now insists that Scientology's purpose is no more than to make the "able more able" and to treat ills of the spirit, not the mind and body. For these services, the church charges what it calls "fixed donations." An introductory course aimed at improving one's communications skills and bolstering self-confidence costs $75. Being audited all the way to clear can take two years and cost $5,000 to $10,000. Achieving the supreme state of "Operating Thetan" can cost thousands more, and according to the church's price lists, the cost of Scientological counselling is rising by 5% a month for an annual inflation rate of 60%. "What governments, people and even our orgs (organizations) can't get understood is that NO PRODUCTION-No Money," Hubbard explained in a Nov. 27, 1971, policy letter entitled "Money." "The staff member, as part of the org, may think his pay comes from mysterious places. It does not. It comes from his own personal production ... "It is up to Division 6 (the church's marketing division) to build up a DEMAND for the services and a volume of people who then demand the service. It does this with surveys of what the public will buy that the org can offer. It then makes the public aware of this by ads and contacts. The public comes in and pays ... That is really all there is to it." Los Angeles Times, August 27, 1978 Church Wages Propaganda on a World Scale "The DEFENSE of anything is *untenable*. The only way to defend anything is to ATTACK, and if you ever forget that, then you will lose every battle you are engaged in, whether it is in terms of personal conversations, public debate, or a court of law." - L. Ron Hubbard By Robert Rawitch and Robert Gillette For more than a decade, the worldwide Church of Scientology, one of the burgeoning new religions of the 1960s and '70s, has conducted sophisticated intelligence and propaganda operations on an international scale against government agencies, private organizations and individual critics the church perceives as its enemies. The church's involvement in covert activities appears to extend well beyond federal agencies named in an indictment a Washington, D.C., federal grand jury handed down Aug. 15 against 11 members of the church hierarchy in the United States and Britain. The 11 were indicted in connection with an alleged conspiracy to steal government documents and burglarize the Internal Revenue Service, Justice Department and other federal agencies. The indictment also alleged a second separate conspiracy to obstruct justice through a coverup of the thefts. A three-month inquiry by The Times indicates that, in addition to federal agencies such as the Internal Revenue Service and the Justice Department, Scientologists obtained jobs in key offices of the American Medical Assn., the Council of Better Business Bureaus and the Los Angeles office of the California attorney general. The government's case in great measure resulted from the testimony of Michael Meisner, former head of Scientology's covert operations in Washington, D.C., who turned government informant in June, 1977. Spokesmen for the Church of Scientology's national center in Los Angeles have argued that such acts could be justified as a defense against what the church regards as persistent efforts by the United States and other nations to "harass" and "suppress" its members, growth and practices - notably, in the United States, by the revocation of federal tax-exempt status for some churches in the 1960s. [CHOP HERE; 30 MORE PAGES AVAIALABLE]. ||||| From: Frog Date: 5 Sep 2002 11:58:04 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: (amicus) N, exhibit: on the issue of Fair Game Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal References: <20020903072001.30984.qmail@nym.alias.net> <829ee8d867b158fcad85d7274cb94389@paranoici.org> Comments: This message probably did not originate from the above address. It was automatically remailed by one or more anonymous mail services. You should NEVER trust ANY address on Usenet ANYWAYS: use PGP !!! Get information about complaints from the URL below X-Remailer-Contact: http://www.privacyresources.org/frogadmin/ Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@dizum.com Organization: mail2news@dizum.com Lines: 334 Path: news2.lightlink.com!news.lightlink.com!gail.ripco.com!central.cox.net!cox.net!news-hub.cableinet.net!blueyonder!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.itconsult.net!news.dizum.com!sewer-output!mail2news-x3!mail2news-x2!mail2news Xref: news2.lightlink.com alt.religion.scientology:1551130 comp.org.eff.talk:105664 misc.legal:433694 N. ON THE SPECIFIC ISSUE OF FAIR GAME The issue of FAIR GAME is raised in Vol4 Brooks testimony, on 07/may: page 456 01 Mr. Minton provided -- I'm starting in the middle here of 02 the second paragraph on the page hand-numbered 2. 03 "Mr. Minton also provided financial assistance to 04 several Scientology critics, including Grady Ward, Keith 05 Hensen[sic], Lawrence Wollersheim and Arnaldo Lerma, who had 06 become targets of Scientology's infamous 'Fair Game' 07 practices, in which anyone who is identified as an 'enemy' 08 can be tricked, sued, lied to or destroyed for the good of 09 Scientology." 10 What is the Fair Game practice or policy? Mr Fugate's denial of it is, specifically (as is show below) perjury: 11 MR. FUGATE: Your Honor, first of all, I object 12 to that because it's my understanding that that is 13 no longer -- that that was a writing that occurred 14 years ago and it was withdrawn. And I don't know 15 what her knowledge of it is in its current state, 16 and I would object to it on that basis. 17 THE COURT: Well, it is overruled because this 18 all goes to the right to cross-examine to see 19 whether or not this court will believe their 20 rationale for coming forward with this perjury, and 21 therefore whatever is in her mind is relevant. 22 Now, your objection, therefore, is overruled at 23 this time. 24 MR. FUGATE: I'm objecting for the record, 25 Judge. page 457 [.......] The witness adds endless spin to obscure the truth of the matter: 19 THE COURT: I don't know what the Fair Game -- 20 is that the Fair Game policy? 21 THE WITNESS: Well, no, the Fair Game policy -- 22 and again, your Honor, you know, the Fair Game 23 policy is another thing that -- I mean, you have to 24 understand, you know, I was -- I was part of a group 25 of advocates. I was part of a group of very, page 458 01 very -- Mmm, how do you say it -- you know, who had 02 a very clear agenda to destroy Scientology. 03 And Fair Game policy is another one of these 04 sort of buzz words that the critic community uses 05 and that I use a lot to paint Scientology in the 06 worst possible light. Her denial of Fair Game is, specifically, perjurious: 07 What the Fair Game policy -- I mean, Mr. Fugate 08 is correct when he says that the policy itself is 09 cancelled back in the '60s sometime, but, you know, 10 anybody who is a critic of Scientology -- and when I 11 say critic of Scientology, I mean that is sort of a 12 broad term for this community of people who feel 13 very strongly that Scientology should be done away 14 with. 15 Fair Game is a term -- well, it is basically 16 what I say here, you know, that anybody who is a 17 critic of Scientology can be basically destroyed for 18 the good of Scientology. That is how critics feel 19 about it. 20 THE COURT: And even though -- I'm sorry, but 21 even though the policy itself has been undone, I 22 take it, and they say we don't do that anymore, 23 we don't have a Fair Game policy, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Except that this is an outright lie. 23 if they ever had one, NOTE: Scientology never denies that it once had such a policy, but does (falsely) deny that the policy continues in effect. +++++ THE CONTEXT OF FAIR GAME. "Fair Game" is part of the so-called Church's system of so-called Ethics. As such they regard it as part of their "(Spiritual) Technology", in outside terms as part of doctrine. It is, however, an instruction for practical behaviour, and not merely a matter of conducting its own business in its own way but a policy of unlawful attacks on the rights of others. The "Ethics" of Scientology are closely similar to the Ethics of Hell as described in C.S.Lewis's book "The Screwtape Letters": good intentions count for nothing, money production is everything. He who produces well is ethical, and immune from penalties over the complaints of others. Harming production, by laziness or incompetence or even force of circumstance, is unethical behaviour over which you will be made to "report to ethics" and suffer penalties. The term Fair Game occurs in a Policy Letter on "Ethics Penalties". There are a series of penalties for rebellious or unproductive behaviour, the lowest condition for the worst offenders being declaration as an ENEMY of Scientology, equivalent to expulsion or excommunication: the person cannot receive any scientology services unless they crawl back, apologise, make redress, and are accepted back through a process of groveling. The punishment for being expelled is similar to the idea of being "out-lowed". Scientologists believe the laws of their religion -- it does not have a god -- are superior to "wog law" i.e. they can obey the laws of their religion (do what they want) above the laws of civilised society. And an enemy is out-lowed, declared Fair game, protection of Scientology law is withdrawn from them so that Scientologists can attack them as much as they like without penalty and, by implication are encouraged to do so. Strictly speaking, the only person who will receive as piece of paper saving they are "declared" an enemy or suppressive person is a former member being expelled. However, such treatment is regularly meted out to anyone who in practice becomes an enemy of the Church -- for example, by reproving it in public for locking someone up until she died of thirst. +++++ HAS FAIR GAME BEEN CANCELLED? The alleged Church of Scientology has never denied that, at one time, ethics penalties were laid down as in the following HCOPL..... HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Remimeo HCO Policy Letter of 18 October 1967 Issue IV PENALTIES FOR LOWER CONDITIONS (Applies both Orgs and Sea Org) LIABILITY Suspension of pay and a dirty grey rag on left arm and day and night confinement to org premises. TREASON Suspension of pay and deprivation of all uniforms and insignia, a black mark on left cheek and confinement on org premises or dismissal from post and debarment from premises. DOUBT Debarment from premises. Not to be employed. Payment of fine amounting to any sum may have cost org. Not to be trained or processed. Not to be communicated or argued with. ENEMY SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed. LRH:jp L. RON HUBBARD The policy was later amended as follows.... HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Remimeo HCO Policy Letter of 21 October 1968 CANCELLATION OF FAIR GAME The practice of declaring people FAIR GAME will cease. FAIR GAME may not appear on any Ethics Order. It causes bad public relations. This P/L does not cancel any policy on the treatment or handling of an SP. LRH:ci:cden L. RON HUBBARD Let us now look at the text as amended by the new PL... ENEMY SP Order. [Phrase deleted]. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed. The actual policies on the treatment or handling of enemies have not been changed. It is on this basis that Scientologists say "Fair Game has been cancelled". The WORDS Fair Game have ceased in official use. They say this, and misdirect the hearer into thinking that the behaviour -- tricking, suing, lying to and destroying enemies -- has also been changed. But it has not. The actual policies on the treatment or handling of an enemy have not been changed. Lying by misdirection is an official Scientology policy: supposedly "wogs" are too dim and aberrated to take the whole truth, therefore you have to dilute it down to an acceptable truth (i.e. tell them a half-truth which leads them to infer the conclusion you want) which their poor fuddled minds can handle (from HCOPL 13 August 1970 Issue II PR Series 2, in the _Volunteer Minister's Handbook_, page 461, by L. Ron Hubbard)... Handling truth is a touchy business also. You don't have to tell everything you know -- that would jam the comm line too. Tell an *acceptable truth*. Agreement with one's message is what PR is seeking to achieve. Thus the message must compare to the personal experience of the audience. So PR becomes the technique of communicating an acceptable truth -- and which will attain the desirable result. If there's no chance of obtaining a desirable result and the truth would injure then talk about something else. However, a person who has lived for years outside the cult after leaving such as Ms Brooks (or an officer of the court like Mr Fugate) should understand the exact meaning of the oath. It is more than an oath to tell "nothing but the truth" i.e. abstain from specific falsehoods. There is also a requirement to tell "the whole truth" i.e. not to misdirect by telling whole truths but to make a full and accurate answer to any question asked. It is one thing for Scientology press releases to say "we have cancelled use of Fair Game" meaning the words, and mislead the audience that the practice has also been cancelled. To do so in court is perjury. Ms Brooks, in particular, knows exactly what the true situation is yet still chooses to utter a deliberate lie. +++++ I was not previously aware of the testimony of Robert Vaughan Young on 17/june, page 189, which explains this exactly: 08 Q What is Exhibit 9 then? 09 A Exhibit 9 is -- is a page with two policy letters 10 on it. Because they're both short. This is one from one of 11 the volumes, the same pages. You printed more than one of 12 them to a page. 13 Number one is entitled "Cancellation of Fair Game" 14 written in 1968 by Hubbard. 15 Q So did that cancel Number 8, Exhibit 8? 16 A No. This was -- this is one of the most -- more 17 controversial policy letters. It is often cited by 18 Scientology to say fair game was canceled, here is the 19 policy, see this cancellation of fair game. 20 When I was a PR working with media, governmental 21 authorities, I did that. I pulled it out and I said, "See, 22 fair game was canceled." 23 And that is because the person didn't understand 24 the rest of it. Because it says here, "This PL," meaning 25 policy letter, "does not cancel any policy on the treatment page 190 1 or handling of an SP." 2 Well, this other one that we have here was "How 3 you handle an SP. May be sued, tricked or lied." 4 What he's saying here, and it says it clearly -- I 5 mean, I hate to say it says what it says, but this has gone 6 into courts, government, media, government agencies and they 7 haven't caught on, so pardon me if I said -- point out he 8 says fair game may not appear on any ethics order. 9 In other words, the words "fair game" may not 10 appear on any ethics order because it is bad public 11 relations. 12 The next sentence, "This does not change any 13 policy on how to handle SPs." 14 So all we stopped doing is we stopped using the 15 words "Fair game," but everything else he wrote about how to 16 destroy an SP, you do it, fair game policy was not canceled, 17 just the use of the words. +++++ The following is from Jon Atack's General report on Scientology, but gives primary sources such as court papers (mainly in the Wollersheim case). from http://home.snafu.de/tilman/j/general.html. You will appreciate the THESE PERSONS AND CASES ARE THOSE WHICH THE DEFENDANT CHURCH HAS, TTSELF, RAISED AS RELEVANT TO THE INSTANT CASE. 77. In Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology of California (the "mother church" of the Churches of Scientology at the time the suit was filed), the California Appeal Court ruled, in a decision upheld by the US Supreme Court: "Wollersheim was compelled to abandon his wife and his family through the policy of disconnect. When his mental illness reached such a level he actively planned his suicide, he was forbidden to seek professional help. Finally, when Wollersheim was able to leave the Church, it subjected him to financial ruin through its policy of 'fair game'." (JCA-147, pp.A-7, 15 & 16). At appeal, Scientology asserted that "fair game" was a "core practice of Scientology", and therefore protected as "religious expression". This position was also made on behalf of Scientology in the case against Gerald Armstrong, in 1984, by religious expert Dr. Frank Flinn (JCA-45). 78. In the same case (Church of Scientology of California v. Armstrong) (JCA-7), Judge Paul Breckenridge criticised the continued use of Fair Game, showing that the policy had remained in force beyond the supposed cancellation in 1980. Judge Breckenridge said: "In addition to violating and abusing its own members' civil rights, the [Scientology] organization over the years with its 'Fair Game' doctrine has harassed and abused those persons not in the Church whom it perceives as its enemies." Judge Breckenridge added, "After the within suit was filed ... Defendant Armstrong was the subject of harassment, including being followed and surveilled by individuals who admitted employment by Plaintiff; being assaulted by one of these individuals; being struck bodily by a car driven by one of these individuals; having two attempts made by said individuals apparently to involve Defendant Armstrong in a freeway automobile accident; having said individuals come onto Defendant Armstrong's property, spy in his windows, create disturbances, and upset his neighbors". JCA-7. Memorandum of Intended Decision in Church of Scientology of California v. Gerald Armstrong, Superior Court for the State of California, C420153, 20 June 1984. http://www.planetkc.com/sloth/sci/breck.html JCA-45. Frank K. Flinn testimony in Church of Scientology of California, 1984, vol.23, pp.4032-4160. JCA-147. Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology of California, Court of Appeal of the State of California, civ.no.B023193, 18 July 1989 (upheld by the U,S. Supreme Court, 7 March 1994). 87. In a statement recusing himself from a Scientology case, California judge James Ideman said "The past eight years have consisted mainly of a prolonged, and ultimately unsuccessful, attempt to persuade or compel the plaintiff to comply with lawful discovery. These efforts have been fiercely resisted by plaintiffs. They have utilized every device that we on the District Court have ever heard of to avoid such compliance, and some that are new to us. This noncompliance has consisted of evasions, misrepresentations, broken promises and lies, but ultimately with refusal. As part of this scheme to not comply, the plaintiffs have undertaken a massive campaign of filing every conceivable motion (and some inconceivable) to disguise the true issue in these pretrial proceedings. Apparently viewing litigation as war, plaintiffs by this tactic have had the effect of massively increasing the costs to the other parties, and, for a while, to the Court ... The scope of the plaintiffs' efforts have to be seen to be believed ... 1,737 filings [were made by Scientology] ... Yet it is almost all puffery -- motions without merit or substance." (JCA-159). JCA-159. Declaration of Hon. James M. Ideman, United States District Court, Central District of California, in Religious Technology Center v Scott et al (no. CV 85-711 JMI [Bx]) and Religious Technology Center v Wollersheim et al (no. CV 85-7197 JMI [Bx]), filed 21 June 1993. [online at http://www.lermanet.com/scientologylegal/ideman.htm ] useful sptimes article: http://www.sptimes.com/News/32899/TampaBay/Hardball.html Berry detailing stuff that happened to him: http://www.holysmoke.org/gb/gb068.htm ||||| From: Anonymous User Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above. It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software. Please report problems or inappropriate use to the remailer administrator at . References: <20020903072001.30984.qmail@nym.alias.net> <829ee8d867b158fcad85d7274cb94389@paranoici.org> Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal Subject: (amicus) L, exhibit: letter from the Lawn Ornament to the D.A. Message-ID: <71e3e74fcf0f20bb3c10879e3724c592@remailer.havenco.com> Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 12:05:42 +0000 (UTC) Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net Lines: 447 Path: news2.lightlink.com!news.lightlink.com!gail.ripco.com!fu-berlin.de!newsfeed.vmunix.org!newsfeed.eunet.at!newsfeed.austria.eu.net!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news-x3!mail2news-x2!mail2news Xref: news2.lightlink.com alt.religion.scientology:1551133 comp.org.eff.talk:105665 misc.legal:433695 Letter from David Miscavige to Bernie McCabe re: The Lisa McPherson criminal case 22 January 1999 RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTERHOLDER OF THE DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY TRADEMARKS 1710 IVAR AVE, SUITE 1100, LOS ANGELES CALIFORNIA 90028 DAVID MISCAVIGE OF THE BOARD January 22, 1999 Mr. Bernie McCabeState Attorney 14250 49th St. NorthClearwater, FL 34622 Re:Case Number CRC 98-20377-CFANO-S Dear Mr. McCabe, I am aware of the Williams & Connolly letter to you, but want to approach the problem from another perspective: How to achieve a peaceful resolution to the charges your office has brought against my religion. As you know, this is not the first time I have attempted to pursue peace. I have met with your office on two occasions, first with Mr. Crow and Mr. Burgess on November l8th and second on November 23rd with these individuals as well as Mr. McGarry and, most significantly, with you. As I pointed out to you, these meetings were preceded by other attempts to resolve matters. Indeed, I have been working with the City of Clearwater since last May to bring an end to counter-productive hostilities and prejudicial treatment of the Church and Scientologists for two decades. If there was any doubt that peace was my objective, it should have been dissipated by the cover story on me in the St. Pete Times of Sunday, October 25, 1998. Even the Times could not help but hear my message: "In his first-ever newspaper interview Miscavige told the Times that Clearwater is the scene of 'possibly the last long-running confiict' for Scientology. He said he wants to take 'big steps' to end hostilities there." That is why I came to your office, almost immediately after the indictment was issued, attempting to bring about a constructive resolution to this matter. My reasons are obvious. Although I certainly do not believe the charges are well-founded, as I communicated to you, nobody is happy concerning the unfortunate circumstances regardingI see it as my duty to do what I can to take fair responsibility for this matter. Obviously I cannot bring back, but I can address the situation for the good of the Church and the community so that wounds can heal and we can both move forward. The seriousness with which the religion takes on that responsibility is best exemplified by my personal participation. I am not a member, officer or director of the Flag Organization, but I am very concerned about anything that affects Scientology as a whole. These charges surely do. The best evidence of my sincerity in addressing this situation is the Church's restraint in dealing with the press, something you personally acknowledged. Whatever my personal feelings about the investigation or, indeed, the history of the treatment Scientology has received in Clearwater, I maintained the view that our concern should be the future, taking steps not only to address the case at hand, but on a far broader scale, the Church's relationship with the entire community. This case is a very sensitive one for your office. That is why in our initial meeting I did not attempt to argue the facts or the fairness of your charge. I recognized that, with charges having been brought against the Church, the most productive course was to address them head-on in a meaningful and just way. Putting it bluntly, I realize that once charges have been brought, there are political consequences connected with any resolution. I do not think anyone failed to note that the only charges brought were corporate in nature, typically less severe than individual charges. However, as I explained to you, the implications of a charge are far different for a church. This would not be seen as a mere "corporate charge" against the entity that happened to own theFt. Harrison Hotel (where stayed), but instead would impact on the entire worldwide religion of Scientology and its thousands of churches, missions and missionary activities. To illustrate my concerns, I showed you the headlines in the St. Petersburg and New York Times where the corporation charged is not mentioned. Instead, the headlines speak of "Scientology". As I explained, this is no different from headlining "Catholicism", "Buddhism", "Judaism" or any other religion. The fact is the charge has the effect of branding the religion as a whole . I think you recognized that the Church's refusal to accept any form of guilty plea was not arbitrary or merely an attempt to "take a stand" but, rather, was based on very serious concerns as to what a plea would mean m terms of damage to all of our churches and members. There are good reasons for not charging churches with crimes. One must ask, "Who is being charged?" That is the question I am being asked by parishioners around the world. The Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization is unique in the religion of Scientology. Its congregation is composed not only of members from the Clearwater area, but from all parts of the globe. indeed, its congregation is probably the largest of any church in the United States, Scientology or otherwise . That is because it is the Mecca of our religion and Scientologists from every one of our churches ultimately come to the Flag Organization. The prejudicial burden of having our Mecca labeled "criminal" is obvious. And for what? Let's put aside for the moment any argument as to the cause of death. Certainly the parishioners of the Church had nothing to do with it. Or is the state alleging that the practice of the religion itself is at fault? Similarly, well over a thousand church staff of the Flag Organization were not involved. Ironically, those who did deal with have not been charged. Most have been immunized, including two out of three members of the Board of Directors, one of whom is the chairman. I can understand the need in some criminal proceedings to leave a person with a "guilty" record, the purpose being to taint the person with a stain he can never remove. That is precisely why the Church cannot accept a plea as a form of justice. A church is not like another corporation. If criminal charges are leveled against a business corporation, it necessarily concerns conduct in the line of business - an attempt to increase profit through improper means. When charges are leveled against a corporation, that does not affect its shareholders like a charge against a church affects its adherents. No parishioner should ever have to have this discussion: Q: "What church do you attend?" A: "Scientology." Q: "The church with acriminal record - the only one ever in the United States?" And yet these are precisely the conversations that are bound to occur. That is why I invited you to come over to take a look around. I guarantee a picture different from what you currently perceive. The Church is a dynamic and thriving community. Its members are drug-free and dedicated to helping their fellow man. They not only aren't freaks, they are contributing members of society and many are extremely prominent in their respective fields. Law enforcement often resolves corporate charges short of a guilty plea in order not to cripple a corporation's capacity to conduct business. I referred you to the Met Life case where the company paid a fine in lieu of further criminal proceedings because a guilty plea would have prevented it from conducting business. In that case, unlike this case, billions were at issue, the conduct was intentional and the corporation did benefit. But, it did not have to live with "guilty" tattooed on its head. In that case, also unlike this case, the corporation law enforcement made an accommodation for was a for-profit business . My concern is far different; it is to prevent the branding of the entire Church, all its members and the religion as a whole. Such a result does not reflect the reality of the case. I still remain convinced that a resolution short of years of litigation is in the best interests of the community and the Church. I recognize that any emerging religion goes through a tough time in its formative years. I also recognize past mistakes of the Church. More importantly, I recognize that resolving conflict does not always require a war to the end, even when one is right. The Church won its suit against the City. But that did not result in peace for the Church, or lead the City to treat us in a better fashion. I believe the Church would be vindicated in the present case. Yet I am just as convinced that protracted litigation would not only be counter productive but, in fact, destructive to the Church and the community. Just as certainly, I recognize the need for any organization to take responsibility for its acts. I could argue all day about the circumstances surrounding the unfortunate death of and how the Church is not to blame. But resolution, not talk or argument, is what is required, Responsibility, not blame, is what must be addressed. That is why I made the proposal to you which I continue to believe is in the best interests of all. Let me reiterate that proposal. PROPOSAL 1) That the Church accept a pre-trial intervention on the medical charge. 2) That the Church institute a "compliance program" to include: a) Employing on a full-time basis a licensed medical doctor, who need not be a Scientologist, to service our Church facilities including the many hotels we maintain for visiting parishioners. b) Implementing a policy that such a medical doctor would perform on the premises only routine medical services limited to treatment of minor injuries (cuts and bruises) and garden variety illnesses (colds and flu). All other illnesses or injuries would be referred to a hospital or clinic not on Church premises. c) Precluding the boarding, in any of our facilities, of anyone with an illness that is more than minor or garden variety in nature. d) Providing to all local hospitals and doctors a standard protocol for treatment of Scientologists that would make clear that the only treatments precluded by Scientology scripture are those in the field of psychiatry. This Church-authored protocol would also make clear that although Scientologists are opposed to psychiatric treatment, they are certainly not opposed to receiving medical treatment. e) Clarifying that those who dealt with violated longstanding Church policy barring the housing or care of psychotics on Church premises. 3) That the Church pay the full costs of the police investigation.4) That the Church donate $500,000.00 to the county Emergency Medical Services Trust as a sign of its commitment to using available services whenever necessary. This proposal offers this community much more than the State could obtain in any formal proceeding. As we both understand, the ultimate outcome of any prosecution is a maximum fine of $15,000.00 in addition to possible payment of investigative costs.What I have offered is well in excess of that. Indeed, I am offering many things that the State would never be able to obtain, most important of which is directly addressing the situation itself to prevent reoccurrence . From your perspective the proposal offers the following: 1) In accordance with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the proposal is a much less intrusive means of dealing with the Church, allowing you to avoid the fatal flaws of the Felony Information. 2) Acceptance of the proposal would avoid a protracted battle which would be very costly to the taxpayers and further destructive of Church-community relations. 3) The proposal reflects adoption of a program by a major institution to prevent any similar incident. 4) It includes a donation far in excess of the fine otherwise available to the State. 5) The proposal allows all parties to move forward on a constructive path, a significant concern to both the Church and the City of Clearwater. I asked that you give serious consideration to this proposal. I further told you that I had flexibility to incorporate or delete particulars as the State believed appropriate to bring about a full, meaningful and responsible resolution of the matter. You indicated I would receive a response. I believe you recognized the serious nature of my proposal. Following the Thanksgiving weekend, having heard no response, our counsel contacted your office. Mr. Crow informed counsel that you were contemplating a counteroffer and went on to say that there had better be no statements to the press regarding our discussions or "all bets are off." We agreed. After that phone call came the annual summit of out-of- town anti-Scientologists exploiting the death of Lisa McPherson. During that week of protest we were subjected to a non-stop assault on our religion, not only in Clearwater, but around the world. However, taking heed of Mr. Crow's warning, I felt it important to stay true to our word. As a result, the Church did not make any response to the media concerning the charges or our perceptions of this prosecution.More time passed without a response. Once again, our counsel contacted your office. After a few hours delay, Mr. Crow relayed to counsel that he had just spoken to you and that you had stated the offer submitted was unacceptable. He refused either to expand on the reasons for rejection or to make any counteroffer. What am I to think when faced with these circumstances? On the one hand I am told in no uncertain terms to make no mention to the press concerning the Church's sincere efforts to resolve the case, and I am given the unmistakable impression that a response would be coming from your office. We then endure a week of anti-Scientology bashing, only then to be told, "all bets were off in the first place. Nevertheless, I remained of the opinion that we should continue to meet and resolve the case and once again asked counsel to contact your office. This contact was made through Mr. McGarry which was apparently offensive to Mr. Crow. When he next contacted counsel, he began by warning him, "Don't you ever go around me again", and then proceeded to say you would not meet with anybody. I assure you, the indictment of the Church is of far greater concern to me than a turf war. Since Mr. McGarry apparently had no problem in taking the call from counsel, this dialogue makes it seem as if Mr. Crow has a personal stake in this matter. But let me be clear: I have no desire to upset anybody in your office. It was neither significant to me that counsel contacted Mr. McGarry (as opposed to Mr. Crow) nor something I imagined would cause upset. I continue to be willing to meet any of the persons in your office. Let me add, however, that when I did meet with Mr. Crow prior to our meeting, he made it clear that while he was #3 in the office, and had been for some time, he could not respond to any offer without first discussing it with you. Therefore, if rapid, responsible and meaningful resolution of this case is to be achieved, you and I are the persons to do it. MEDIA AND ANTI-SCIENTOLOGY CELEBRATIONS Perhaps the best proof that this case is perceived - not as a narrow "corporate charge" but, rather, as an indictment of the entire religion - is what it has generated in anti- Scientology activity and how the media have communicated the case to the world.Prior to the indictment, the volume of media attention this case generated was unprecedented. Since the indictment, that volume has reached preposterous proportions. With this letter I am providing you with a binder of what has appeared: oCalculation shows a circulation in excess of 96 million.oOf the 96 million reached, only 3% of the coverage even mentions the charges as against the Church of Scientology, Flag Service Organization , the corporation technically charged.o31% refer to "Scientologists" or "Scientology" - the religion itself. o A full 66% refer generically to the "Church ofScientology" , making no distinction to any corporate entity. To take two well-known recent examples of the publicity given to these charges: The Arts & Entertainment channel ran a two-hour documentary on Scientology and 20/20 allocated an hour to the subject. Both made mention of the case and both described the charges as having been brought against the Church and the religion as a whole. Possibly the best example of how everybody perceived the charge as against the entire Church is the court notice received by Flag wherein the caption merely states:Church of Scientology. (No mention of Flag Service Organization or FSO.) Let's not forget that shortly after the investigation began, the Medical Examiner went on tabloid TV ( Inside Edition ) announcing her conclusions that the Church had denied water for "up to 17 days." This created an impression that carries forth to this day that the Church intended to kill Yet as even the charging affidavit now makes clear, that did not occur. But unfortunately this cannot change the media background upon which the charges are now superimposed.As for the annual celebration of death by anti-Scientologists, let me stress that these pickets did not merely appear in Clearwater. They appeared around the world, from Canada to Australia, across Europe in England, Sweden, Germany, Denmark and other countries, as well as cities across the United States. I have included pictures as evidence of this international assault. Law enforcement does not write headlines or design the picket signs of anti-Scientologists. That is true, but it is just as true that in charging the Church, these results were as predictable as the sun rising and setting each day. it is precisely what happens when the government targets an entire religion. Let us also not forget these pickets only began when the Clearwater police put this investigation on the Internet. And while some would argue that the investigation was not conducted in collusion with anti-Scientologists (though there is evidence to the contrary), it certainly has provided them with a springboard for the harassment of my religion. The deplorable conduct of the protesters bears mentioning. While marching in front of our building, they carried a coffin on the sidewalk with the words, "Scientology Kills." They carried signs that said, "Blood on Scientology Hands" , "My name was Lisa McPherson and I was murdered by the Church of Scientology" and "Thank god L. Ron Hubbard is dead" . Eerily reminiscent of the unconstitutional methods of earlier years were signs proclaiming, "Honk if you hate Scientology" . Meanwhile, county buses carried anti-Scientology " advertisements " (placed anonymously) including, "Don't Walk, RUN! Quit $cientology!" , "Find Out Why so Many People Oppose Dianetics & Scientology" , "Are you REALLY happy in the Sea Org?" (Scientology's religious order), and "Think for Yourself...QUIT SCIENTOLOGY" . It should be noted the bus boards were so offensive that a Commissioner of the City of Clearwater felt it necessary to bring them to the attention of the full Commission.One cannot doubt the case has become a cause celebre for anti- Scientologists. Holding a press conference upon their arrival in Clearwater, they began with an announcement- "Welcome to Occupied Clearwater." Another indication of how the State's charges affect the religion and its members as a whole, is what protesters were saying on video, but out of earshot of the media; "Tell David (Miscavige) I'm coming, and I'm coming with a dick so big, it will knock his goddamned spine out!" The conduct of the anti-Scientologists does not reflect "protest", it reflects "hatred." Although I am sure you do not condone this conduct, when an entire church is charged, that tends to send a message that such conduct is acceptable since no distinction is drawn as to who has been charged - every member has. And let there be no question, these protesters are not, and were not friends. The Church and its members were. When alive, these anti-Scientologists treated in the same manner they now treat the rest of the Church and its members. But put those concerns aside. What does this do for the City of Clearwater and what image does it create? The City is engaged in a serious program of redevelopment and rejuvenation under the banner of "One City, One Future." We are a prominent part of that City. But the image generated by the State's indictment and commensurate anti-Scientology activity is very harmful to the City. Certainly it does not help bring tourists or students on spring break.Please understand, the majority of these "protesters" are not dissident ex Scientologists and most were never members of the Scientology religion. They truly are anti-Scientologists. And, let there be no mistake, we had to do more than ignore the assault. Given their outrageously abusive conduct toward our members, the Church showed great restraint, as even the City Manager acknowledged, even implementing measures to bus parishioners between buildings so as to avoid these people while they occupied the entire sidewalk and front door of our building. THE CHURCH IN THE COMMUNITY ANDITS RELEVANCE TO A RESOLUTION At our meeting you indicated you were aware of the 11th Circuit decision and acknowledged my description of it as setting forth "a history of illegally attempting to destroy the Church in Clearwater." The circumstances surrounding the case cannot be taken in isolation and are inextricably tied to the history of Clearwater and its Police Department. I am convinced you are not fully aware of the details of this history and because the purpose of this letter is to bring about a resolution to avoid further conflict, I have not set forth those details. However, if you remain unconvinced of the pervasiveness of that prejudicial treatment or its relationship to this investigation, then I ask you let me take you through those details. Not hyperbole, but documented details. At a minimum, you would get a preview of what will be brought forth if we are forced to litigate. Following the Church's protest of the CWPD, in December of 1997, based on parishioner concerns about the continuing pattern of prejudicial treatment by the police, I recognized that a major change was needed and took steps to change dramatically the Church's relationship with the City. This was confirmed by the City Manager in the December 27th, 1998 edition of the Miami Herald , in statements such as this: "The city and the church had a very contentious relationship for many years. A lot of mistakes were made on both sides. Now both sides are trying to work very hard to find compromises and move forward." I have met with City officials on many occasions both before and after the Felony Information and I know they join in the desire for resolution. As I mentioned earlier, prosecution will inevitably entail rehearsal of the whole history of the Clearwater Police Department and its unlawful crusade against the Church, which is legendary. No good can come from putting it on trial too. Such a trial of the police would cut against the grain of what Scientology and its membership have tried to accomplish in community betterment activities. In the past year alone, more than 167,000 hours of volunteer work was performed by our members in Clearwater. As just one example, a group of 170 local Scientology parishioners have worked thousands of hours helping to rehabilitate prison inmates. Another group provides 250 hours per week of free tutoring to youth in need. Efforts like these have made an impact on community redevelopment plans. In that regard, on November the 21st 1998, we broke ground and began construction on a new 370,000 square foot Church facility in downtown Clearwater. We will also shortly begin construction on a new 4,500 seat auditorium which will be available for all local community events when not being used for Scientology events. I know of two large corporations that have noted the stable Church presence in the downtown area as a reason for locating in Clearwater. It has been estimated that our economic impact in the community will rise to $150 million per year by 2001. CONCLUSION As you acknowledged at our meeting, this is not a typical case. More importantly, you know that nobody in the Church of Scientology intended any harm. Prior to the indictment, I publicly stated my opinion that the history in Clearwater showed that some people were waiting for something to occur so they could "get the Church" That death has disgracefully become a cause for celebration amongst anti-Scientologists supports that concern. Although you may not agree with all of this statement, you did confirm that your investigation had not found evidence of anybody intending harm toThese are virtually the first charges ever brought against any church. One has to return to the last century to find that having occurred. Even in another high profile case conducted by your office concerning Reverend Lyons, your office chose to prosecute individuals and not the religious organization even though the individuals involved in the alleged fraud included the elected Chief Executive of the organization who was acting in behalf and for the benefit of the organization and the religious organization itself subsequently ratified Reverend Lyons' acts and conduct. It is critical to note that this Church has been attacked for the conduct of individuals who did not follow or forward Church policy. I do not understand anyone to say otherwise. Indeed, the alleged conduct violated Church policy which fully supports medical care and has long been opposed to housing psychotics on Church premises. The issuance of these charges contrasts sharply with what happens when a death occurs to an adherent of Christian Science or Jehovah's Witnesses . Although those who practice those religions have had many instances of failing to enable medical care, neither church has ever been charged as we have. And in charging this Church, the Felony Information will affect every Church staff member not involved, every Church parishioner not involved and, ultimately, the religion itself. Can this really be said to forward the interests of justice? As I have noted, I have met with the City on numerous occasions, both prior to and since the charges were filed. I know that feelings are mutual this matter should be resolved. With the circumstances that exist, with the proposal I have made to resolve this case in a responsible manner, prosecution of the Church is not in the best interests of the City.If the intent of this indictment was to smear the religion of Scientology and tarnish its reputation internationally and the State has determined that nothing short of that goal is acceptable, then I can understand moving forward with the prosecution. However, if the concern is for the Church to take responsibility for this matter in a significant way, then I have made a proposal that addresses those concerns. The Church could simply pay a $15,000.00 fine and be done with the whole matter. I believe any non-church corporation would do just that. But because you are dealing with a church, there are consequences which prohibit that course of action. If the Church wished to ignore this matter and prolong its resolution, it would choose to litigate. It is my belief that if we fail to achieve a settlement, the case will be dismissed on constitutional grounds. But for sake of argument, assume it is not. We would then be looking at years of litigation. If the intention were to not take responsibility, this would be the obvious course of action. In my opinion that is not the approach either of us should take. On the other hand, assume we proceed with motions and the charges are dismissed. Even that would not be a wholly positive resolution of this matter. A victory for the Church and a loss for the State says: the Church and the community are still at war . While some might prefer that outcome, I do not . I strongly prefer moving forward in a cooperative effort. I do not understand why my proposal was unacceptable. I especially do not understand why no counter-proposal was offered. What I have proposed is a final and permanent resolution, thus allowing my Church to move on with its religious objectives and your office to deal with its law enforcement responsibility in a community where, unfortunately, crime is so prevalent. It seems there is a new violent crime committed every day, usually by those on drugs, a problem in its own right. Dealing with that sort of crime is a responsibility of yours that I don't envy. I would rather help you by dedicating my Church to getting people off drugs and thus lessening the crime that so often results. Why let this case distract you from those efforts when a full, meaningful and fair resolution of it can readily be achieved? I am currently in Clearwater and am available to meet and resolve this matter now. Sincerely, David Miscavige [copy from LMT Int site] ||||| From: Mike O'Connor Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal Subject: Re: (amicus) L, exhibit: letter from the Lawn Ornament to the D.A. Organization: Leptonic Systems Inc References: <20020903072001.30984.qmail@nym.alias.net> <829ee8d867b158fcad85d7274cb94389@paranoici.org> <71e3e74fcf0f20bb3c10879e3724c592@remailer.havenco.com> User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.2 (PPC Mac OS X) X-Face: %I5[u;NN-d'{}I|+j$Riju_Eu}N!t).F:-~.me!)K-xe%_CG6[L\)wALnAYG~rN9'j8eK2s}[%*qA5J>L*vPc^b6pO[2j#)?78<2(m\Yx_\_ug:@i,.;U_'ags%TfqMIWH~/YLmJJ^p Message-ID: Lines: 125 Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 12:06:36 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.47.85.120 X-Trace: news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net 1031241987 24.47.85.120 (Thu, 05 Sep 2002 12:06:27 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 12:06:27 EDT Path: news2.lightlink.com!news.lightlink.com!gail.ripco.com!news-feed.riddles.org.uk!freenix!proxad.net!news.stealth.net!news.stealth.net!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!newsfeeds-atl2!news.webusenet.com!pc01.webusenet.com!news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail Xref: news2.lightlink.com alt.religion.scientology:1551169 comp.org.eff.talk:105666 misc.legal:433696 In article <71e3e74fcf0f20bb3c10879e3724c592@remailer.havenco.com>, Anonymous User wrote: > Letter from David Miscavige to Bernie McCabe > re: The Lisa McPherson criminal case Change "Church" to "Mafia," and "Scientologists" to "Mafiosos" and see how much sense the letter makes then. I'm personally of the opinion that Scientology is a ruthless global scam that uses mafia-like tactics. A harsh judgement? Check out this quote from TIME magazine's cover story on Scientology - an article the cult spent a decade and tens of millions of dollars suing over for libel. They lost every point. They went up to the Supreme Court level twice, trying and trying to get some sort of retribution on TIME. They lost every point. TIME's article is court-tested not to be libel. Truth is a defense. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ "The thriving cult of greed and power: Ruined lives. Lost fortunes. Federal crimes. Scientology poses as a religion but is really a ruthless global cam - and aiming for the mainstream." [...] "The Church of Scientology, started by science-fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard to "clear" people of unhappiness, portrays itself as a religion. In reality the church is a hugely profitable global racket that survives by intimidating members and critics in a Mafia-like manner." -- TIME, 6 May 1991 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In the letter he says: 'No parishioner should ever have to have this discussion: Q: "What church do you attend?" A: "Scientology." Q: "The church with acriminal record - the only one ever in the United States?" And yet these are precisely the conversations that are bound to occur.' This is exactly the situation in other countries. In Canada, the organization DOES have a criminal record. Tried to infiltrate the government, JUST LIKE HERE. See the stipulation of evidence in the US Federal case where the organization's very highest officials went to jail for that and other crimes. We have virtually absolute freedom of religion here. This organization switched from being a pop-psychology and snake oil (E-Meter) store to a "religion" in order to take advantage of that protection. They installed crosses, gave its salesfolk collars, called it's paid sessions confessionals... it's all very well documented. Don't believe the claims about this organization? They do seem incredible and exaggerated, don't they. Well, look into it. ++++++++++++ SACRED CULT SCRIPTURE +++++++++++++ Incredulity of our data and validity. This is our finest asset and gives us more protection than any other single asset. If certain parties thought we were real we would have infinitely more trouble ... without a public incredulity we never would have gotten as far as we have. And now it's too late to be stopped. The protection was accidental but it serves us very well indeed. Remember that next time the ignorant scoff. -- L. Ron Hubbard HCO[B|PL] (May 15, 1963; perhaps May 11) ++++++++ SACRED CULT SCRIPTURE +++++++++++ THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN CONTROL PEOPLE IS TO LIE TO THEM. You can write that down in your book in great big letters. The only way you can control anybody is to lie to them. When you find an individual is lying to you, you know that the individual is trying to control you. One way or another this individual is trying to control you. That is the mechanism of control. This individual is lying to you because he is trying to control you - because if they give you enough misinformation they will pull you down the tone scale so that they can control you. Conversely, if you see an impulse on the part of a human being to control you, you know very well that that human being is lying to you. Not "is going to", but "is" lying to you. [last sentence underlined in original] Check these facts, you will find they are always true. That person who is trying to control you is lying to you. He's got to tell you lies in order to continue control, because the second you start telling anybody close to the truth, you start releasing him and he gets tougher and tougher to control. So, you can't control somebody without telling them a bunch of lies. [...] -- L. Ron Hubbard Technique 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ INTELLIGENCE SPECIALIST TRAINING ROUTINE - TR L Purpose: To train the student to give a false statement with good TR-1. To train the student to outflow false data effectively. [...] Training Stress: In Part 1 coach gives command, student originates a falsehood. Coach flunks for out TR 1 or TR 0. In Part 2 coach asks questions of the student on his background or a subject. Student gives untrue data of a plausible sort that the student backs up with further explanatory data upon the coach asking further questions. The coach flunks for out TR 0 and TR 1, and for student fumbling on question answers. The student should be coached on a gradient until he/she can lie facilely. [...] -- [Recovered from the cult in an FBI raid] +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The alt.religion.scientology newsgroup discusses this organization. See you there. -- LYING IS A SCIENTOLOGY SACRAMENT ASK THEM ABOUT XENU Mike O'Connor