Scientology
TO STACY ETC. ON LMT
I was just advised that Stacy posted the following in a message
to Safe.
> In fact, I would like to invite you to be on the Advisory Board of the
I think that this is important enough that I should answer
immediately before I even take time to find out more of the
details.
When I see somebody shifting over towards a better course,
I am not inclined to nitpick. For this reason, I offered no
criticism of the charter and various statements being made
by LMT because they are moving in the right direction.
However, if I were to get my name associated with LMT, then
I do need to nitpick and to make my position very clear in
advance. Furthermore, I believe that the dialogue about this
has to be out in the open rather than private. There has
already been so much skullduggery in Scientology that I see
no other ethical course but to play with all my cards open
and on the table.
I am going to need some time to analyze things, so I'm putting
any decisions about this on hold while I do that.
But a couple of things occur to me right off the cuff and I'll
mention those as a starting position.
First and formost, a Reform has to be oriented towards aiding
the existing membership rather than towards getting them out
of the CofS.
In this respect, even I am in a strange position because of
having one foot in the freezone. A lot of my writings are
freezone oriented rather than reform oriented.
What CofS should become is the equivallent of a freezone
group that happens to practice standard tech and behaves
well towards everybody and does not abuse its membership.
Although many critics would like to get people out of CofS,
and many freezone groups would like to have members going
to them instead, and even I would like to see them reading
my self clearing book, all of these other agendas are
inappropriate for a foundation whose target is to bring
about an internal reform within CofS.
An internal reform means leaving the members in there and
having them change the place around. These other agendas
(including my own) must be kept away from LMT if it is to
have a chance of success.
For example, it is appropriate for LMT to demand that
there be no censorship of information about LRH, but it
would be wrong for LMT to engage in Hubbard bashing or
rubbing members noses in some of the less pleasant truths.
Consider somebody who idolizes Jefferson for writing the
Bill of Rights. It would not be proper to keep needling
them about Jefferson's slave mistress. It would only be
appropriate to prevent them from censoring that from his
biography.
Remember that Lisa herself was a Scientologist and would
have objected heavily to any form of Hubbard bashing or
poking fun at Scientology beliefs.
The proper goal for LMT would be to ensure that it would
be safe for her to practice her religion if she were
alive today. In other words, we must remove the risks
and the exploitation rather than destroying the beliefs
or attacking the Scientology tech that she followed.
I would suggest that a sort of bill of rights might
be needed. Offhand, I have one point to suggest and
I probably will think of others. It is -
TO ALLOW THE FREE USE AND SPREAD OF THE SCIENTOLOGY TECH
REGARDLESS OF THE DICTATES OF ANY ORGANIZATION.
Since Scientology is a Religion, this is a direct expression
of first ammendment rights.
Note that this says ANY organization, and most especially
includes CofS but is not limited to CofS.
I think that most of the membership would agree to this
point and even get behind it enthusiastically. The only
objections (and there will be many) would be from those
who wish to control the tech for purposes of exploitation
and money making.
I think that freezone would back this one up because it
supports their own faith in the tech and desires to use
it outside of the rigid orthodox CofS mindset.
And I think that if the critics pause and think for a
moment, they will realize that this also causes all the
lawsuits against them to evaporate, so I hope that they
will go along with this as well.
It is with points like this, which are positive from all
sides, which will bring about an internal reform.
It is also important to get the membership to read
the Scientology Reformer's Homepage that I wrote and
which can be found at fza.org among other places. This
is the one which indicates most strongly to loyalists.
Those whom I have been able to talk into looking at it
always come around and start supporting reform. When
I wrote it, I was thinking deeply upon how I felt when
I was on staff in 1968 and it is exactly what would have
reached me at that time. Most of my other writings are
far too harsh. So take this one as a guideline.
If we could get some media exposure of the reformer's
homepage at fza.org in the LA and Clearwater areas, it
would be a tremendous help, because most loyalists and
even most of the fence sitters do not know to look.
A common story that I hear from people who are on the
fence is that they glanced at ARS once a few years ago,
saw nothing but bashing, and decided it was useless to
look there any further because they still believe in
the tech even though they think the organization is
very screwed up. The Reformer's homepage will turn these
people around, whereas rants about LRH and Crowley will
not. Note that any advance tech student who has heard
the Philadelphia Doctorate Course knows that Ron called
Crowley his friend and nobody every left Scientology
on account of that.
Also note that fza.org has no group or organization
behind it. In other words, there is no moneymaking or
profit that they will gain from attracting attention.
This is important because it makes it impossible for
the CofS to claim that it is being promoted for purposes
of stealing their business. This is not true of many
of the other freezone pages which are sponsored by
practicioners who might gain business. Fza.org is
special in that it was done as a labor of love by people
who are not practicing but only wanted to help spread
information.
This is only a start. I'll be examining the LMT charter
etc. and seeing what else I can come up with.
All the best,
The Pilot (aka Ken Ogger)
See The Self Clearing Homepage for URLs to these sites
http://fza.org/pilot/selfclr.htm
Or see The Pilots Home Page at http://fza.org/pilot/index.htm
Some translations are available, see links at fza.org
Also see the new www.fzint.org website.
This post will be included in the next Super Scio Archive.
See the Pilot Archives at FZA.ORG.
Note that some of my posts only go to ACT. I don't actually use
the pilot@scientology.at email address. That is just window
dressing. I prefer to keep techical discussions out in the
open. I watch ARS and ACT for messages with Pilot in the
subject line.
Message-ID: <X520000117T63902X13.3BR@somewhere.com>
Date: 17 Jan 2000 04:00:12
From: pilot@scientology.at (The Pilot)
Organization: The Pilot's hidden place
> Lisa McPherson Trust. I am sure I speak for everyone at the Trust when
> I tell you that it would be an honor if you would join us in our
> endeavor. You can join as "Safe" if you would be more comfortable that
> way. And if you are in touch with the Pilot, please relay the same
> invitation to him.
Note that I keep up with ARS by checking in periodically, pulling
thousands of message headers, and sampling whatever looks like
it is of interest. And I have been completely offline since last
week. I only just picked up all my email (I'm writing this on Monday,
Jan 17, 2000), and found a bunch of messages calling my attention
to what was happening on ARS.
The free Self Clearing Book, The Super Scio book, and the
"SCIENTOLOGY REFORMER'S HOME PAGE" are all over the net.