The point of view from which I enter this contest is that I believe a hate group is running this contest.

Then why I am entering this contest, you might reasonably ask.

I am entering this contest to keep the contest honest and in the hope that the Lisa McPherson Trust will select at least one wining piece unlike those this same contest awarded substantial money awards to last year. Those essays were by people who had never been Scientologists, who knew nothing first hand about Scientology, and who were bound and determined to make the religion of Scientology the target of ridicule and hateful actions.

I write this essay in defense of my constitutional right to freedom of religion.

I write this essay as a call to reason, objectivity, sanity, and as a demand to put an end to hate in the world.

The assault on my religion is not rational or objective, but driven by falsehoods that in one form or another are the sole stock in trade of hate mongers, bigots, and other vested interests.

If this sounds unreasonable -- as I know it is unreasonable to those bent upon the destruction of my freedom of thought and freedom of religion -- I say get rid of the falsehoods and take a fresh, uncorrupted look.

I have been in Scientology for over forty years and therefore know something first hand about control, freedom and responsibility as regards Scientology.

Despite my admittedly impassioned view, I view the hate mongering activities and agenda of the Lisa McPherson Trust to date as evidence of its dishonesty. As for this duplicitously inspired contest, I do not expect to get even an honorable mention for my submission or ever have it see the light of day again.

First, let me say that if Scientology had not been able to do for me what it promised it could do. I would not have remained in Scientology for over forty years.

Yet, my life was changed by Scientology for the better based upon the very concepts that this "Literati Contest" has as its subject matter: Control, Freedom, and Responsibility.

Control has many connotations in this society. Traditionally, control has meant to direct. The negative emphasis of control is what the Lisa McPherson Trust Literati Contest writers -- who have any chance of having a winning entry -- will dwell upon.

Control as defined in Scientology is entirely positive and aimed at increasing a person's governance over his life and the environment. Typically, those who decry any form of control do so to escape the consequences of their harmful acts. Thus they rant against control and justify the harm they do because they fear control will lead to accountability and responsibility. This is not so in Scientology.

In Scientology, control is necessary for the increase of one's ability.

Competence commences with a disciplined approach -- one which requires a willingness to manage or control factors that would surely defeat a person were he or she to succumb to the dictates of each vagary. With the increase of ability, one's freedom is enhanced and likewise one's responsibility for self, others and the environment also increases.

When it is abused, control is bad, benefiting the few at the expense of the masses. The Soviet Union and dictatorships seem to prove that this is axiomatic.

Societal correction of the criminal appears harsh in that all the criminals' freedom is forfeited and total control of the malefactor within a prison is imposed. Control has gotten a bad rap, a bad name even for non-criminal citizens.

Those who rail or scheme against control have obviously been badly and oppressively controlled and have themselves controlled others badly. Then again I should not say controlled but abused.

For instance, one of the supporters of Lisa McPherson Trust accuses the Church of controlling the lives of its members. Which of course is what the essays by approved Lisa McPherson Trust submitters will undoubtedly emphasize. This supporter had a very harsh childhood at the hands of a physically abusive father. This person was beaten daily during certain periods of his young life.

It is no surprise then that this person is one of the foremost inveighers against Scientology having control of its own affairs and of its parishioners.

Having given me a good definition of control and proven that real control is inherently beneficial and to be used for good, Scientology shows me that this person's fear of and attack upon control as bad is completely understandable. He was beaten into a false definition of control.

In effect, those who attack control as bad simply do not know what real control is.

The LMT and its associates - critics as they have styled themselves - have made it very clear it does not want to the Church to grow.

Moreover, a number of these "critics" have made it very plain they would see it "destroyed." There is an abundance of Internet postings attesting to this. Their named target is Church management.

In order to grow, control is a key ingredient. This is especially true for any international organization that would reach to the four points of the compass.

Ergo, a good attack point for supporters of LMT is the dedicated erosion of control, freedom, and responsibility from within and without the organization. I quote the Official Rules of the Lisa McPherson Trust Year 2000 Literati Contest:

"The essay should analyze how control, freedom and responsibility operate together or clash within the organization and how these interface with the non-Scientology world."

In the absence of good control an organization deteriorates, first with distraction then to heedless efforts, then to anarchy. History is strewn with the lessons of anarchy.

Beginning in the eigth century B.C.E. China witnessed the collapse of the Zhou dynasty. For nearly 500 years thereafter, social anarchy ensued. It began as feuds between lords. It soon deteriorated into long drawn out wars. Women, children, and the aged were included in the slaughter when found or captured or by an opposing army. Hundreds of thousands were recorded as being killed in mass slaughters. There were accounts of horrific tortures such as the conquered being thrown into boiling cauldrons, and their relatives forced to drink the human soup.

The decay of control is sought by those whose hedonistic lust is camouflaged as a crusade against alleged tyranny only to end up literally in the human soup of anarchy.

Comparison is a useful tool to get a point across and LMT is my comparison so that control, freedom and responsibility as it pertains to the rules of this contest have good reference.

LMT has but one point of control - the person who created and funds it. Its' money will pay for the winners in this contest. What if I proposed a contest for his organization wherein the essays "should analyze how control, freedom and responsibility operate together or clash within the organization how these interface with the Scientology world?"

I could write an essay about LMT, but it would not be honest because I know little of the control, freedom or responsibility in his organization beyond the conspicuous foundation upon which rests its activities and existence: Bob Minton's coffers. I don't even know how he or his employees in his for-profit organization define control, freedom or responsibility. I would hope that he controls his employees and organization, allowing freedom for his employees to do the job they were hired for and exercise total responsibility for their job and the organization so that it grows and expands. I know that if he does not control them and define their freedom on the job and hold them accountable, the organization will not reach its goals. Financial control would, for him, be a must. A lack of control over finances at LMT would ultimately destroy the place.

Thus, in the confines and context of his organization and its goals he has to control. But what do his employees have to say about this? I imagine they have no gripe if the substantial paychecks keep rolling in. Let the paychecks stop and they might have some complaints. But right now they perform to his standards or they lose their employment. We have seen this happen to his former executive director.

There is no freedom if there is no control, no responsibility. The Church has passed the fifty-year mark. This is evidence of control internally and externally returning longevity and prosperity - in other words survival. Without control, freedom and responsibility being exercised by Scientologists of their Church and of the environment the Church would not have lasted 10 years.

The rules of this contest mandate that control, freedom, and responsibility define the context of the essays. But the rules of this contest state go further, requiring the essays to "provide some practical resolution or approach to the Scientology issue…" based upon control, freedom, and responsibility. This brings up a significant question for me: What issue?

There is no "Scientology issue", just as there was no "Jewish issue", except in the genocidal minds of Hitler, Goebbels and Goering.

Too, there was no "Bosnian issue", except in the ethnically cleansed minds of psychiatrist Jovan Raskovic, his student Radovan Karazic, and their avid follower Milosevic.

Thus, Scientologists entering this apparently open contest have a problem. The contest mandates there is a "Scientology issue" while patently there is none.

Unless that issue was invented to construct a demagogic stage where rancor could perform another ugly act.

Yet, I see a way to do an essay as provided by the poorly phrased propaganda gimmick: the dialectic "provide some practical resolution…"

Fortunately, the Church has scriptures (canon law) to follow that have for over fifty years provided good control, freedom, and responsibility and ensured and insured its survival despite those who would "provide some practical solution"

to engender its demise. Control, freedom and responsibility will see the Church growing substantially through its next fifty-years. Any who doubt this have simply no idea of what Scientology is or for propaganda reasons deliberately redefine it so they can create an issue and then "provide some practical resolution."

In closing this Apologia for Reason, and before proceeding with the essay proper, I will say this: What is true for me is that Scientology is fought by those with unclean hands. Because they are particularly unclean on the subjects of control, freedom and responsibility, they try mightily to call into question those keenest of qualities that Scientology instills in those that follow the road to freedom: control, freedom and responsibility.

Why I am a Scientologist

I joined Scientology staff one year after leaving the U.S. Army where I had served in several action sectors. I had seen evidence of man's great inhumanity to man. I was severely traumatized by the experience until I received auditing and was able to free myself from that trauma. I was greatly revitalized to the extent I wanted to devote my life to creating a better world through helping people.

I joined staff and found a purpose that I could put into immediate practice through the application of the writings and discoveries of man's greatest friend L. Ron Hubbard.

I worked in the evenings and did my training in the daytime. I first became a Dianetic auditor and later a Scientology auditor, while advancing through various posts to the level of an executive.

My greatest pride was in seeing people change into more able beings as they received their auditing and training. As they found out that they were not merely bodies but beings of ineffable potential, I noticed too that their control of their environment increased and commensurately their freedom increased. One thing that I remember being told may times by preclears just after they had gotten a session was how the more auditing they received the greater they liked other people and wanted to help them.

Auditing, Affinity for their fellows and the desire to help them seemed to go hand in hand with getting auditing. I had noticed the same thing in myself.

The ability to help seems to be a benchmark of greater understanding of oneself through auditing and training.

I remember one person's success story in particular because it is my own. For years I had not really communicated with my stepfather because I felt his treatment of me in my teens had been too harsh, restrictive and prejudiced in favor of my half-brother. My stepfather and I were constantly at odds, arguing, sullen to each other, with me feeling deprived, controlled, freedomless, and justified in causing him as much trouble as I possibly could. In fact, I considered him a control freak of low intellect. I also never once thanked him for placing a roof over my head or for the food he put on the table after long hours of hard labor. The bottom line is that his control was anathema to me and I tried to destroy it at every turn.

After getting auditing for a few sessions -- sessions in which I unburdened myself of my unethical actions toward my stepfather -- a strange thing happened.

I found that my recall of him before and after these sessions were quite different. Sure I remembered the bad times, but I also remembered the enjoyment we had traveling around the country fishing, hiking, camping, and moments when we actually were close and what I had done to exacerbate our conflicts. I found myself actually loving this man who without question took under his care as his own two children that came to him as strangers. I grew to like him more and more until the day he died.

The lesson I learned about control is that control comes from understanding myself and others. He didn't learn the lesson, but I did and that was enough, as it changed us both into friends. When we met for the first time after I got that auditing he saw or felt immediately that the game between he and I had changed.

His interpretation was that I had become an adult or that the Army had made me a man. But I knew that I had changed because I wrested control of myself from what was controlling me.

When young, I did not have the freedom to communicate to this man for fear that whatever I said would cause a row. After auditing I had attained the freedom to communicate whatever I wanted to him without fear of upsetting him because I had taken responsibility for both myself and for him.

I ended up being able to control him when necessary during the remaining years of our relationship and I in turn had no problem letting him control me.

Now, the people at LMT judging this essay are probably wondering what this has to do with their skewed essay rules. (They should have chosen an outside source to do the judging as well.)

Well, I'll tell them. Unlike their connotation of control, which is somebody forcing others to do things, my connotation of control is good because I realized at the personal level that there is no bad control there is only no control. No control is bad. It deprives people of the other two subjects in this essay: freedom and responsibility.

Yes, I realize that I am supposed to be writing about how Scientology controls people and "provide some practical resolution." Well, Scientology provides a practical solution to all of life's problems. It had better do that or I wouldn't have any use for it, because it will never free people or help them attain responsibility without control or practical solutions.

You see the lie here in this "Literati Contest" is that control harms people.

That is just plain nonsense. What harms people is no control: fail to control people to get their personal ethics in, refuse to make them produce a worthwhile product and let them receive big bucks for producing harmful acts and products.

LMT itself could use a little control, as it sure isn't accomplishing is alleged "mission." Its got a whole town right now wishing it had never come to town. I wager the present director and founder of LMT understands that very thoroughly after almost a year of operation. And my prediction is that they will never get it under control because they don't have the right definition for control, freedom, and responsibility.

If they did have the correct definitions there wouldn't be a LMT in the first place. True, LMT is not the subject of this essay. They're the ones paying for it. Though it helps to throw them in once in awhile for comparisons' sake. How else can I say anything about providing some practical resolution to the burning "Scientology issue" when I don't see an issue and have no complaints about my Church?

No, I entered this "Literati Contest" to keep the contest honest and will get on with that.

I am a Scientologist, I repeat, because Scientology has given me the ability to control others, my environment, and myself and because I know that I have gained freedom of thought and choice. Thereby I am capable of controlling others and myself for the greatest good for the greater number of dynamics. Moreover, it is greater control and increased freedom that have given me the courage to be responsible for others the environment and myself. I am not afraid to act, to control, to have freedom and to be responsible to others. Or to have others control me. Scientology has given me the ability to understand others and myself and to trust in the control, freedom and responsibility of others.

The truth is that Scientology has given me a reason and purpose to live and to know that I am a good and well meaning person. Moreover, it has taught me to believe in mankind. Before Scientology, I was not sure life had any meaning and that people weren't anything more than animals and that they had to be forced to be good. The world was dog-eat-dog. This is false. Scientology has proved to me through application of the true meaning of control, freedom and responsibility that man is basically good and indeed likes his fellow humans immensely and wants to be responsible for their survival. I have found once a man realizes that he can control his fellow man without harming them, that freedom isn't something that if you have it you will only end up harming others, thus it should be removed from ones' possession. And that responsibility stems from the willingness to confront anything and everything.

If I were to "provide" as per the contest rules of this "Literati" some "practical resolution" it would be to have people at LMT honestly examine their intentions in regard to control, freedom and responsibility.

They won't do that, of course, because this contest is not about them but about Scientology: control, freedom, and responsibility.

Besides, they have the prize money already in hand.

The Church would not have gotten as far in this world today without control, freedom and responsibility. Through fifty-years of out right lies about the Church aimed at stopping it is the Church that persists to this day and beyond, while naysayers have come and gone. What made this possible? Control, freedom and responsibility. Ask any successful multinational organization and it will tell you the same thing.

I can just imagine what some of the "practical solutions" from the approved LMT list of submitters will be. Something on the order of get rid of the Church leaders most responsible, freedom loving and most able to control others is my guess. I bet LMT wished it had a management that capable. (Just teasing.)

Controlling situations, being free and being responsible are what the Church, its staff, and parishioners are most lauded for from Seattle to Timbuktu. There are literally thousands of proclamations and acknowledgments from people, communities, municipalities and governments around the world admiring the ability of Scientologists for ability to control, exercise freedom and be unflinchingly responsible.

Why I will remain a Scientologist

It is because of the very points of control, freedom and responsibility that I will remain a Scientologist. These points have changed and improved my life for the better, made me a better person and given me the ability to help others survive and survive better than they did before.

LMT apparently finds fault with the very things that have improved my life and kept the organization intact and growing, and that provides me practical solutions to living better: the Church gives me knowledge and means to improve my life and help others.

This so-called issue that LMT posits exists is artificial. "Provide some practical resolution" is LMT's code for their propaganda campaign of "reform"

pushed by its founder for four years with money which may or may not have a tainted history.

Am I fair in this essay on control, freedom and responsibility for questioning the intent of the very contest I have entered? I believe I am fair if you consider truth a trustworthy yardstick of honesty.

I will remain a Scientologist because I have personally witnessed for over forty years the Church and its parishioners take control of their destiny in order to ensure that they are free when that destiny arrives rather than relinquishing their control, freedom and responsibility to the dictates of those such as LMT represents.

Is LMT original in attempting to persuade people that control, freedom, and responsibility as practiced by Scientologists curtailed? Absolutely not. One thing the history of the Church has cast into the light of truth has been a concerted attempt to convince people with all manner of falsehoods that Scientologists using their knowledge, gaining increased freedom, and controlling their environment is something harmful.

The masterminds of the "Literati Contest" might think they have come up with a moral high ground approach to questioning the operation of Scientology. But what they may not realize is that the moral high ground is not won through operating a clever propaganda scheme. Any small gains they make are tainted with what they cannot reveal about their motive.

I will remain a Scientologist, increasing my ability to control of my environment and myself. I have found it is not laws that have provided for and protect my freedom in the main but keeping my mind free and understanding my own motives and the true intent of others regarding the survival of all on this planet.

Scientologists and the Church increase their ability to control so that they remain a powerful force and source of knowledge to insure the survival of all on this planet.

If I thought for one moment that the masterminds of the "Literati Contest" had my freedom of mind and the freedom of mind of every other soul at heart I would not be writing this piece or entering in a contest I apparently have no chance of winning. I would not write this essay at all. It is the very duplicity of the contest rules that tell me I am right and that freedom of mind and thought is the last thing this "Literati Contest" has in mind.

Every great movement has been fought - Scientology is a great movement. Control, freedom, and responsibility have made it a great movement. The Church and its parishioners believe in what they strive towards and have had to fight for fifty-years.

I remember back in 1986, around the time of the Wollersheim case, a rueful complaint that a journalist for a major Los Angeles paper made to me about the Church, and I quote, "It doesn't play by the rules." He made this remark in reference to disappointment that the Church was not going to lay down and die after the decision in the Wollersheim case. I have always thought this an immensely amusing lament from the Fifth Estate.

The problem for LMT and their "Literati Contest" -- and most likely the thing that caused its masterminds to dream up that "clever" ploy -- is that the Church through control, freedom, and responsibility just won't quit fighting back. Alas and a lack.

Control, responsibility, and freedom have given the means to Scientologists to create a great beneficial impact upon the people of earth. Narconon, Criminon, Applied Scholastics and other social betterment groups increase daily their reach to those in need of help in bettering their lives. Yet LMT and its members and supporters do not look into these works, no, they instead deny their existence or assign ulterior motive to them.

The problem of control and freedom as it pertains to LMT is that they want to control the destiny and freedom of Scientologists and their Church and thus have to ignore or propagandize against the great good that Scientologist do in the world with control, freedom and responsibility. Of course, this an absurd agenda for the LMT and guaranteed failure in the attempt.

This very same line of attack has been used against other religions throughout history. Hate mongers are quite unoriginal from age to age in their attacks upon religion. How believable is the horrific 1920s propaganda against the Catholic Church now that Catholic parishioner's number over one billion worldwide? LMT and its supporters might make an argument for the truth of those propaganda statements but the reality is that the acts of individuals is not the nature of any endeavor - even LMT's - unless of course it is the inherent nature of the group, such as the KKK.

Mormons suffered massacres in the formative years of their history and yet they flourish today. Do they exert control over their religion internally and externally? Quite right they do.

Review at your leisure the vast revilement that Mormon Church survived to become a contributing factor in the greatness of the United States of America.

The simple caution here then is: suspect the motives of "Literati Contests" that 1) reduce substantially the cash award in its second year and 2) wants to interfere in the affairs of religious groups by soliciting "practical resolutions."

In the end, I remain a Scientologist because Scientology has helped me become a more able person and turned my benighted picture of life and people into a bright and practical hope for life and mankind.

I will remain a Scientologist because I know the history of religion and the new meaningfulness that Scientology has brought to religion and all religions.

The Wrong Perspective for
A Judge of the Literati Contest

The Lisa McPherson Trust is a for-profit organization hoping to make millions from a lawsuit, which the founder of LMT is funding. Whether the founder of the LMT is qualified to render an unbiased opinion on anything regarding Scientology should have an essay contest all its own. This man has an infamous history regarding Scientology -- one of outlandish actions meant to provoke Church staff and parishioners.

A recent exploit of his was to attempt to provoke Church staff and parishioners through a mockery of the E-Meter, a religious artifact. Two of LMT's associates pretended to be an auditor and PC in session. The place they chose to do this was in front of the Church of Scientology, Flag Land Base in Clearwater, Florida.

In another, incident he and the Executive Vice-President of LMT spewed obscenities into the face of a staff member at Church of Scientology Flag Land Base trying to provoke a reaction. Security cameras caught the entire sordid exhibition.

The double-dealing of the founder of LMT was exposed on national television. He had lied about his relationship with the present director of LMT. He duped the reporting journalist originally with how wonderful a family man he was when in truth he was having an affair with the woman he was being lauded for helping so magnanimously.

Does this man with his most recent comment "Scientology the fastest dissolving religion" have the right or wrong perspective to judge anything about Scientology? (As an aside, he was undoubtedly prompted to use the word dissolving because the Secretary of State of Florida had dissolved the Lisa McPherson Trust, for among other things, non-filing of certain legal papers.)

I repeat that I entered this contest to keep the contest honest. I have serious doubts that I will succeed in keeping it honest. However, my essay will see the light of day no matter what the outcome of the "contest."

Is this part of the essay germane to the contest at hand? It is safe to say that the "Literati Contest" would not exist without the deep pockets of the founder of LMT - and he is one of the judges.

If nothing else, my essay will put the "Literati Contest" judges on notice that hypocrisy has its cost.

See Part 2 of 2

You may email Rick Sherwood at:

Rick_Sherwood@prontomail.com

From: AJ <AJ_member@newsguy.com>
Subject: Rick Sherwood's Literati Entry part 2 of 2
Date: 17 Dec 2000 02:13:16 -0800
Message-ID: <91i3js01l3r@drn.newsguy.com>

[Introduction:

This is part two of Rick Sherwood's essay: the one that Stacy is trying to annul because of his belief that Arnie Lerma, Joe Cisar and Scott Mayer could have never been true Scientologists.]

Control and Persistence on a given Course

Persistence on a given course is a high survival trait. The Church of Scientology has persisted on a given course of returning control, freedom and responsibility to all the peoples of Earth. The Church has never retreated or taken any path other than that path laid out in its scriptures.

Despite repeated attempts to undermine the Aims of Scientology those with the foresight, fortitude and just plain guts have kept it on course.

That is why the "Literati Contest" rules seek to attack and undermine those who have kept the Church on course. For what other reason would they make an issue of the internal control of Scientology other than to raise doubts about who controls?

The so-called critics of Scientology are frantic that they have not succeeded in undermining control within the Church. They literally seethe in frustration at their continued failure to unseat the sane and unflinching control that drives Scientology along its course to achieving the Aims of Scientology.

More time is spent by the "critics" of Scientology in an push to destroy the control factor than upon any other aspect of the Church. Too, they have tried to destroy the copyrights. This ended in abject failure. They have tried to denigrate Scientology's founder. This ended in abject failure. LRH is lauded the world over.

LMT and other "critics" have aligned themselves with oppressive German actions to stamp out the Church in Germany. This is doomed to failure because LMT's founder and employees do not know enough of the history of Scientology.

Following that criminal alliance, LMT added itself to the axis of the French attack upon freedom of religion.

Undermining or subverting control of the Church is an old story. Each time it is attempted those tough enough to wield control, freedom and responsibility step forward to rebuff those who would destroy man's only hope of survival. This is the history of control within and without the Church. Control sufficient enough to insure man's survival is wisely tempered with understanding of freedom and responsibility learned through spiritual training and processing.

Being able and willing to uncompromisingly exert control in the face of sustained attacks is the mark of leadership. Those opposed to such staunch leadership, faced with such certainty of command flail about like leaves in the wind. This is what has happened over the past seven years to the so-called "critics." Try as they might, they have faced one defeat after another while the Church has persisted, grown stronger, trained its staffs into greater willingness to control their environment despite the screeching of "critics" to lay down and die.

Toughness breeds toughness. Toughness means reaching out more to wrest the world from its ills. Responsibility means that you won't relinquish your control, freedom, and responsibility because a few "critics" object to your possessing any control, freedom and responsibility they have not approved your having.

"Critics" have a major failing which makes it hard for them to ever win in the face of iron willed control, deep-rooted sense of freedom and a desire to be more responsible. They feel threatened in the face of such beliefs. Irrational as this may sound it has been demonstrated over and over by them in their refusal to look at anything but falsehoods about Scientology.

"Critics" are fond of predicting the demise or destruction of Scientology. There have been hundreds of doomsday dates heralded by them over the past seven years.

Pure delusion. They have no consensus on the Internet or in the real world to support such a prediction.

The rules of this contest reflect the delusory nature of the "critic."

Freedom

Per the contest rules, I am also supposed to take up the issue of freedom.

Throughout this essay I have probably annoyed the "critics" by not addressing freedom in the context they want me to. I instead have spoken of freedom of mind, freedom of thought, freedom from aberration that allows me greater movement, greater compassion, greater understanding and even increase in intelligence once the suppression on my intelligence was removed by Scientology training and auditing.

Their context is not about freedom at all but about slavery and how I am a slave or robot or brainwashed.

Poor "critic" to be enslaved by such a false belief.

Scientology freed me. While on staff I became more able, I gained valuable knowledge, I increased my worth to society, gained pride in my accomplishments and expanded the number of people that I could actually communicate with to an infinite degree.

I worked hard because I wanted to. I had heavy demands made upon me and I met every one of those demands, gaining even more pride in the ability to grow.

Where once I thought that I had just so much potential and when that was used up I had reached my societal niche -- end of story until I died - I found continual growth a reality.

Scientology has shown me that my potential is limitless as long as I do not agree to arbitrary limits and lies.

My freedom was never restricted. I found that I could always reach higher levels of understanding that showed me that any idea of constraint was due to misunderstanding or misunderstoods operating in the area.

Did I ever disagree with something? Don't be silly, of course I did. Did I feel my freedom limited because of a disagreement? Never. I just communicated more, not less. You know the old saw: "When in doubt communicate." I took more responsibility not less. I did not withhold myself I communicated. I did not justify my faults and transgressions and blame others or the Church. I got honest with others and myself. I did not justify dishonesty in myself. And I availed myself of its justice system when I saw fit.

I am extremely proud of my accomplishments and production and thankful to good control within the Church and the environment that allowed me a safe haven to increase my competence, my worth and my service to mankind.

I am not overly concerned with my individual freedom when I have taken upon my shoulders the responsibility for making the world a better, saner place in which to live, knowing that this is the true route individual freedom. It's hard work, taking control and responsibility. I have dedicated my life to this and though the "critics" attempt to profane my dedication I know what is true about myself, a truth they refuse to believe about me -- that I even seek their survival and to help them if ever honesty reach for help.

Those at LMT and "critics" know the state of their own lives. Are they in control of their freedom? Are they willing to be truly responsible for everyone on the planet? Or are they harming good people for the sake of whatever reason they deem justifies their actions? Only they can answer those questions.

Nobody is examining the life of a "critic" to determine if he is controlled, or in control, free, or enslaved, responsible or irresponsible. Perhaps there is no examination because "critics" have no one around them who care enough. If he steps too far out of line he runs afoul of society and the authorities take action. I believe that "critics" have their concept of freedom as freedom from something.

But is a "critic" really free to do anything he pleases at any time.[?] No, a "critic" is not. If a "critic" doesn't work he doesn't eat. Is a "critic" free then to abrogate the law? Yes, until he gets caught but that doesn't really matter in the long run because the "critic" will move to penalize him or herself. This is demonstrably true whether believed or not. So, what is freedom to a "critic?" They seem to have a lot of attention on this so it must be something they have trouble with in their own lives. Scientologists are not overly concerned with being free to do whatever they want right now so much as concerned with insuring that down the road there is total freedom for all beings.

I suggest "critics" and people at LMT get the word freedom defined more accurately.

The LMT Literati Contest "Practical Resolution"

This section goes about setting up the data that will be used in "providing some practical resolution" for the "critics."

In doing research for my essay I read some postings. One interested me for the incredible stupidity of the poster. This poster proposed what he called a phone assault on the Churches of Scientology. He claims to be an ex-Scientologist and brags about knowing all about Scientology and Scientologists.

His plan, which he encouraged other "critics" to adopt and implement called for using pay phones to make harassing calls into the receptionists of the Churches with stated aim of confusing short term Scientologist into quitting the Church.

I said to myself "what an idiot." What he is proposing is against the law, several laws, beginning with malicious harassment.

The only thing he would accomplish is to provide more evidence to present to hate crime units of the FBI and state and local law enforcement that "critics"

of the Church, including LMT - he endorses LMT - are hate mongers. By the way, the willingness of law enforcement at all levels to take a complaint and at least file the name of the person reported on is on the increase. I have been making complaints on my own for several years and noticed recently greater acceptance of what I was complaining about.

He is obviously nothing more than a crank with an ax to grind. The "critics"

need to take control of him and responsibility for him and curtail his freedom to do whatever he wants.

Now the crime this person was about to do may well have harmed his own group - the alleged critics.

I believe that "critics" are aware of harm individual "critics" have caused their purported effort. I have seen them come down on one of their own with a vengeance. They do not so much as exert control over the offender but crush him with invalidation. To be a "member" of the "critics" must be a thankless job at times. Never have I seen the offender given a chance to correct the damage. If he does not conform he is gone, banned from the channel or the newsgroup. There is no justice for a "critic" who offend to mightily.

I have seen "critics" put up an obscene web site on a erstwhile ally. I have seen former "critics" vituperatively savaged beyond belief.

The point is that as long as a "critic" toes the party line he is accepted.

There is a lot of lip service to "Oh, we aren't a group, we have no leader, we're just a bunch of individuals with our own viewpoint and nobody makes me toe the line. We're just a bunch of happy anarchists." If there are any "critics"

who are foolish enough to think that is true then a look back through the postings of the past seven years will make him or her an absolute liar.

Now the point of all this is simple "critics" are hypocrites on the subject of control, freedom and responsibility.

The double standard of LMT and "critics" is up on the Internet to see. Hypocrisy fashioned the rules of this "Literati Contest."

This essay should have been about the lack of control, freedom, and responsibility among the "critics" and at LMT as it interfaces with the world.

Such a contest would have at least been an honest one.

Scientology exerts internal and external control to accomplish the humanitarian Aims of Scientology. Thus "critics" have targeted strong management in order to subvert the humanitarian Aims of Scientology.

"Critics" must realize by this time that they are their own worst enemy. It was inevitable that they would define themselves in the public's eyes as weirdoes, cranks, and fringe freaks. Years ago, perhaps, 1994 the "critics" predicted that Internet users would flood the newsgroup a.r.s. and crush Scientology off the net.

Didn't happen. "Critics" are the world's worst predictors. Why? They are like the gambler who goes to the track and bets on the horse he wants to win not on the one that will win. He bets the phantasm of his desire rather that the horse of reality.

Truth is not on the side of the "critics" because they do not deal in anything much but falsehoods. This has been true from the start and will not change despite the trend over time of the "critics" to try to clean up their act and appear more acceptable to the public at large.

One attempt to clean up their act was brought about by their realization that in attacking and harassing individual Scientologists' beliefs that they were not gaining any friends. So, they opted for saying that they had nothing against Scientologists but only against their Church and its leadership. To quote colloquial wisdom "give me a break, will ya."

The fact of the matter is that the public, a whole Florida community, avoids LMT and the "critics" like the plague.

The use of false data has a nasty draw back for after using it has to be the truth or the user knows himself as nothing more than a liar. Would any "critic"

admit to being a liar? Only the most criminal would, as they have no sense of self-preservation at all.

The simplicity is that they are not capable of controlling themselves; they operate on a false definition of freedom and control (equals force); and have no concept of responsibility. For them responsibility is blame. If they could see beyond these limitations they might be capable of contributing to the survival of mankind. But right now they are only capable of destruction - and damned incompetent at even that.

Therefore I aver that LMT's and "critics'" "practical resolution" would read something like the following - based upon the writings, communications, and rants of the parties mentioned.

· Get rid of all the able leaders as they follow the scriptures of the Scientology without compromise.

· Appoint a committee of LMT and "critics" to "reform" the Church.

· Ban LRH technology that LMT and the "critics" object to.

· Relinquish the Church's tax exempt status.

· Need I go on? "Critics" postings on the Internet abound in ways they would provide a "practical solution."

· Okay, one more. Pay off Wollersheim so that the founder of LMT can collect from Wollersheim. Corrected to read: pay the money to LMT's founder to ensure he gets his money.

The Public View

LMT is fighting for public acceptance in Clearwater, Florida. To this date, as evidenced by "critics" postings that fight is not going well. LMT has completely estranged the entire government of Clearwater and the vast majority of citizens.

Actions and rhetoric that vibrate hate have accomplished this.

This December "critics" will "picket" in Clearwater. They will follow their usual plan of action no doubt and launch an assault to take the moral high ground through trying to provoke the Church into doing something the "critics"

can then use to call in the press to cover the abuse they suffer.

The Clearwater provocation plan of the "critics" is well documented on the Internet and in their own words. There is also documentation in the "critics"

own words why Clearwater citizens will not side with them.

They have antagonized the public and government in Clearwater, which in turn has given Clearwater citizens and leaders adequate comparison of the intent and actions of LMT and the "critics" versus the "critics" target.

Due in part to the comparison provided by LMT and "critics" my religion is welcomed in Clearwater as never before by a growing consensus.

This then is the state of the people who want to "provide some practical resolution…" to the "Scientology issue"

To paraphrase: By your works you shall be known.

My Practical Resolution

· The people at LMT and the "critics" will withdraw all the false data they have spread and admit to having spread it.

· They will stop their attacks on the copyrights of the Church and get all the copyrighted material they have spread over the Internet and into libraries and other repositories removed from these places.

· They will contact all authorities to which they have given false information and witness and declare that the data is false.

· They will bar false data on all chat channels where false data is spread and stop using these channels to conspire to attack Scientology. They will do the same for the newsgroup.

· They will declare there is no Scientology issue and announce broadly that there is only the issue of hate and hate is not acceptable in a sane world.

· They will withdraw support from any government that attempts to abrogate the constitution of that country, especially as it effects religious freedom and religious belief.

· They will reject as unconscionable the practice of discrimination against any religious peoples.

· They will provide data that they are bound by law to report as honest citizens and crimes committed by any critic against the laws of the land whether committed against Scientology or not.

· They can report confidentially to the proper authorities any crimes in progress by critics whether they involve Scientology or not.

· That "critics" honestly inform themselves as to the true motives of themselves and any other "critic" and publicly repudiate all harmful and false motives of themselves and other "critics."

· That they find out about the true nature of Scientology, setting aside all bias and prejudice that would bar seeing Scientology as it truly is - and not through the corrupting lens of falsehoods.

· They will cease their deprogramming attempts and cease in any and all manner to pull people away from their faith.

Patrick Henry's famous words "Give me Liberty or give me death" inspired me to pen unflinchingly the above practical resolution. Though I have no intention of dying his, words speak infinitely to the undying resolve it takes to defeat tyranny in any form. The "practical resolution" sought by this LMT "Literati Contest" is sheer unadulterated tyranny. Tyranny aimed at destroying my Constitutional right of Freedom of Religion.

Conclusion

The rules of this "Literati Contest" stipulate that there is to be a practical resolution provided on the Scientology issue, combining input from both sides, in other words a synthesis solution. Such a synthesis, such a solution would be false, impractical, destructive, and dishonest, as there is no Scientology issue. There is only a RICO-like conspiratorial agenda and collusion to subvert the religion of Scientology. The rule is therefore declared the grossest subterfuge and thus invalid for any honest and ethical being. I declare this most heartily.

I wrote this essay from my experience and belief and my undying gratitude to L.

Ron Hubbard. He gave me the Bridge to Total Freedom. I intend to cross all the way over that bridge.

You may email Rick Sherwood at:

Rick_Sherwood@prontomail.com