zegel3.memo

Clearing Archive Roboposter roboposter at lightlink.com
Thu Dec 13 06:06:03 EST 2018


 
 
 
 
 
 
             ((My comments in double parentheses - Homer))
 
                            ZEGEL TAPE NO. 3
 
                               ZEGEL - 3
                               July 1984
 
                      Copyright (C) 1984 Jon Zegel
       Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
 
     ((This is the complete and unabridged, word for word transcript of
Jon Zegel's tape number 3. Remember that Zegel recants the entirety of
his first 3 tapes, including this one, in the 4th tape.))
 
     Hello again, it's July 1984 and this is Jon Zegel.
 
     This is tape number 3 in the series of tapes that we've produced.
When we did the first tape a little over a year ago, in July of 1983,
there were just a few hundred splinters around the world.  By the time
we did tape number 2 in January of 1984, there were thousands of
splinters, a real world wide splinter movement.
 
     This tape, I believe, marks the end of the 'splinter' movement.
There exists today a complete new Church.  We are no longer a schism of
Scientology.  In fact we have arrived.  We lack only a common name.
 
     As you know, a Church is by definition a collection of people who
share the same philosophy and beliefs.  The new Church is such a
collection, a group of people who believe in the philosophy of
Scientology, the basic dignity and rightness of people, they believe
that people have a right to improve their lives and the lives of those
around them without becoming emotionally or economically bankrupt, and
that people, just as they are, are basically good and are seeking to
survive.
 
     In this tape we are going to take a hard look at some of the
difficult areas to confront.  We will look at Church credibility, who is
in control, and the most difficult area, LRH's involvement or
noninvolvement in what has occurred.  We will look at the question I am
asked most often, "How could this have happened?"  And lastly we will
look at what this all means.
 
     Credibility.
 
     In any situation where evaluation of data is important, the
credibility of information is always a question.  Church credibility has
been extremely poor, both with the public and the press.  Here are a
couple of examples of why.
 
     In March of this year, a group of people concerned with the
Church's failure to make prompt repayments, staged a protest
demonstration at the Cedar's complex here in Los Angeles.  The march was
covered by both local and national media, TV, radio, press and so on.
The Church responded by sending Scientologists out carrying signs saying
"Sponsored by the Los Angeles Psychiatric Association" and passing out
similar statements to the press.
 
     What follows is the report broadcast on KFWB radio:
 
     "People upset with the refund policy of the Church of Scientology
marched in front of the Church headquarters in Hollywood today.  KFWB's
John Brooks reports that the protesters have filed suit against the
Church and claimed they have been harassed and intimidated."
 
     "Former Scientologists who say they were denied refunds totalling
thousands of dollars marched down the Sunset Boulevard sidewalk, while
current members of the Church joined the march with their own picket
signs and gave out misleading statements to the press as though they
were part of the protest.  Other Scientologists took down the names of
the marchers and photographed them.  The former Scientologists say
harassment and intimidation are what they faced when they tried to get
refunds.  Despite Church advertisements that money would be promptly
returned.  Church spokeswoman Shirley Young says protesters failed to
follow the refund procedures and are using this issue in a continuing
effort to discredit Scientology.  John Brooks, KFWB news 98."
 
     The credibility problem is not just a US phenomenon.  What follows
is a recording of a BBC radio call in program featuring Scientology's UK
Director of Public Relations, Mike Garside.  He's being asked questions
about Church policies on disconnection.  The first person you will hear
is a caller named George.
 
     Caller:  "I agree a person should be allowed not to talk to someone
if they don't want to, but I disagree with the fact of a Church saying
to a person, 'You should not associate with someone else because we
decided he is no longer in agreement with our aims, and so you should
stop your communication with him.'  "
 
     Interviewer:  "Do you in fact do that?"
 
     Mike:  "Well I think, I think really, we, you know, you need to
look at the actual policy of the Church in the matter, and really uh,
the...the..."
 
     Interviewer:  "Come on Mike, tell us, what is the policy of the
Church in the matter?  Do you or do you not tell your people not to
associate with those who have broken away?"
 
     Mike:  "What we say is that if somebody is, if somebody's survival
is being threatened by somebody they are associated with, then it is
probably a good idea for them to keep cool on it and to steer clear of
them for a while."
 
     Interviewer:  "Are they being keeping very cool of you George?"
 
     George:  "Uh, Well, yes, yes, but, their policy from what I have
read is not that it should be a good idea, but if they don't, they
themselves could be declared as a suppressive person."
 
     Interviewer:  "True of false, Mike?  Last word on that..."
 
     Mike:  "I, I think really the, the, the basic charge of that is
false."
 
     OK, let's see what the Church policy actually says.  From the
Church Policy Letter 10 September 1983 called PTSness and Disconnection,
on page 2, "the term disconnection is defined as a self determined
decision made by an individual that he is not going to be connected to
another.  It is a severing of communication."
 
     The issue here by the way is not disconnection, but whether or not
it is self determined.  Let's have a further look, on page 4 of the same
Policy Letter it states "A pc is connected to a person or group that has
been declared suppressive by HCO in a published Ethics Order.  He should
disconnect."
 
     It goes on to say, "No attempt should be made to establish
communication with the declared SP to clear matters up or to seek to
reform the SP.  The SP's reform is strictly in the hands of HCO.  The
PTS simply disconnects."
 
     And later goes on to say, "To fail or refuse to disconnect from a
suppressive person not only denies the PTS case gain, it also is
supportive of the suppressive, in itself a suppressive act.  And it must
be so labeled."
 
     It then refers to HCOPL 23 December 1965RA, which was revised and
reissued on the 10th of September 1983, and is called Suppressive Acts.
It was republished just a couple of months before this radio program was
broadcast.  Let's have a look at it.
 
     Sure enough on page 4 under Suppressive Acts it states,
 
     "28.)  Continued adherence to a person or group pronounced a
suppressive person or group by HCO."
 
     Further on page 9 it says,
 
     "Any PTS who fails to either handle or disconnect from the SP who
is making him or her a PTS, is, by failing to do so, guilty of a
suppressive act."
 
     So, is disconnection self determined?  In fact, no it is not,
specifically in two instances.  One when handling fails, and when a
person has been pronounced an SP by HCO.  The only choice is being on
lines or not.  If you disconnect you can be on lines.
 
     Mr. Garside would have you believe that this is all self-
determined.  Let's see how it is actually applied.  I will read from
three actual Church Ethics Orders all issued within the past 12 months.
I've deleted the names of those involved for obvious reasons.
 
     From the first, this one issued at FOLO West US, it says, "Any
Scientologist found to be maintaining a line with, offering support to,
or in any way granting credence to ...., and his or her motivations, is
also subject to declare and denial of any further service."
 
     On another Findings and Recommendations from a Comm Ev, it says
"...that this person be declared a Suppressive Person, her only terminal
being the International Justice Chief".
 
     And on a third, this one from Flag, it says, "All Scientologists
and In-Ethics individuals everywhere are warned not to associate with
these suppressive individuals or become involved in any treatments with
them, as such would be personally dangerous to your progress in
Scientology.  Any such association would also make any person connected
a Potential Trouble Source per the policies governing PTSness.  These
individual's only terminal is the International Justice Chief."
 
     So does the Church practice a policy of involuntary disconnection?
There is no question about it.
 
     Just as an aside, the very same policy letter, Suppressive Acts,
restates FAIR GAME.  On page 10 it says,
 
     "Also until a Suppressive Person or group is absolved, no Committee
of Evidence may be called on any Scientologist or person for any
offenses of ANY KIND against the Suppressive Person, except for offenses
which violate the laws of the land."
 
     Is that Fair Game?  You bet it is.  And I have seen it applied to
myself and others recently, all claims that "Fair Game was Canceled" are
just more evidence of this lack of credibility.
 
     Forgery of Documents.
 
     According to the RTC, LRH donated his trademarks to the RTC on two
documents called Assignment Agreements.  Real questions exist regarding
these Assignment Agreements.  They have been examined by two
professional Questioned Document Examiners, with proven credentials and
long careers.  These are not people with any axes of their own to grind.
They have been examined by John L. Swanson of Boston MA., and Erngard
Wassard of Holt Denmark.  Both have found the LRH signatures on the
Agreements highly questionable.
 
     ((In later trials, the credentials of John L. Swanson were thrown
into doubt as his training was not extensive as originally thought.))
 
     Ms. Wassard after examining the two Assignment Agreements states,
 
     "The doubtful signatures show so much similarity in the writing
movement and shape of the letters, in the breaking off of lines, the
tilt, and not least in the chaos of big loops in the upper zone of the
writing, that there is a probability amounting almost to certainty that
 
     a.) the two signatures have been made by the same person, and
     b.) that that person is NOT identical with the person L. Ron
Hubbard who has signed his name on the known samples,
 
     since the doubtful signatures show a multitude of deviations from
the authentic writing, which are typical of forgeries."
 
     She then lists 18 specific discrepancies between the real and
questioned signatures, and states,
 
     "Apart from all this, there are so many interruptions of the
writing, interruptions of the line, added lines, irrelevant additions,
omissions and failing imitations, that the conclusion must be that there
is a probability amounting almost to certainty that the signatures are
forgeries of the signature of L. Ron Hubbard."
 
     She goes on to say,
 
     "Note:  The phrase 'A probability amounting almost to certainty' is
the strongest phrase used in cases of this nature, also by the police.
It is my personal honest belief that the doubtful signatures are not
authentic."
 
     And she signs her name at the bottom.
 
     The Church had deleted sections of these documents when they first
submitted them to the court in the Omaha Trademark case.  When complete
copies of the documents were later obtained, it was discovered that the
Notary Public, the Official Witness to these Questioned Signatures, was
none other than David Miscavige.
 
     Further examination by the Questioned Document Examiners of the
complete documents show remarkable similarities between Mr. Miscavige's
signature and the questioned signatures of L. Ron Hubbard.
 
     You know the Church is very fond of putting heads on pikes and
making grand claims that it has reformed.  (('We found and busted the
SP, so that isn't going on any more...'))  I would suggest to you that
such claims be viewed with the deepest skepticism.
 
     I say this for two reasons.
 
     One, the only remedy for lying is, of course, telling the truth.
And I believe that there has been little evidence of that.
 
     And Two, the only real evidence of reform is the making amends for
damages done.  I would point out that there is NO evidence of that at
all.
 
     So beware of the claims of reform.
 
     The same senior personnel are on post, and the same policies are in
force.  A few minor figures have been crucified to be sure, but I see no
evidence of reform.
 
     By the way, Lyman Spurlock, who is the Chief Executive Officer of
The Church of Spiritual Technology, and a trustee of the RTC, recently
said under oath, that former Scientologists who wish their folders not
be held by the Church can contact the Church, and while present, have
their folders destroyed.  I wonder if that's true.
 
     While the 1982 Mission Holders Conference is old news, it was
pivotal in recent Church history.  Since I have uncovered some new data
about it, I thought I would share it with you.  I was very fortunate to
obtain an audio recording of the Sunday Evening Meeting, as well as
having interviewed several people who attended.
 
     First according to all accounts, those who attended the conference
were extensively flashbulbed, that is flash guns from cameras were fired
in their faces every 10 to 20 seconds or so, through out the first 4
hours of the conference.  There three individuals actually doing this,
among them Jesse Prince who is the secretary on the Board of Directors
of the RTC.
 
     The atmosphere, not being allowed to leave, heavy ethics presence,
flashbulbing, etc. is all very typical of implants.  Clearly this
flashbulbing was not for photography.  Simple arithmetic would indicate
that flashing every 20 seconds or so would lead to between 60 and 120
flashes per hour.  Since ordinary 35mm film contains 36 exposures per
reel, and no film changes were observed, something else besides
photography was going on.
 
     MAA's additionally patrolled the room making sure every eye was on
the speakers.  If one glanced away, even for a moment, one of these
MAA's would come right in front of you, glare directly at your face,
wait until you looked straight ahead and then move out of your way.
 
     Not one person on that podium said a word to stop this flashbulbing
and intimidation.  David Miscavige, trustee of the Church of Spiritual
Technology, trustee of the RTC and trustee of Author Services, Lyman
Spurlock who is the Chief Executive Officer of the Church of Spiritual
Technology, trustee of the RTC, Mark Yeager who is CO CMO INT, that is
Commanding Officer of the Commodore's Messenger Org International, and
Chairman of the Watchdog Committee, Norman Starkey, who is the Chief
Executive Officer of Author Services, Guillaume Leserve, who is the
Executive Director International of the Church of Scientology, Raymond
Mithoff, the Senior C/S International for the Church of Scientology,
Jesse Prince who is the Secretary of the RTC and a member of its Board
of Directors and Wendell Reynolds who is the Finance Dictator.
 
     The highest tech and admin terminals in the Church sat through this
for 4 hours without one protest, they must agree and subscribe to this
kind of behavior.  That's the only conclusion that can be reached.
 
     One of the things that always puzzled me about the Mission Holder's
Conference was, why publish the transcript?
 
     There is an answer to that question, but I never would have
discovered without the audio tape.  The answer is what was written up in
the transcript does not match what was said.  There are hundreds of
minor alterations, deletions of 4 letter words and so on.  But little of
that is significant.  What is significant is the major difference
between what the Church Attorney Larry Heller said, and what the
transcripts said.
 
     Now what I am going to do is I'll alternately read a couple of
lines of the transcript of Mr. Heller's remark and then I'll play that
segment of the tape, and you'll see what I am talking about.
 
     Now what I am doing right now is I am reading from page one of SO
ED 2104 INT, which is the transcript of the Mission Holder's meeting.  I
am looking at paragraph number 4 of Mr. Heller's remarks that begin as
follows.
 
     "All of the Scientology/Dianetic trademarks were previously owned
by L. Ron Hubbard.  L. Ron Hubbard has donated the vast majority of
those to a corporation which some of you have probably heard of, by the
name of Religious Technology Center.  "
 
     Now I'll play the corresponding section from the tape.
 
     ((Zegel plays actual tape...))
 
     "All of the Scientology/Dianetic trademarks are owned and will be
owned in perpetuity by L. Ron Hubbard.  L. Ron Hubbard has licensed
those trademarks, or the vast majority and the use of them, to a
corporation which some of you have probably heard of, by the name of
Religious Technologies Corporation."
 
     Just to recap briefly, what the transcripts says is that the
trademarks were owned previously by L. Ron Hubbard and donated to the
Religious Technology Center.  What Mr. Heller actually said was that the
trademarks are owned in perpetuity by L. Ron Hubbard and are Licensed to
the Religious Technology Center.
 
     Now the use of those two terms, that Ron OWNED the trademarks and
continues to own them and licenses them to the Religious Technology
Center are consistent throughout Mr. Heller's speech.
 
     The next line of the transcript reads as follows,
 
     "In donating those trademarks, L. Ron Hubbard imposed the duty on
Religious Technology Center (RTC) of assuring that the source of those
trademarks, the technology that those trademarks represent, are given
and disseminated to the public in the way that he formulated those
trademarks."
 
     Now let's listen to what Mr. Heller actually said.
 
     "In licensing those trademarks, L. Ron Hubbard imposed the duty on
Religious Technologies Corporation of assuring that the source of those
trademarks, the technology that those trademarks represent are given and
disseminated to the public in the way that he formulated those
trademarks."
 
     Mr. Heller is clearly speaking of a licensing of trademarks to the
RTC, NOT a donation.  That, coupled with the question of the
authenticity of the signatures on the Assignment Agreements that we
covered early, leaves some mighty large unanswered questions.
 
     It is my opinion, and let us be sure that we have labeled this
clearly, THIS IS MY OPINION as to why this was done.  I believe what you
have going on here is a 'have your cake and eat it too' type set up.  It
is very clear that there is the desire on someone's part to file
lawsuits to stop other people from using Scientology materials and
trademarks.  If L. Ron Hubbard is the owner of those trademarks he is an
indispensible person in the law suits.  If on the other hand he has
donated the trademarks to the RTC or some other organization, THAT
person or organization becomes the principal in the lawsuit and L. Ron
Hubbard is spared the inconvenience or the discomfort of having to
appear in court.
 
     On the other hand, if the Assignment Agreement is in fact genuine,
LRH ends up giving up ownership of the trademarks.  Now there was always
an outpoint to my way of thinking in LRH GIVING these trademarks away.
A lot of things can be said about LRH, but that he gives away the
materials of Dianetics and Scientology is not one of them.  So that act
in itself was an out point.
 
     If what Mr. Heller said is true, that in fact these trademarks have
been LICENSED to the RTC, and I have every reason to believe that what
he spoke there was the truth since he was very much involved in the
documents surrounding it, then in fact LRH is being paid royalties or
other fees for the licenses and the trademarks, and these other
documents talking about the donation have simply been created to shield
him from becoming a principal in the lawsuits regarding the trademarks.
And that's really all that's going on.
 
     There has been some question about verbal declares at this meeting.
Here in David Miscavige's own words he'll tell you about two declares,
and you will actually here him say "Declare her!" as Cora Lee Wimbush,
having just heard that her husband Kingsley has been declared, rises to
leave.
 
     Now you will have to listen closely,
 
     ((Zegel plays tape...))
 
     David Miscavige:
 
     "Scientology will go as far as it works, and when it is not applied
correctly that's a violation of trademarks.  ****???????????????**** I
just want to tell you exactly how much business we mean, you know,
remember we said Dean Stokes and Kingsley Wimbush were here.  Well
they've been declared, and we are going to file criminal charges on
them.  Kingsley Wimbush and his 'de-dinging' process is OFF SOURCE and
is Squirrel and is a violation of trademarks.  And he is calling
something Scientology that isn't, and it's not going to go on any more.
 
     Next person who I am going to introduce to you is Warrant Officer
Lyman Spurlock.  He is the Corporate Affairs Director of the Church and
he is going to brief you on the new Corporate structure of the Church.
 
     "Declare her (snaps finger)"
 
     ((In transcribing this tape, the sound level was so bad I had to go
get the printed copy of the transcript to decipher some of the text.
 
     In doing so, I noticed that the printed transcript has a slightly
different view than the recorded tape.  Here is the relevant section
from the transcript.
 
     David Miscavige:
 
     "Scientology will go as far as it works, and when it is not applied
correctly (out-tech), that's a violation of trademarks.  This is a very
serious matter.
 
     Earlier this evening both Kingsley Wimbush and Dan Stokes were
here.  They have both now been declared, and we are pursuing criminal
charges against them.  They have both been delivering their own squirrel
tech, while calling it Scientology.  Kingsley Wimbush's "dinging
process" is completely squirrel.  You won't find it in any tech, yet he
has been calling it Scientology.  That's a violation of trademark laws
and he now faces some serious charges for this crime.  This sort of
activity is NOT going to go on anymore."  ))
 
     As long as we are talking about Mission Holders, I thought it might
be a good idea to look at what happened to two of them, because their
stories are instructive of something I feel needs exposing.  And that is
the practice of the Church of Scientology deciding to do something, for
example take over large missions, or convert their cash into Church
assets, those sort of things, and how they will manufacture a shore
story to justify those actions.
 
     The process is really quite consistent, and takes place in 4
stages.
 
     1.)  They decide what they want, mest, money, a stat, silence, etc.
 
     2.)  They try using ordinary means to get it, conversation, asking
for it, promotion and so on.
 
     3.)  Presuming that that fails, they take sever actions, they'll
relicense all the missions with Church in control, or they'll simply
take what they want or they'll intimidate or they'll lie or they'll
threaten etc.
 
     4.)  What they'll do is they'll change the past or manufacture a
past in all manner of shore stories in black PR on the person or group
to make it all right, and to discredit any objection that person might
have over what was done.
 
     Let's watch this in action, and the most important element of this
is changing the past, as I think you'll see.
 
     The first of these Mission Holders we will look into is Kingsley
Wimbush.  Obviously the eval that Kingsley Wimbush did that lead to the
famous de-dinging has been much maligned.  I thought you might be
interested to hear his side of the story.
 
     In June of 1982, Kingsley owned 6 missions and employed 132 staff.
At its peak, this network was taking in nearly $175,000 a week, much of
which went to reserves.  The staff was well paid, a booming scene all
around.  Kingsley and others who were around at the time credit the
booming scene which was going on there to the eval and the effects that
had on the staff.
 
     During the summer of 1982 Kingsley made the eval available to other
Mission Holders who wanted it, and reports of rave successes in using it
were far and wide, stats up and so on.  And these are verified by my
interviews with those who used it.
 
     As Kingsley will now, in hindsight, freely admit however there were
some minor out tech points, but those were really minor and the eval did
produce results.  None the less in the first week of August 1982, Roger
Barnes, who was then with SMI, Scientology Missions International,
received a telex from International Management labeling the eval out-
tech.
 
     Mr. Barnes contacted Kingsley who in turn contacted every Mission
Holder by letter and phone instructing them to stop using the eval,
return the tapes etc.  He even received a commendation for doing such a
thorough and rapid job cleaning up the scene, and he even refunded some
of the money that had been paid to him.
 
     He was ordered to Flag for Sec Checking and got 25 hours.  During
the 25 hours, he had an absolutely enormous win, really saw what had
gone wrong, and asked to go to Ethics so that me might go ahead and
complete the cycle by doing lower conditions.  This request by the way
was denied, but that didn't stop him, he simply got a hold of an Ethics
book, sat down and began to apply the conditions anyway.
 
     Generally he was absolutely blown out and delighted with the
results that he'd had.  He went to Div 6 there at Flag, that is the
Public Division, and got a list of those people that Flag said had been
upset by the eval.  He contacted each and everyone of those people, and
there was only about 10 or 12, personally with a resolve to handle them.
 
     It was interesting to note by the way that he never really found
any people that were upset with his eval.  All the people that were on
that list in fact were upset with Flag but for reasons other than the
eval.  He handled them anyway, and simply continued the cycle.
 
     But the Church was not satisfied, they ordered that he take
additional sec checking, and in fact he had nearly a 100 hours more.  In
hind sight, Kingsley feels that what the Church was doing was just
digging up or attempting to dig up dirt to use against him.
 
     Anyway he continued on, on the sec checking at Flag.  He learned
along the way that there was to be a Mission Holders meeting in San
Francisco, and requested permission to attend.  He was told he was not
permitted to attend.
 
     But on Sunday October the 17th at 6am, that's the day of the
meeting, a CMO messenger awoke him and said, "You are ordered to attend
the Mission Holders meeting, you have 5 minutes before we leave."
 
     Kingsley was delighted, he leaped up, you know, cleaned up as best
he could, threw some clothes into a suitcase and jumped on an airplane
back to San Francisco.  He arrived at the Mission Holders meeting
expectantly, and was declared on the spot.  Obviously this was a
tremendous blow to him.  And in fact it took him a couple of days to
fully regain his equilibrium as I suppose it would any of us.
 
     None the less he caught a plane back to Flag and set up meetings
with the SMI Justice Chief, a guy named Jay Griffin.  Griffin told him,
"Look, you can't stay on as Mission Holder because you are now a
declared SP, so what I want you to do is to sign over your missions to
SMI, do your A to E, and then we will give your missions back to you as
soon as you are undeclared."  Kingsley agreed to do it.
 
     Soon afterwards however a SMI ethics order appeared on Kingsley,
that says,
 
     "He may never be a Mission Holder again, and may never do the upper
bridge."
 
     That ethics order of course was signed by Jay Griffin.
 
     Kingsley is tremendously discouraged, his mission network,
complete, has been taken away from him, and he returns home.
 
     The Church begins to spread malicious rumors about him, saying that
he has been embezzling money, guilty of bribery, he has enough crimes to
be put in jail for four lifetimes.  Miscavige, as you heard at the
Mission Holders meeting, said that the Church was going to pursue
criminal charges against him.  All that of course was just hot air.
 
     None the less in November of 1982 Kingsley got a call from Jay
Griffin to come to Los Angeles, that they'd "sit down and discuss things
and get them straight."
 
     Kingsley was delighted, he drove all night from northern California
to get to Los Angeles the following day.  He arrives and checks into a
motel and calls Griffin, only to be told to report to a particular
address that Griffin gave him.  So he jumps in his car and he goes to
the address and he enters a room and he discovers within the room two
private detectives and a court stenographer and is given the following
recommendation.
 
     "Anything you say can be held against you."
 
     Kingsley, as you might imagine, freaked out a bit.  He said look, I
am not going to get into this, until I talk to an attorney, and in fact
goes off and does so.  He spends a little bit of time with the attorney,
explains exactly what's occurred, the attorney says look you have
absolutely nothing to worry about, go and talk to them all you want.
 
     And so he does.  In fact he goes back and he discusses with the
PI's, the Private Detectives, Private Investigators if you will,
precisely what is going on in great detail, and all this is typed up by
the stenographer and so on, and the Private Investigators frankly
couldn't be less interested.  The Church had apparently told them that
Kingsley was responsible for blood highway from one end of the country
to the other, and they were very disinterested in what they discovered
from him.
 
     None the less, shortly there after a comm ev was held, of course
the findings and recommendations for it were never published.
 
     The loss, well, from the Mission Network there was a loss of about
$400,000 in cash that went into the Church, another $400,000
approximately in real estate equity, and those mission have never
recovered.
 
     Why was this done to Kingsley?  Well we are going to look into the
story of another large mission holder, Steve Surry, because he was TOLD
why.
 
     Steve owned 5 US mission, Salt Lake City, Denver, 3 in the Seattle
area called Bellevue, Seattle per se, and University Way.  As of October
1982, his network had highest ever stats of nearly $40,000 per week and
the 5 missions have a net worth of cash and liquid assets of nearly 1
million dollars.
 
     Steve, as did the other mission holders, attended the 1982 Mission
Holders Conference, was as shocked at its content.  But he was more
shocked at what came next.
 
     By Wednesday October the 20th, Bridge, a private profit making
corporation, had none the less called him on the phone and told him that
every single one of his missions must have 100 copies of every
Scientology book as their book stocks.
 
     He was told "If you don't the Finance Police will be at your door."
 
     Well a deal was struck.  By Thursday October the 28th, the
commanding officer of FOLO West US, Link Elliot had, unbeknownst to
Steve, traveled to the Salt Lake City Mission and had begun conversion
of it into an Org.
 
     As a matter of fact on Friday the 29th of October, he called a
meeting of all the Mission public to announce it.  On Sunday October
31st, Steve received a call from the Salt Lake Mission ED.  "Lieutenant
Galloway of the International Finance Police is here and he wants
$15,000 per day for inspections."
 
     Steve considered carefully his position at that point, and he
realized that either he would pay the $15,000 a day or they would simply
declare him and take the money anyway.  So he paid $30,000 for 2 days
inspections to the International Finance Police.
 
     Monday November the 1st was not to be a good day.  To begin the
day, Steve received a call from the Seattle area missions telling him
that the International Finance Police were there and the would have to
pay for 3 more days at $15,000 per day.  A total of $45,000 more.  Which
by the way left the University Way Mission broke.
 
     On the same day, later on, the Salt Lake Mission ED, whose
conscience was really bothering him, called Steve up to tell him about
becoming an org.  Steve as you might imagine was shocked, dismayed and
angered.
 
     I asked Steve what he got for the $75,000 that he paid to the
Finance Police.  After considering his answer carefully, he made it very
clear that what the Missions got out of it was literally nothing.  What
was being done to the missions at that point was simply a gigantic reg
event for Flag, both public and staff were being ordered and or
encouraged to go to Flag.
 
     They didn't inspect any books, any folders or anything.  He was
additionally ordered to get 10 staff members to Flag at a cost to the
Mission Networks of an additional $17,000.
 
     On Wednesday, November the 3rd, Steve got the answer.  This is the
answer for Kingsley, and it's the answer for him.  He had a meeting with
Link Elliot again, who is the Commanding Officer of FOLO West US, and
asked him what the heck was going on.  Link said very clearly that he
was under orders from the Watchdog Committee to turn all large Missions
into Orgs, and any mission holder who refused would be declared.
 
     Steve asked, "Well what exchange am I to get for this, I have put
these years of my life into building these missions..." and the answer
to the question was nothing.
 
     By the end of the day, of Thanksgiving Day, November 25th 1982,
beyond the the $45,000 for the Seattle area missions, beyond the $30,000
for the Salt Lake City Mission, an additional $87,000 in fines had been
levied against the Mission network.  The total paid in 5 weeks time was
$75,000 in inspections, $25,000 in books, films and so on, $17,000 for
staff training and $87,000 in fines, for a total of $204,000 paid to the
Church of Scientology.
 
     But there is a Catch-22 in all of this as well.  In December of
1982, Steve was recalled to Flag, obviously he had 'bad attitude' by
this time, and among the things that occurred was that he was sent to
Ethics, and it was decided he would work out of the condition of
Treason, as he had been upset with management and so forth.
 
     And what was his amends project to be?  His amends project was to
be turning the Salt Lake City mission into an Org.
 
     In January 1983 Steve returned home.  He tried to put all of the
upsets behind him.  He contacted his mission ED's, look we are going to
put this network back together, we're going to get back on our feet and
go for it.  But in the middle of the month he was called by SMI,
Scientology Missions International, and told that a Committee of
Evidence was called on him, and 22 mission holders as well.
 
     His mission executives around the country were being told that he
was being Comm Ev'd, there was lots of third party, and so forth, and so
his ability to actually control and manage those missions was diminished
considerably.
 
     When Steve finally did get to testify before the Comm Ev, he
discovered that they had only two reports of dubious credibility on him.
The reports had very little information in them, and yet, according to
the findings that were later read to him, he was found guilty of dozens
of crimes and High Crimes.
 
     And yet those findings and the recommendations that would have gone
with them, simply were not issued.
 
     In February of 1983, because of his deteriorating ability to manage
the missions, as a result of the third party and the unknownness of his
findings and recommendations from the Comm Ev, Steve felt it was best
for the network and best for his own sanity for him to resign, which he
did.
 
     On May the 1st 1983, the findings and recommendations of the
Committee of Evidence were finally published.  It's interesting to note
I think that Steve was NOT declared, he was just given lower conditions.
Of course by that time, his career was ruined, his mission was network
was torn to pieces, and he started a new life.
 
     A number of people have asked me to tell my story.  I should say
our story, because it involves of course both myself and my wife Vivian.
And although we've been hesitant to do so, it so well illustrates the 4
stage approach that we mentioned earlier, you know, decide to do
something, try the usual means, take severe actions, and then change the
past to make a justifiable shore story, that I have decided to go ahead
and do so.
 
     Our story begins in December 1982 when I was called by a Flag reg
and asked about doing more NOTS.  I was quite candid with him about how
I felt about Church activities including the Mission Holders meeting,
the materials revealed in the Ron DeWolfe trial, the Richard Stewart,
you know he was the private business owner in Los Angeles that was so
abused and so on.  And he wrote me up to the CMO, that is the reg
((wrote me up.))
 
     I was called in and an attempt was made to 'handle' me, but their
promise to follow up on the cycle and call me back and so forth was
broken several times.  And as more and more activities continued in Los
Angeles, by the spring time we had contacted Vivian's son, who is Mark
Yeager, at that time the Command Officer of the CMO International, and
Chairman of the Watchdog Committee.
 
     We asked that he come home and have a talk with us.  He said he was
unable to do so because he was leaving town and couldn't, but he would
meet us within a few weeks.  In the interim we were called and visited
by Jeff Chervel (sp?) from the RTC, Ray Mithoff who is the Senior C/S
International and Jesse Prince, who was a principal in the Inspector
General's Network.
 
     We were told, as the three of them came in a group, that they had
flown in from Flag just to see us.  Over that weekend that they called,
we had 8 plus or minus hours of meetings with them, and told them
specifically our observations and grievances.  They were convinced that
there was a third party and we as active field auditors must have out
tech.
 
     There was some yelling, mostly by Jesse Prince, but otherwise the
meetings were cordial.  What was most surprising was their expression of
complete shock and not knowing about any of these activities that had
allegedly gone on in Los Angeles.
 
     The following Saturday we were visited again, this time by Jesse
Prince, Jeff Chervel and his aid named Warren McShane.  We were told
that the Senior C/S International, Ray Mithoff, had written a program
just for us, and that two 'auditors' had been flown in especially from
Flag to handle us.  We were told we would be getting some word clearing,
and sec checking, and all of this was going to be done for free provided
that we handle other disaffected field as exchange.
 
     We agreed and spent a week being sec checked up one side and down
the other.  Our sec checkers, we later learned of course, we both in the
Finance Police.  By Saturday night we were called to a meeting with Ray
Mithoff, Warren McShane and Jesse Prince.  During the meeting, Jesse
became abusive, vulgar and threatening, when we refused to take a
Condition of Confusion purely on his say so.
 
     He accused us of all manner of crimes and High Crimes, none of
which we were guilty.  After some minutes of the yelling and the
threats, I stood up and Vivian with me, and said "That's it.  We've
heard all we're going to of this, good night", and tried to leave.
 
     It was then that we were assaulted.  Ray grabbed Vivian and yanked
her back into the room, Jesse and Warren grabbed my arms and held me.
Finally amid their yelling and cursing we struggled free and escaped.
There were attempts by our auditors to patch things up, but all they
were allowed to run was "What withhold did Ray miss on you?" or "What
withhold did Jesse miss on you?" and so forth.
 
     Approximately two months later we learned that we were to be Comm
Ev'd.  We had already resigned from the Church, not so much because of
our cycle ((with Ray and gang)) but because of what we saw being done to
others.  The Committee of Evidence none the less went on.  Vivian,
always the more direct of the two of us, refused to attend.  I did
attend, but made it clear that it was only as a courtesy to the members.
Besides we had learned previously that the findings and recommendations
for the Comm Ev, although it had not yet taken place, had already been
written up at Int.
 
     My reporting that fact made them angry.  That I would even think
that they would allow such a thing to go on.  But it turned out to be
true, and when the findings and recommendations were finally published,
3 of the 4 committee members wrote really serious knowledge reports to
the Church saying that the findings and recommendations had been
significantly altered.  By the way, for anyone that's interested in
seeing them, I have copies of those Knowledge Reports.
 
     A mission as a matter of fact was fired to Los Angeles to handle
the "Zegel Comm Ev which was flapping".  What was the Church's response
to altered findings and recommendations?  "We can't change the findings
and recommendations because that would be following the enemy line."  I
guess it means more to the Church for the lies to stand.
 
     Coming up a little closer to present time, I thought we would talk
about the recent Church caper in Germany.  The OT Committee which is an
association of Free Scientologists from around the world was holding a
convention in Munich West Germany and the Church fired two missions and
10 detectives to try to disrupt that meeting.
 
     These missions came from COST, the Church Of Spiritual Technology,
which is the new alter ego of the Church of Scientology and the RTC, the
Religious Technology Center.  They discovered that attending this
meeting was one Silvie Herman, a former staff member from Munich, and
what the missions attempted to do was to collect an affidavit from some
of her former staff memeber associates, indicating that perhaps she had
mis appropriated funds or embezzled money or some such things while on
staff, so that they could present criminal charges against her.
 
     In fact they did collect such an affidavit, they went to the German
Police and the German Police came and arrested Silvie Herman and put her
in jail.  The Free Scientologists that were there, got real real busy
when this occurred, gathered up a huge amount of documentation
indicating that this was a typical kind of Church activity, that they
had submitted false affidavits and so forth in the past, and had this
material delivered to the judge prior to the hearing.
 
     When the hearing for Silvie took place, the judge looked through
the materials and said that there was considerable question in their
minds regarding this particular affidavit.  As a result of that he
released Silvie on her own recognizance, but unknown to the Church
Officials at that time, the State Attorney, which is the next higher
level Attorney in the German legal system, had had a meeting with the
judge scheduled for just 15 minutes after this trial was to be over.
 
     In fact that meeting took place and a decision was made that there
should be a raid against the Orgs in Munich.
 
     The following morning at 8 am, 100 police officers arrived in front
of the Munich Org and another 15 or 20 arrived at the local mission.
 
     4500 kilograms of files were taken at the Org.  Approximately 300
kilograms of files were taken at the nearby Mission, a total of nearly 5
metric tons of documents.
 
     Of those materials, no pc folders were taken.
 
     After reviewing that information, and looking through the financial
records of the Church, a hearing on the status was held and it was found
that the Church of Scientology in fact was not a Church at all, but in
fact a trade or commercial activity, a for profit corporation in
Germany.
 
     Scientology has lost its Church status, they now, all the staff
members, have to apply for trade licenses to be Scientologists.
 
     There was another Church caper recently in Spain.  Joe Caban, who
is one of the principles in the OT committee, lives in Madrid, and had
arranged with Peers Gartstrom (sp?) a former CO of the Madrid Org, to
come to Spain to speak to Spanish Officials regarding alleged illegal
activities of the Church in Spain in previous years.
 
     Melissa Caban, John's wife, went to the airport to pick Peers
Gartstrom up, and as he was walking up the ramp toward her, three plain
clothes "officers" took Peers away.  Later, Church detectives approached
Melissa and said to her, "Your husband is next."
 
     Melissa was obviously very shaken by what she had seen.  She went
home, she got on the phone, she called all the Spanish legal officials
that she could think of, the local police, the state police, the other
individuals of that nature, simply trying to find out what had happened
to Peers, and in fact none of them knew anything about it at all.
 
     Ultimately what it turned out, was that the Church had sent private
detectives to pick him up.  They had identified themselves, pretending
to be law enforcement individuals, had taken Peers away, apparently
scared him to death saying that Interpol was after him and he was going
to have to run for his life and so forth.  Peers was put back on a plane
and went back to Denmark or another one of the Scandinavian countries,
and has not been seen or heard from since.
 
     But what Melissa did was go the Spanish authorities, was able to
identify the three Church detectives that had impersonated police
officers, they were arrested by Spanish Authorities and charged with
impersonating police officers, criminal charges.
 
     I thought perhaps it would be worthwhile and take a few minutes as
well and talk about Robin Scott.  For those of you that haven't heard,
Robin Scott was involved in an operation in the early part of 1984,
where individuals entered the Org in Denmark wearing Sea Org uniforms or
the like, and collected a NOTS pack, walked away with it, and fact had
it in their possession.
 
     Church obviously was very disturbed to hear that this had happened,
since that obviously would cut into their monopoly on the NOTS
technology, or so they thought, and so an operation was planned to 'get'
Robin Scott.
 
     Peter Glass was the Scientologist that was chosen to assist the
Church in this activity, and what Glass did was call Robin on the phone.
He told Robin that he was a musician working in Denmark making very good
money, and wanted to do Solo through advanced section 3 ((OT III)) for
himself and his wife.  He wanted his advanced section V, what the Church
calls NOTS and other auditing.
 
     He invited Robin to join him at a rather post resort, where he was
to be going on a vacation, and the two of them would discuss the
details, exchange money, and so forth.  On March the 13th 1984 Robin got
on a plane flying toward this resort, and the plane had a stop over in
Copenhagen.  And while that made him a little bit nervous, he really
didn't think too much about it.
 
     As he got off the plane, policemen stopped him, there were GO staff
members about, hiding behind pillars, taking photographs and carrying
on, and of course one of them had been present to identify him for the
law enforcement people.
 
     It was a very smooth operation on the part of the Church, and in
fact, you know, one of their better operations.  Robin was first taken
to a holding area in the airport, where he was questioned, his luggage
was searched, it was in fact determined he was the person that the
Church was talking about, he was then taken to jail in Copenhagen.  He
spoke extensively to the Danish Police, felt that coming completely
clean with them, telling them every single detail of not only what he
did, but why, was the most important factor, and essentially found them
to be very affable and very helpful to him, and were not hostile or mean
or unpleasant to him in any way.
 
     At any rate, he found that a lawyer was appointed for him by the
Danish Authorities, the lawyer turned out to be an exceptionally skilled
and really very helpful individual, who placed calls to Robin's wife,
and made sure that those kind of communication lines stayed open, and
that he got mail and visits and the all the things that one would want
given that rather unpleasant circumstance.
 
     During this period of time, Robin was approached by Church
Officials and offered a deal.  If he would merely return the materials
that he had taken, and sign an affidavit they had prepared, they would
drop the charges against him.
 
     He had largely returned the materials already, but he was horrified
when he read the affidavit that they had prepared.  What the affidavit
did was indicated that there was a large international conspiracy of
which Robin was only a part, and that the conspirators included David
Mayo in Santa Barbara, Bent Corydon in Riverside, Lawrence West in San
Diego California and a wide variety of terminals in Europe.
 
     Robin simply refused to sign the affidavit, that information in
fact was not true, he states it's unequivocably not true, and I have
talked to the majority of the other people that those affidavits were
designed to implicate, and they said they simply had no knowledge or
understanding of what was going on at all.
 
     This is another instance of the Church simply attempting to
manufacture bad news about these people that it is trying to discredit
when in fact that bad news, that discreditable information, does not
exist.
 
     Robin's trial date was set for Wednesday, April the 18th.  Five
days prior to that on Friday April the 13th, he was informed that he had
a visitor.  A strange event in itself in that he had already had his
prescribed visitor that week.  His lawyer of course could see him as
often as necessary, but he was only permitted one visitor.
 
     None the less he was escorted down the visitors area and he found
that in this small room, which was about the size of an average auditing
room, there was jammed in there 10 people.  The RTC had fired a mission
to Copenhagen to try to get something more going against Robin Scott.
 
     In that room was a Judge, the Judge's Bailiff, a stenographer, an
interpreter, three Church Attorney's including Thomas Small that had
been flown in from Los Angeles, Warren Mc Shane and a variety of other
Sea Org members in full uniform and regalia.
 
     The attempt here was to get an injunction served on Robin to
prevent him from distributing the materials that he had collected from
the org in Denmark.  Because in fact he had already returned those
materials, the Judge found in Robin's favor.  That was the end of that.
The cost of that was inestimable.
 
     On Wednesday, April the 18th, came the trial date for Robin.  He
went into court, the Church had charged that he had damaged them to the
tune of $200,000, because the GI at the Denmark AO had crashed by that
much apparently, they charged him with theft, and they charged him with
entering the premises with the intent to obtain documents or
information, essentially an industrial espionage type charge.
 
     Regarding the damages, the Church was unable to establish in court
that the criminal court were the right place to sue for damages.  The
judge threw that charge out because in fact that of course is a civil
damages activity, and he was very surprised that the Church had tried to
get away with that in criminal court.
 
     The second charge of theft was withdrawn by the Church, they
couldn't prove that in fact Robin had stolen anything.
 
     The third charge however, of entering premises with intent to get
documents Robin had pleaded guilty to, and the judge looked at that, and
said "Yes indeed that's the case, the ordinary sentence for that is 4
months.  However you have already served one month, I will suspend the
remaining three months, and so you are free to go."
 
     The Church of course was very bad indicators on that, Robin was
tickled pink, within 24 hours was on a plane and back together with his
wife in Candacriag in the UK.
 
     So of course we are very pleased that Robin is free, we are sorry
that any religious group exists on the face of the Earth that hides its
materials, or holds its materials so far from the public that the only
way that one can get them is to undertake such Herculean tasks.
 
     Perhaps the period of time when that is the case, is now behind us.
 
     Probably a dozen times a week I am asked this question, "How on
Earth could this have happened?"
 
     How could the Church and the tech that I love get so far off the
rails.  Hundreds of thousands spent on private investigators for
harassment, millions and millions spent on lawyers, dozens of law suits,
the Church lying to the press and to the public, missions closed, all
manner of abuses, how on Earth could this have happened.
 
     It is my conclusion that there are three closely related factors
that brought this about.
 
     The first of these three factors is the spill over of tech into
admin.  It is important to remember that to a large degree tech was
developed for use in auditing, in that closed environment.  As the
Church grew, and being an admin terminal became a career, we discover
more and more instances of the tech being misapplied as an admin tool.
 
     We find admin terminals studying the tech with the viewpoint of
"How can I use this to get my stats up?"
 
     The result is that there is a bending of the technology.  For
example, a pc who natters in session is indicating the presence of a
missed withhold, a simple technical matter.  The auditor locates and
handles the missed withhold because, and this is important, because the
pc will directly benefit.  He will feel better, the session will proceed
more smoothly, and the pc will get more gain.
 
     You can see the direct benefit.  This benevolent tech however has
been bent to mean, anyone with any complaint has crimes against the org,
and is used as a justification for all types of acts against the person
involved.
 
     The paranoia, and by the way relief confronting actual out points,
is terrifying.  Anyone with a complaint is a potential criminal, and boy
is that convenient.
 
     This altering of the tech is squirreling if you will.  Let's take a
look at Ethics.  Remember when Ethics was the 'Reason and Contemplation
of Optimum Survival'?
 
     Boy have we come a long way from that to on the spot declares,
dirty tricks, private investigators, a variety of illegal acts, and so
on.  Is this Ethics?  I think not.  I see it more as arrogant
lawlessness in the name of Ethics.
 
     We have to deal with this Technology in the frame for which it was
developed, rather than buttering it all over the universe.
 
     Let's take another simple piece of technology as an example.  What
turns it on, will turn it off.
 
     I would suggest that if I were to talk over to you and put an anvil
on your foot, that my continuing to put anvil's on your foot would not
turn that off.  The datum, put back in context, and there's the key
factor, IN CONTEXT, means if an auditing process produces a reactive
response in the pc, the continuation of that process will ultimately run
out that reactive response.  That is demonstrably true, and also
demonstrably of benefit to the pc.  So what turns it on, will turn it
off, but not when you are dealing with anvils on the foot, or when you
are dealing with lies to the press.
 
     You can not eliminate dishonesty with more dishonesty.  Do you see?
And its a trap.  We recognize the basic truth of the technology, we have
seen the successful applications, and yet we are trapped in the
misapplications or the applications out of context.  The tech MUST be
applied in the context for which it was created.  Otherwise it can be a
real trap.
 
     The second part of the answer to the question, "How could this have
happened?" is what I call 'The NO LOOK'.
 
     Those people within the Church, or out, who don't want to look at
anything but what the Church of Scientology tells them to look at.
You've encountered them and so have I, you know, 'No, don't play me any
tape, no I don't want to read that' and so on.
 
     Why would a person, in a subject that reveres LOOKING, you know,
look don't think, if it's true for you it's true, and so forth, why
would within that philosophy we have people who won't look?  It's
troubled me for some time.  In fact the answer came just after Christmas
of this past year.  I was given a sweater that was the wrong size and I
took it back to the store to exchange it.
 
     The clerk was not at all attentive to me.  I kept walking away and
so on.  Just before I started to say something, and I wanted to say
something sharply to this person, I hesitated, 'He'll think I have a
missed withhold' I thought.  Now why did I think THAT?
 
     I was really puzzled, my universe sort of went 'creeeak!', and I
was determined to figure out why I had this particular computation.  And
I did figure out what had gone on, to explain...
 
     Let me create an example, and it's really quite simple.  Let us
supposed I walk into the org and the reg wants me to sign up for a
service.  I say "Are you kidding me with these prices or what?"  Now the
reg, seeing that I am upset, and of course the basis of my upset you
must understand, most likely, is that I want Scientology and can't get
it...
 
     None the less he arranges a free session for me, so at least I am
going to get SOME Scientology.  I go into the session, and this issue of
prices is on my mind.  Now of course the auditor with check for ARC
breaks and Problems, but eventually we are going to have to handle
prices, and since I am complaining, he's not going to have much choice
to pull the withhold, you know?
 
     "On the subject of prices has a withhold been missed?"
 
     And so on.  And we'll pick up probably chatter to friends, and go
earlier, and maybe pick up an incident in the 5 and dime store as a kid,
you know, change the price on a toy or something to buy it when you
didn't have enough money.
 
     Any rate that ultimately will F/N and there will be a bit of charge
off the case, and you'll feel better.
 
     Now a smart auditor has a broader look, and perhaps will check the
subject of money, you know, now that'll get the meter active, for missed
withholds.  In this society a good auditor can generally a chain or two
on money almost any time.  But we'll take these couple of chains and
we'll run 'em off and we blow a bit more charge off the case and you'll
end up at the end feeling a bit better.
 
     But look at the misapplication.  Are the prices in fact lower?  No
they're not.  Is the person's income any higher?  No.  Well what are we
doing then?  Well apparently what we are trying to do is to run out the
analytical evaluation that prices are too high.  Does it work?
 
     Unfortunately, sometimes the answer is yes.  But perhaps not why
you think.  It works because the session, which has failed to handle the
real situation, is now a lock on the present scene, you know.  A = A The
disagreement with prices = the missed withhold on money.  And if you
continue to speak out it means you have MORE overts, and of course you
don't want to have more overts, and you certainly don't want others to
THINK that you have more overts.
 
     Let's look at this a bit further.  Look around the room you are in
right now and select any object, any object at all.  I promise you I can
find a chain of overts or withholds in your case regarding that object.
Suppose you chose a lamp.  "Did you ever do anything you shouldn't have
done with the lights on?"  How about "Have you ever done anything you
shouldn't have done with the lights off?"
 
     If you picked up a piece of paper, how about "Ever write a love
note you shouldn't have written?"  How about "Did you ever read
something on paper that wasn't addressed to you?"  Do you get the idea?
You can find a chain of overts or withholds under ANYTHING in the bank,
because A = A, that is Anything equals Anything.
 
     Perhaps you committed an overt when there was a plant in the room.
Well we can find that overt, although disrelated, via the plant, because
in the bank the plant equals the overt.  The fact of a chain of overts
under prices or money does not mean that the complaint is invalid, only
that there some charge there.  A charge present does not mean that there
is no real present time situation.
 
     But watch the implication come forward.  If you read or hear
something you shouldn't, say about the field or Anti Scientology and you
observe it to be true or agree, you must have withholds.  That's what
the Church would say.  And of course it's true.  Now no one wants to
have withholds or be bad, and certainly no one generally wants their
withholds exposed.  So all the Church has to do is indicate that any
time you agree with anything that they don't like, it means you have
overts and withholds.  And they do that.
 
     All this sec checking business centers around this phenomenon.  And
the trap is that it is true, 100 percent.  Any one who agrees with the
field has withholds.  Of course so does anyone who has ever driven a
Volkswagon, so does anyone whose ever eaten fish and chips and so does
anyone who has ever breathed.
 
     ((Ron wrote a bulletin early on that said ALL ARC BREAKS STEM FROM
MISSED WITHHOLDS.  He later suggested that the nature of the missed
withhold was more related to the wrong or missed item in the GPM than it
was to any overts the pc had committed.
 
     He makes it clear though that the pc's complaints and natter about
the auditor only really indicate a missed withhold when the auditor is
doing his best for the pc.  If the auditor is not doing his best, and in
fact is trying to harm, use, or suppress the pc, the pc will of course
get upset and start complaining and attacking and nattering about the
auditor.
 
     So it takes some skill to determine what's really going on with the
pc.  It may very well be true that a pc high enough on the tone scale,
when faced with blatant suppression, out tech, or subversive intentions
on the part of the auditor, would just turn the session around on the
auditor and pull HIS withholds!  So it may still be possible that the pc
that succumbs to complaints and natter and 1.1. attacks rather than
direct handling of incoming suppression is suffering from his own
indecisions in the past and his own as yet still unpulled overts.
 
     The fact is though, that if you really DO pull the withholds of the
pc who is being abused by the auditor, he WILL come up tone to suddenly
turning the tables on the auditor and putting HIM in session to get HIS
overts to stop.
 
     When someone does you wrong, you complain and natter to the degree
that you have done wrong too and have it justified and restrained, and
you handle the wrong coming at you terminatedly to the degree that your
own slate is clean.
 
     The fact that a pc complains about an auditor means that the
auditor is doing wrong, AND the pc has missed withholds on the subject
of his own.
 
     The Church would have you believe that if you had no missed
withholds of your own, you would be able to tolerate any wrong that came
your way, WHICH IS TRUE, but that don't make it RIGHT!  Get it?  The
Church is still wrong.  The fact that people blow and natter and
complain about the Church rather than handle its out ethics terminatedly
merely means that the Church is committing overts that are similar to
the overts that are restrained and withheld on the pc's own track.  Thus
the Church gets away with murder, and smugly claims that everyone who
doesn't like it has withholds.
 
     YES THEY HAVE WITHHOLDS AND SO DOES THE CHURCH WHICH IS WHY YOUR
WITHHOLDS ARE BEING RESTIMULATED!
 
     The very biggest problem though that I see in the money arena with
the Church is that everyone in the Church has a massive MU on the
concept of WORTH.  How much is auditing worth?  How much is Eternal
Freedom worth?  Is it worth a million dollars to not go to hell forever?
Is it worth your life?  Is it worth eternal slavery to those that freed
you?
 
     Their concept of worth is what you are willing to trade for the end
result of the service.  Surely getting free of this joint is worth every
penny you have, as long as the price does not ruin your Eternal Future.
So when you want to buy auditing you ask, "How much is Eternal
Freedom?", they say "How much you got?"  And you say, "Well I've got
this much."  And they say, "Good!  It's worth ALL OF IT!"
 
     But this can only go on as long as there is no competition from
other purveyors of Eternal Freedom.
 
     Say the Church is selling auditing at $3000 per intensive.  They
say "Well it's worth that much!"  And you say "But I don't got that
much!"  And they say "Well tough, come back when you do, we can't sell
auditing for less than its worth."
 
     Then one day Joe Squirrel comes along and offers the same auditing
services for $2000 an intensive.  He is starting competition.  And the
Church goes to him and says 'But you can't do that, you are selling it
for less than it's worth!'  And he says 'Worth Smorth.  If I sold it for
$3000 an intensive I would be making far less money than I am selling it
for $2000 an intensive, so IT'S WORTH IT TO ME TO SELL IT FOR LESS.'
 
     Then someone else comes along and starts selling the same service
for $1000 per intensive and all the customers start coming to him, and
obviously pretty soon the Church and the other guy have to both lower
their prices to stay competitive.
 
     So now let's say that 20 people are selling auditing, each trying
to steal market share by undercutting the rest because it is WORTH it to
them to do so, and the price of an intensive is down around $50 an
intensive.  How low can this go?  Well pretty soon, you find that people
just can't charge any less because of the base line costs of keeping
themselves alive, and so when there are lots of competitors, each trying
their best to streamline their operation, and give the best service for
the lowest amount, you find that pretty soon everyone is charging just
about the same price and that price is the minimum deliverable price for
that product.
 
     Now here is where the MU on worth get cleared up.  Let's say you
bought an intensive with one of the earlier providers at $1000 an
intensive, but you never used it.  So you are the proud owner of one
unused intensive and you held onto it while prices were plummetting.
 
     Even though the guy who sold you the intensive for $1000 is now
charging $50 per intensive, he certainly does not owe you your money
back nor even more intensives to make up for the amount of money you
originally paid.  This is true for any commodity.  If you buy a
commodity and then prices come down, you take a capital loss.
 
     So one day you decide you don't really need this intensive that is
waiting for you at that provider and you get the idea that maybe you
ought to offer it up for sale to someone else who might want to buy it
and use it.  So you go to market and you set up a stand and you make a
great big sign that says 'One Intensive for sale, $1000 bucks.'
 
     Someone comes over to you and points out to you that others are
selling intensives for $50, how can you expect to sell your intensive
for $1000?  So you say "Well that's what I paid for it, that's what I
want to get for it."  A little discussion with your potential buyer
shows you that you don't stand much chance of getting what you want, you
certainly do not DESERVE to get what you want just because you want it,
right?  So you say, "But it's WORTH $1000!  It was worth it to me to pay
$1000, and it should be worth it to others to pay $1000 for this
intensive."
 
     And you buyer says "Yes, no doubt if this were the last intensive
in the world, you would probably find a buyer at $1000 very quickly, but
intensives are everywhere, and they cost $50, and frankly you can't sell
your intensive for $1000 today because IT IS NO LONGER WORTH $1000, it
is worth only $50!"
 
     So finally you understand that the WORTH of an item is exactly and
only what you can get for it on the open market.  It may be "priceless"
art from the Orient, but if nobody wants it, it completely worthless.
 
     On the other hand if someone wants it really bad, and they are
willing to give everything they own for it, then it's certainly worth
something more.  However if they can get it for $50 dollars down the
street, then its never worth more than that lowest price that he can get
it for down the street.  Saying "But it's WORTH a million dollars, buy
it from me instead" is ridiculous.
 
     So the next time someone says "Well the reason that auditing is
priced so high is because it is worth a lot of money", realize that you
are talking to a criminal liar who thinks that price is a function of
worth, rather than worth being a function of price.
 
     Price is actually a function of VALUE AND AVAILABILITY through
independent dealers.  The more something is valued the higher its price,
until you hit its ceiling price where no buyer can afford to purchase
it.  And the more available it is, the less its price will be until you
hit its baseline floor where no seller can afford to produce it and
bring it to market.
 
     The monetary WORTH of any item IS its price, and is solely and only
what you can buy or sell it for on the free market.
 
     Now you understand the fanatical devotion the Church puts towards
wiping out free market competition.  It places an inflated WORTH on
their products.))
 
     The third part of the answer to the question "How could this have
happened?" is, like it or not, LRH and his influence.  It does not take
a genius to recognize that no matter who is holding the Senior
Management positions in the Church, the Church has behaved in an
irrational and erratic fashion over the years.
 
     Just by dumb luck, someone would have risen to Senior Management
who is sane, yet almost without exception every Senior Management person
has been removed and vilified.
 
     And surely the actions of current management, and their influence
on the Church, indicates serious problems there as well.
 
     The tech says, when there is a constant trouble in an area, look
only at those people who have been there throughout the time of the
trouble.  In this instance, unfortunately, it's Ron himself.  And yes I
know that current public relations press and so on, is that he hasn't
managed the Church since 1966, but that is simply a lie, another in a
long line of shore stories.
 
     The facade that LRH constructed for himself, to shield himself from
blame, or legal liabilities for wrong doing by the Church, is falling
apart.  In addition the PR image that has been presented of Ron is also
falling apart.  The implications of all this are pretty wide reaching.
 
     Ron's image is going to be tarnished, that's just the way that that
is, and not because of enemies, but because of actualities, lies and
misrepresentations.
 
     We in the new Church are going to have to confront and deal with
this truth.  We have already proven our ability to do so by our handling
of the scene with the Church.  Now there is going to be a scene with
Ron.  This is going to be tougher, but since we know it is a problem
let's simply go ahead and tackle it head on.
 
     I have done my best in the past, on these tapes, to collect and
verify every bit of information where ever possible.  And this tape is
certainly no exception.  Now this isn't necessarily going to be easy, so
fasten your seat belt.
 
     The first area we are going to look at is claims about LRH's early
life.  And before we are too harsh, let any of us who has never
exaggerated our own life, or our own accomplishments, cast the first
stone.
 
     But this information is going to be published, and as believers in
this philosophy, we are going to have to handle it.  While many many
details about LRH's past have been falsified or exaggerated, I intend to
concentrate on those that relate to or influence the tech.
 
     Let me give you an example, LRH's claim that he was raised on a
cattle ranch.  Records show however that he lived mostly in small towns
with relatives, not on a ranch.  This is no big deal, the person who
developed the tech could have lived either place without affecting the
quality of the work.  So who cares about that particular claim anyway.
 
     On the other hand, LRH claims to have extensively traveled through
out the East as a young man, including being taught by a variety of
mystics and so forth.  In fact, according to records, his travels to the
East consisted of a two week trip to China with the YMCA, and a short
period on Guam, when his father was assigned there by the Navy.  These
travels are NOT extensive, and LRH's diaries and notes from this period
fail to demonstrate any significant insights.
 
     I trust you see the difference between the two types of
discrepancies.
 
     OK, here we go.
 
     Ron's college career is not as illustrious as we have been led to
believe.  He spent in fact only one year in college, and the nuclear
physics course which is so talked about, in fact he received an F in.
He never in fact received any degree at all.  The doctorate that he
claims came from Sequoia University, a mail order diploma mill.
 
     Some records indicate that Ron had a financial or ownership
interest in it.
 
     His military career is not as he has represented it either.  LRH
saw no verified combat that we can determine, and certainly was not a
combat hero.  He was never wounded, and was neither blinded nor
crippled.  He did not command a squadron of Corvettes, nor was he
returned as the first casualty of the Easter Theatre on the Secretary of
the Navy's private plane.
 
     There have been claims that LRH won between 20 and 40 medals and
Palms, but Naval records indicate that he received only four campaign
ribbons.  He won no Purple Heart, the automatic decoration for those who
are wounded in the line of duty.
 
     The shore story was that he was in Naval Intelligence, and
consequently, his records fail to show his actual accomplishments.
((Meaning that for security purposes his history has been played down by
those employing him in the undercover operations of Intelligence.))
 
     Careful review however shows NO indication at all of an
intelligence career, and the important records, such as being wounded
and so forth, would not have been the type of records purged from any
Intelligence Officer's file anyway.
 
     LRH's post war career takes on a different character, with his
claim of being blinded and crippled deleted.  Clearly he did not cure
himself of those things by his early experiments in Dianetics.  What is
clear is that after leaving the Military, Ron was very mentally
uncomfortable.
 
     He wrote repeatedly to the veterans administration asking for
financial, medical and psychiatric assistance.  During this period,
also, he was involved with Alister Crawley, and all manner of cultic
ritual.  Some of which was, if you will, unsavory.
 
     The next area that it is important to look at is the development of
the tech.  Here we have considerable contradictions.  LRH would have us
believe that he is the Sole Source of all of the worthwhile tech, and
that everything that was contributed by others was either useless, dead
ends and so on.
 
     However in my interviews with dozens of people, many many
individuals contributed SIGNIFICANTLY to the tech, not just in
refinements, or in methods of application, but in terms of genuine basic
pieces of tech, most still in use today.
 
     ((Thank God, or else the whole thing probably wouldn't work!))
 
     For example, the TR's were developed in Washington D.C. by Jan and
Dick Halpern, and early bulletins apparently even included
acknowledgements to them for that creation.  Later of course those
acknowledgements were deleted.
 
     The CCH's were also developed by the Halperns, with the help of LRH
JR or Nibs.
 
     The concept of repetitive questioning was created by Jack Horner,
((who)) according to the Church, ((is)) one of the most horrible
Squirrels of all times.
 
     ((Jack Horner is presently listed on FLAG ED 2830RB Suppressive
Persons and Suppressive Groups List.  Nibs (Ron DeWolfe) is not listed,
but he is certainly not in good standing, and I vaguely remember from
somewhere that the Halperns had been declared, but they are NOT on the
present list.
 
     It should also be noted that John McMaster was the driving force
behind the original Power Processes, now considered confidential even
though they are no longer on the Bridge.  McMaster resigned from the
Church in disgust in the early '70's.  He too is NOT on the declare
list.))
 
     So as you can see, the tech has come from a wide variety of
Sources.
 
     Once again we must put this in perspective, because we don't want
to completely negate LRH's contributions to the tech either.
 
     Either extreme is incorrect.  His contributions are myriad and
important.  He has been a catalyst, a harvester, and has written
brilliantly about the material.  But has not created all of it, as we
have been led to believe over the years.  This is simply another example
of changing the past to meet current needs.
 
     What WE need to do is to rebalance our affection for Ron.  We can
still hold him in high esteem for what he really created, and stop the
false admiration of him for things he did not.  That I believe will be
good for all involved.
 
     What IS important in this technology is not Source.  Now I realize
that's a heretical thing to say, but what is important is not Source,
but TRUTH.  We can be gracious about past misrepresentations, we could
waste our time in useless castigation, but I suggest we simply forgive
all past lies, and spend the time and energy we might have devoted to
blame and regret to a rededication by each of us to find the Truth.
 
     The relationships between LRH, the Church, and the variety of
peripheral corporations surrounding it, have been the subject of much
controversy.  I would suggest that the principle problems faced here are
the lies.  The Church, its officials, not to mention LRH himself, have
had to live double lives, not unlike the woman who is being physically
beaten by her husband at home, yet says that all is well while speaking
to the neighbors.
 
     Living that kind of a lie, and the Church, the Sea Org, the
Commodore's Messenger Org, the RTC, Author's Services, and the Church of
Spiritual Technology all live that kind of lie, is a nearly impossible
and emotionally devastating task.
 
     The hottest subject in this area of course is money.  LRH has
always claimed that his only compensation from the Church has been book
royalties, and that of course is a half truth.  While he has received
book royalties, they have been enormously higher than those paid by
regular publishers.
 
     However, since LRH controls the publisher, Bridge and New Era
Publications, formerly PUBS and PUBS DK, he set the royalties where he
liked.
 
     Facts.  LRH's royalties through 1981 on his book income have been
excess of $50,000 per week.  Sometimes much more.  No, that was not an
error, that was $50,000 per week.
 
     Now an author is entitled to what ever royalty the market will
bear.  Of course when once controls the publishing company, it will bear
a great deal more.
 
     Beyond this, LRH has billed the RRF, do you remember the Religious
Research Foundation, he's billed the RRF $10,000,000 for the scripts,
directorial fees and consulting for the Tech Films.  At least $2,100,000
as already been paid, yet LRH maintains control of all the copyrights
for both the scripts and the films.
 
     Most recently, through LRH's private company called Author
Services, he has been collecting huge sums.  According to individuals I
have interviewed, between March and October of 1982, LRH was collecting
in excess of a $1,000,000 per week.  That money came from the US, and it
went to Bridge, then across to NEP, that's in Denmark, and then by bank
wire or transfer to accounts in Luxemborg and Lichtenstein.
 
     The shore story of LRH financing all the research and so forth is
just that, a shore story.
 
     Church critics and the IRS have known about this for years.
 
     Such large sums going to an individual is called inurement, that is
the proceeds of a non profit corporation, benefiting a private person.
 
     Such could cause the loss of tax exempt status, and apparently the
Church as already lost that status.  ((They just got it back. 1994))
 
     See how the problems begin to accumulate?
 
     The next area we'll look at is MCCS, Mission Corporate Category
Sortout.
 
     It was run by Laurel Sullivan, LRH's personal public relations
director.  The mission was to take all Church entities, the Church of
Scientology, Bridge, LRH etc etc, and sort them out by category.
 
     Now MCCS had a problem that it was supposed to solve.  And the
problem was, LRH controls the Church and has always controlled the
Church, but he couldn't control the Church.  Now you solve that problem.
 
     For example, the trademarks were an issue.  To prevent Trademarks
from going into the Public Domain, one must exercise both supervision
and control over the marks.  If LRH controlled the marks, he controlled
the Church.  So did he then control the Church, or have the marks gone
into the Public Domain.  You can see the problem I'm sure.
 
     As an aside, the trademark cases, both in Omaha and in San Diego,
are brought and funded by the RTC, just as their assertion of control,
to establish a legal presence as being in control.  Now this is a pretty
expensive exercise, and I believe there is a pretty good chance the
trademarks will be ruled to be in the Public Domain.  ((No chance.))
 
     If LRH had been in control of course, he would be legally liable in
some of the many law suits against the case, but LRH had of course
'resigned in 1966'.  See how the confusions and conflicts begin to
mount?
 
     MCCS was to create an image by paper trail, an alteration of the
past, that would demonstrate, after the fact, that LRH was NOT in
control of the Church, when in fact he was.  LRH's category was to be
'An Author receiving royalties'.  That of course is a half truth, and in
talking to the people involved, I learned how this works.
 
     First, you must become indoctrinated to get this.  You must live,
underline that, you must LIVE the half truth.  You LIVE 'LRH is an
Author collecting royalties'.  You do not live 'He runs the publishing
company and takes as much money as he likes.'
 
     You live only the half of the truth that is consistent with the
image that you are trying to create.  MCCS was then to clean up any
inconsistencies with the half truth that was being created.  And that's
all MCCS was trying to do, change the past to make it consistent with
the half truth in the present.
 
     There have been a variety of other financial transactions, the
details of which are long and dreary.  They follow a similar pattern of
LRH collecting large sums of money, while PR indicating that such was
not the case.  So what IS this?  What are we looking at?
 
     How can LRH have contributed so much to the tech, and yet be
involved in these activities of, to say the least, questionable
morality, not to mention questionable legality?
 
     The answer is found in the dictionary under the term Schizophrenia.
Schizophrenia comes the from the Greek, schizine which means to split,
and phrenos which means mind.  And the definition has two parts.
 
     1.)  A form of psychosis in which the patient disassociates himself
from the environment and deteriorates in character and personality.
 
     2.)  The condition of having or showing markedly inconsistent or
contradictory qualities, split personality.
 
     This is not just a psychiatric term, it can be said of nearly
anything.  For example, a fancy sports car can be said to be
schizophrenic when its a great deal of fun to drive, and yet constantly
is in need of repairs.
 
     LRH, by all accounts of those who were close to him, suffers from
schizophrenia.  He has disassociated himself to the point that he is in
seclusion.  He can be on the one hand the brilliant author of much of
the tech, while on the other a ruthless, vicious tyrant, screaming,
punishing, and intimidating his near associates into submission.  Being
a vengeful, vicious adversary to any he views as his enemies.
 
     The Church, especially its high officials, have had to live this
double life.  They have had to live the PR half truths in lies, pretend
everything was OK, and yet comply with orders from him they KNEW would
cause harm and bring disrepute to the Church.
 
     These Church officials, for the most part, I believe, acted with
good hearts.  They wanted to see people on the Bridge getting gains,
regardless of the sacrifices they had to make in their own personal
integrity.  Those sacrifices, sad to say, were misguided.  The lies and
half truths have grown to such a state that the Church has lost all
credibility, and if we are not careful the tech will soon follow.
 
     They missed the point, the ONLY remedy for lies is the TRUTH, NEVER
more lies.
 
     We haven't mentioned the Gerry Armstrong case, and this might be a
good time to do so.  Gerry Armstrong was accused by the Church of
stealing thousands of documents and invading the privacy of LRH and Mary
Sue.
 
     Gerry had been appointed by LRH ((as)) his biography researcher in
January of 1980 and ((he)) worked almost two years on the post, amassing
tens of thousands of documents.  He was instructed to provide copies of
those documents to Omar Garrison.
 
     As Gerry read the documents he was collecting, he realized that the
Church and LRH had been lying about LRH's past, his credentials and
accomplishments.  ((Didn't LRH see this coming?))
 
     When he tried to correct those lies, he was sec checked and
threatened.  He left the Sea Org, delivering the last batch of documents
to Garrison in the process.  What followed was a false SP declare, and
threats from the Church.  Gerry collected from Garrison copies of those
documents he felt would protect him.
 
     Later the Church paid Garrison $240,000 NOT to write the biography,
and sued Gerry.
 
     The case, which took six weeks to try, was heard in Los Angeles
Superior Court by Judge Paul G Breckenridge Jr.  His finding was issued
on June the 20th of this year ((1984)).
 
     Judge Breckenridge found that Gerry was NOT guilty of stealing
Church documents, invading the privacy of LRH and Mary Sue.  He found
that 'The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this
bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder, L. Ron
Hubbard.'
 
     He found that Gerry and Jocelyn Armstrong, as well as the other
defense witnesses, were credible and extremely persuasive.  While saying
of Mary Sue, "Her credibility leaves much to be desired, she struck the
familiar pose of not seeing, hearing, or knowing any evil, yet she was
the head of the Guardian's Office."
 
     He went on to say, "The Guardians Office, which the plaintiff
headed, was no respecter of anyone's civil rights, particularly that of
privacy."  Obviously the Church has appealed.
 
     Gerry and Jocelyn Armstrong are interesting heros in all of this,
because they have fought a fight, not for themselves, but for the truth.
And they have earned our respect and admiration and thanks.  I just wish
their ordeal was over.
 
     Here's a hot bit of news just in from the U.K.  The Church had
filed an injunction with the courts against Ron Lowery and Robin Scott
demanding that all NOTS packs they had in their possession be turned
over to the court.  The judge however has denied the Church's request
ruling that those individuals can keep, copy and distribute those
materials in any way they see fit.  How about that!
 
     ((I would check on the present status of this before doing anything
rash.))
 
     Before getting into the conclusions portion of this tape, I would
like to invite any of you who would like a free list of New Church
centers world wide, to send me a stamped, self addressed business sized
envelope to, The Clear Center, 11934 Riverside Drive, Suite 211, North
Hollywood, CA 91607 USA.
 
     I guess it's time to draw some conclusions about all of this, and
the first conclusions I've drawn is that it's necessary to question
everything.  Stanley Milgram did remarkable experiments in obedience to
authority among university students.  And he demonstrated an alarming
willingness of the average person to perpetrate harmful actions on
fellow human beings when they fail to question directives of a superior.
 
     We have surely seen that, and all of us right now, share a very
special vulnerability.  You know the discrediting of the faith leaves
the disillusioned hungering for new ideas, and a new faith.  In fact the
end of an old fanaticism does not lead to NO fanaticism, but merely
moves fanaticism over to a new cause.
 
     A quote "No Scientology" fanatic is no less a fanatic and is closer
in belief to the fanatic Scientologist, than to their true opposite, the
tolerationist.
 
     The danger we face is that by bringing down the old, we prepare the
path for the new fanatics.  This is what we must steel our selves to and
guard against.  We must understand it and prevent it.
 
     Each of us in our own way, is vulnerable now to a new faith, a new
Way, or a new Guru.
 
     The second conclusion I think we can draw from all of this, is that
we must return to the basic philosophy, we must LOOK.  We were charged
in the beginning with the responsibility to determine what was true for
ourselves, and our failure to uphold that responsibility has left us
vulnerable.  Look for yourself, study, investigate, question and examine
EVERYTHING.  THAT is the real lesson to learn from all of this.
 
     The third conclusion I think is not to throw the baby out with the
bath water.  We need no campaign to defile LRH, so campaign to defile
the tech.  We need a calm rational evaluation and a reunion with the
society we so carelessly shoved aside.
 
     I am very pleased, and a little sad to announce that this is the
last of these tapes.  Their objective has been achieved, a New Church
exists.  I would like to thank all of you for your help, your good
wishes and your support.  My investigations, I assure you, continue.
 
     Perhaps this is a bitter sweet ending, but from our disillusionment
can grow a new faith in our own abilities to see and judge the truth.
 
     Jon Zegel

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Dec 13 06:06:03 EST 2018 
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/zegel/zegel3.memo
Send mail to archive at lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but 
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.



More information about the Clear-L mailing list