Scientology pages index  |  Contact

(to other Scientology pages)

>> Do you want to help me with my research? <<  Consult my want list here !

Please note that words with an asterisk (*) are defined at the bottom of this page! Only first appearances are marked.

HAS HASI IAS

- “Hubbard Association of Scientologists” (1952 - 1954) - “Hubbard Association of Scientologists International” (1954 - 1977) - “International Association of Scientologists” (1984 - present)

You will not find very much information about the HASI organization and what it actually was about in present Scientology publications. Here and there it is mentioned, but you have to do some digging to be able to put your finger on it. Now, there are some similarities in the name of these 2 organizations, so one could wonder if may be this IAS was a continuation of the old HASI?  This page is dedicated to find out more about all this, the differences, similarities, their purpose and any other information worth knowing.  I may hope this will serve others who also have been wondering about this.
I would welcome any criticisms and or additions warmly!
 
Index:

	HAS & HASI  (1952-77)  &  SEF (1978-82)
		Scientology as an organization  (Purpose of the HAS  &  Scientology becoming a Church)
		HAS, HASI & copyrights         (Includes:  HAS  (May 1952 - 1954);  HASI  (May 10, 1954 - May 10, 1977);           Holder of the copyrights  (HCO Ltd the main office);  HASI contract;           The time gap May 11, 1977 - Oct 6, 1984)
		‘Safe Environment Fund’ (SEF) (1978 - 1982)
	IAS  (1984 →)
		IAS  (Oct 7, 1984 - present)
	HASI  versus  IAS
		The relation HASI and IAS examined
		Membership differences and similarities
		Fundraising of the IAS versus the HASI fund        (Includes:  Solve it with Scientology)
		The entity within & the entity outside
	‘The Ideal Org’ initiative (2004 to present)
		‘The Ideal Org’  vs  Fundraising           - ‘The Ideal Org’ vs Fundraising vs ‘What Your Donations Buy’         - L. Ron Hubbard vs Real estate & Image         - Applying the correct condition         - ‘Hats, Not Wearing’ & The matter of exchange         - Building Fund Account         - The relation between ‘The Ideal Org’ initiative and the IAS

"The only reason orgs* exist is TO SELL AND DELIVER MATERIALS AND SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC AND GET IN PUBLIC TO SELL AND DELIVER TO."          LRH
          (from HCO™ PL 31 Jan 83 “The Reason for Orgs”)

Purpose

“Membership in the HAS is membership in an organization which is determined to free man.”          LRH
           (from Associate Newsletter #2 early May 53)

“The purpose of the organization was simply to have a central point of dissemination, where the materials of Dianetics and Scientology could be put out without any great turmoil, turbulence, vias, and to train people in the subject who wanted training, and to give people help and information, who wanted help and information. That is what the HAS was formed to do.”          LRH
           (from London Public Lecture Series: 8 Oct 55 “Goals of Dianetics and Scientology”)

Becoming a Church

The first Church of Scientology founded as per the documents was the Church of Scientology of New Jersey on 22 December 1953. The Mother Church (founded on the same day) was the Church of American Science . On 18 February 1954 the Church of Scientology of Los Angeles was founded, later this was to turn to be considered the Mother church. This latest church is referred to in the publication ‘What Is Scientology?’ as the First Church. Why did it become a church?

I have addressed the founding of the Church of Scientology in detail on my page “Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard - An Introduction”, see chapter “The founding of the ‘Church of Scientology’ and its ‘Creed’”, to consult click here (link will open in separate window).

HAS  (May 1952 - 1954)

“This organization was put together by myself first as the HAS and then there was a flaw in its incorporation papers (which flaw is just simply an attorney's foolishness—he didn't state accurately whether it was a profit or non-profit corporation). In order to get over that we organized the HASI. In other words changed its name to Hubbard Association of Scientologists International.”          LRH
           (from 8th American Advanced Clinical Course Lectures: 4 Oct 54 “Introduction: Organization of Scientology”)

 
HASI  (May 10, 1954 - May 10, 1977)

“Hubbard Association of Scientologists International, the company which operates all Scientology organizations over the world and Saint Hill.”          LRH
           (from HCO PL 20 Feb 65 “Appointments and Programs”)

“Few people realize that HCO is actually a separate company. It is the worldwide comm(unication) network of Dianetics and Scientology.”          LRH     
          (from HCO PL 7 Feb 70 “HCO makes the Org”)

 
Holder of the copyrights  (HCO Ltd the main office)

“The HCO* is the holder of all copyrights, trademarks, registered marks and the rights of all materials of Dianetics and Scientology.”          LRH     
          (from HCO PL 25 Nov 58 “HCO Board of Review - Function and Practice”)

“All copyrights are made to L. Ron Hubbard, then after “my demise” it says in the franchise, to L. Ron Hubbard, Founder. But all copyrights, marks and rights, by blanket assignment are the property and will remain the property of HCO Ltd the main office. Although the copyright is to L. Ron Hubbard it becomes by that the property of HCO with no further administrative action by reason of existing contracts and franchises.”          LRH
          ( from HCO PL 15 Nov 58 Issue III “Outstanding Copyrights and Marks”)

From the above it appears that L. Ron Hubbard permanently transferred “all copyrights, marks and rights, by blanket assignment” to “HCO Ltd the main office.” The main office of HCO was the Hubbard Association of Scientologists, Inc. (HASI, Inc.) of Arizona, as amongst other HCO PL 30 Sept 64 “HCO Corporations” confide to us.

HASI:  ‘Articles of Incorporation’

With other words, anything you need to be able to give out services to the public in an organized manner.

Then, without any outer interference, the HASI would expire on May 10, 1979 as per the above.

If you wish to read the contract in full, please click here (link will open as a pop-up window).

At the following link you can read about what happened next with the HASI organization:
Certificate of Revocation, HASI, Inc. (May 10, 1977) (link will open as a pop-up window).

A more detailed analysis about the copyright issue and what finally happened with these copyrights you will find on my page “The copyrights issue and related matters”, see Scientology index page.

 
The time gap:  May 11, 1977 - Oct 6, 1984

It is reported that this was also known as ‘Friends of the Safe Environment’ or the ‘Committee for a Safe Environment’. It is said to have been formed in 1978 by the Finance Bureau of the Guardian Office World Wide. Some have judged this to be some sort of forerunner to the IAS, as it was involved in raising funds for various purposes, this entirely separate from services taken in Scientology organizations. These purposes according to some persons were “to create a war chest to fight Scientology's enemies” or something along that line. It has also been claimed that it was incorporated for reason of funding the legal fees of those various staff of the Guardian Office (this included Mary Sue Hubbard) that were indicted for various illegal actions that were uncovered amongst other during the FBI raid on its offices in July 1977.

There is actually not so very much known about this. Although there appear to have been issued various promo and brochures. I am told that if you were a member or donated to them, that you were rewarded a pin.

A late 1979 news issue of ‘Co-Motion’ lays it out as follows:

(from ‘Co-Motion’, [late 1979] (issued by the Church of Scientology))

Indeed we do see similarities in this goalsetting if we compare this with the in 1984 established IAS. The SEF is claimed to have been discontinued/dissolved in 1982, thus far however I have no records confriming this. Do you have any more data about the SEF, then please contact me!

I have a record of the following having been issued: ‘Exchange (safe environment fund)’ issued by Church of Spiritual Technology (Los Angeles). I am not sure what this is about or if it relates to the issue, but it probably does. Anyone have this, then please contact me!

Then in 1984 another organization was brought into being: IAS (International Association of Scientologists).

One of the most obvious changes was the removal of the name “Hubbard”.

1952:    1954:	HAS HASI	-  “Hubbard Association of Scientologists” -  “Hubbard Association of Scientologists International”
1984:	IAS	-  “International Association of Scientologists”

Practically the (H)ASI appears to have about the same function as the IAS as its official church membership, it's just that the very same words are put in a different sequence.

The question is if there was any connection between the 2 in reality? And what was the reason for removing the name of L. Ron Hubbard? Was L. Ron Hubbard not involved in this new organization? We are actually lacking any referencing from L. Ron Hubbard to this IAS, he does not speak about this anywhere. Would this and the removal of the name of Hubbard indicate that may be someone else was ruling the organization now? Or was his name simply removed because of some legal matters? (whatever they may have been). We are not being informed about this. We are left at our guessing.

It appears that the old HASI simply coordinated in making Scientology available to the public as a service and was the owner of the actual copyrights of Scientology, whereas the IAS basically united all Scientologists into one coordinated group for some other purpose. Definitely not the same, however both do reflect being the actual official Church membership.

Now if you go through some of the old promo released during 1984-85 you will find that old HASI-members are encouraged to become a member of the IAS, if they did so they were offered a discount on their first year of membership of the IAS. It was also stressed that with the IAS-membership you would receive a 20% discount on all materials and services for any kind of member, whereas the HASI-membership gave a 10%-30% discount (depending on kind of membership), but this was only for materials.

Please note that HCO PL 22 Mar 65“Current Promotion and Org Program Summary Membership Rundown” which gave a 50% cash purchase discount and credit options was for Scientology staff. The routing on this HCO PL says‘General Non-Remimeo’ which means something similar to ‘limited distribution’, further it says ‘Post Staff Not Public Boards’ which speaks for itself. I mention this as it may appear confusing for those unfamiliar with the routing. The reference is quoted in the ‘Scientology Management Dictionary’, it is also still in the 1991 release of the ‘Organization Executive Course’ volumes.

“So little by little, using donations you give us for your service, your training and your processing, we create little by little areas of sanity.”          LRH
         (from ‘The Auditor 55’, 1970 “What Your Donations Buy”)

It has to be mentioned here that the IAS was never meant to be a service organization. If you donate to them you don't make a payment to a service to be received. The IAS is involved with all kinds of activities that may improve the conditions of life for various groups of people. It is about exposing the practices of psychiatry, oppose the drugging of children, to stimulate and support education, human rights, the right for freedom of speech, and so on... It supports amongst other Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR).

Fundraising by the IAS

In a sense one could say that the IAS introduced asking the public to actually service the organization. IAS basically introduced the habit of asking for donations on a regular basis, however not for a particular service you want to receive in the Church of Scientology. No, it was for to finance some initiative the IAS had taken upon itself to accomplish. This could be anything from financing running advertisements in a variety of newspapers for various exposures concerning human rights and psychiatry, to printing up booklets and documentation that would be distributed amongst the population to inform about the dangers of drugs and various, and supporting all kinds of minority groups and educating them.

For a while this fundraising as practiced by representatives of the IAS was a downside.

For the IAS to be able to accomplish various of their aims this practically meant that was resorted to setting up socalled fundraising ‘events’. At such ‘events’ first some information was given about the successes previously achieved, and then some new target would be introduced. This is often done with a video presentation. After these sometimes lengthy introductions donations were being asked. An approach has amongst other been to speculate upon the goodwill of the prospect. Another was to play games like that if some sum was reached then some person was going to double it. During a particular period of time (especially the 2nd half of the 90's) things became a kind of forceful. It turned into something that persons in a rather persuasive and repetitive manner were approached to donate funds. This crave for money and this sword of Damocles hanging there actually resulted in the end that the public purposely chose to stay away from these IAS events. One knew in advance that it would come to this fundraising. You were made to feel uncomfortable if you did not donate, as then you would not be with the group. Also various started to regret that they had given donations and were asking for a refund. All this resulted in some consternation on the lines. I am happy to say however that these latest years this rather persuasive approach appears over and done with. Nonetheless at about this time the practice was introduced that if one was to donate to the IAS that one was required to sign a slip that said that one understood that this was a donation towards the purposes of the IAS and that a refund therefore could not be given.

The IAS also offers various statuses depending on the level of your financial contribution. There is:

The HASI fund

According to my knowledge the HASI was not involved with any of the things that the IAS was doing. Prior to the IAS there was something about 5 or 10% of the money that was paid in by the public for services that went into a fund. From this fund then if some situation required it monies could be gotten. It also would supply for finances to counteract direct emergencies. I've just started to look into this and do not know the exact specifics. If anyone out there could enlighten me or direct me little it would be very much appreciated.

Anyhow it appears to be so that the IAS extended the purpose of the HASI and was simply asking for additional money to do certain things. The question is if they are actually supposed to do such a thing?

Solve it with Scientology

	SOLVE IT WITH SCIENTOLOGY [Excerpt from HCO Policy Letter of 24 February 1964 Urgent - Org Programming]
	“If the Org slumps: Don't engage in ‘fund raising’ or ‘selling postcards’ or borrowing money.
	Just make more income with Scientology.
	It's a sign of very poor management to seek extraordinary solutions for finance outside Scientology. It has always failed.
	For Orgs as for pcs ‘Solve It With Scientology’.
	Every time I myself have sought to solve finance or personnel in other ways than Scientology I have lost out. So I can tell you from experience that Org solvency lies in More Scientology, not patented combs or fund raising Barbecues.”          LRH

The HASI dealt with the organization itself and was located within the organization itself (HCO). The IAS does represent the official membership as did the HASI, it appears however that the IAS became a separate entity on the outside. It deals with matters that previously were dealt with from within the organization. The HASI was holding the copyrights, the IAS does not. The IAS is largely involved in projects which are not in direct relation to the organization and its parishioners. The HASI supported directly the Scientology organization, the IAS instead takes from the Scientology organization.

Compare with:

“EXECUTIVE DIVISION 

	The Executive Division is Division 7.
	The LRH Communicator is in charge of the Division.
	It consists of 3 departments.

THE OFFICE OF LRH (Department 21)
PURPOSE
	The purpose of the Office of LRH is:
	‘To direct, authorize and organize Scientology and its organizations and to ensure the forward progress of all.’

THE OFFICE OF THE HCO EXEC SEC  (Department 20)
	The primary purpose of the Office of the HCO Exec Sec is:
	‘To help Ron keep HCO and the organization there and make them and the policies, technology and service of Scientology well known.’

THE OFFICE OF THE ORG EXEC SEC (Department 19)
	The Office of the Organization Executive Secretary has as its purpose:
	‘To help Ron keep the organization solvent and producing and to make Scientology well known everywhere.’”          LRH           (from HCO PL 2 Aug 1965 “Executive Division”)

and

	“The purpose of the LRH Communicator is:
	TO FORWARD THE COMMUNICATIONS AND ORDERS OF LRH AND TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT HIS ORDERS, DESPATCHES, DIRECTIVES, POLICY LETTERS AND SECRETARIALS ARE ISSUED AND COMPLIED WITH AND THAT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IS RETURNED TO LRH CONCERNING THEM IN DUE COURSE.”          LRH           (from HCO PL 27 Dec 65 “LRH Communicator”)

“122.  LRH COMMUNICATOR – Sees that Ron's postulates stick!”          LRH
          (from HCO PL 22 May 68, Issue II, amendment to HCO PL 20 Nov 65 “Promotional Actions of an Organization”)

‘The Ideal Org’ initiative  (mid 2004 to present)

• ‘The Ideal Org’  vs  Fundraising  vs  ‘What Your Donations Buy’
• L. Ron Hubbard  vs  Real estate & Image
• Applying the correct condition
• ‘Hats, Not Wearing’  &  The matter of exchange
• Building Fund Account
• The relation between ‘The Ideal Org’ initiative and the IAS

 
‘The Ideal Org’  vs  Fundraising  vs  ‘What Your Donations Buy’

“The ideal organization would be composed of a staff who each one knew all the hats of the group.”          LRH
         (from HCO PL 14 May 70 “Hat Checkout Sequence”)

So, at around the time that the IAS was so to say backing off with their persuasive fundraising, we now got this new thing that would once again put this money demanding burden on the Scientologist.

Considering:

	SOLVE IT WITH SCIENTOLOGY [Excerpt from HCO Policy Letter of 24 February 1964 Urgent - Org Programming]
	“If the Org slumps: Don't engage in ‘fund raising’ or ‘selling postcards’ or borrowing money.
	Just make more income with Scientology.
	It's a sign of very poor management to seek extraordinary solutions for finance outside Scientology. It has always failed.
	For Orgs as for pcs ‘Solve It With Scientology’.
	Every time I myself have sought to solve finance or personnel in other ways than Scientology I have lost out. So I can tell you from experience that Org solvency lies in More Scientology, not patented combs or fund raising Barbecues.”          LRH

And:

“So little by little, using donations you give us for your service, your training and your processing, we create little by little areas of sanity.”          LRH
         (from ‘The Auditor 55’, 1970 “What Your Donations Buy”)

This article originally published in the Scientology periodical The Auditor goes at length into these things addressed as donations. It is well worth a read. Today it is also included in the 1991 release of ‘The Organization Executive Course, Volume 2: Dissemination Division’ (see page 106-108).

 
L. Ron Hubbard  vs  Real estate & Image

It is to be understood that in reality the Ideal Org initiative constitues a display of an image in form of a nice exterior/interior, architectural highlights, and so on. However at the same time the association is being forwarded that if some organization had acquired their Ideal Org building, that then suddenly the organization would start booming, i.e.flourish and prosper, getting in lots of publics, and so on ... Please keep in mind that beautifully looking quarters will not necessarily attract people to come into that building. In addition to my knowledge there is no reference anywhere within Scientology written by L. Ron Hubbard that would imply such a thing either.

	“We own a tremendous amount of property. We own a tremendous amount of material, and so forth. And it keeps growing. But that's not important.
	When buildings get important to us, for God's sake, some of you born revolutionists, will you please blow up central headquarters. If someone had put some H.E. [high explosives] under the Vatican long ago, Catholicism might still be going.
	Don't get interested in real estate. Don't get interested in the masses of buildings, because that's not important.”          LRH          (from Anatomy of the Human Mind Congress tape lecture #2 “The Genus of Scientology”, given on 31 Dec 60)

The idea is also being spread or the assumption is being made that an organization will not be able to expand because there would exist technology of some sort that acquire large premises. If such a technology would exist then this would be found in the administration policy letters as contained in ‘The Organization Executive Course’ volumes. If it can not be found in there then automatically it is deemed not true (ref. HCO PL 16 Apr 65 I “The ‘Hidden Data Line’”). Thus far I have not been shown a reference that would promote any such idea.

Awquard is as well that I have met persons that said something on the line of that, these people that go around and promote and patch up such organizations to Ideal Orgs, that they would have knowledge that we would not have. And thus various people are submittedly putting their trust there. Again, we are not to assume or believe anything! It simply is not practicing Scientology. If something is not in ‘The Organization Executive Course’ volumes, it is not to be operated on. It is that simple! Even worse, if some planned action is actually counteracted by the information found in these volumes, you in fact have to effectively query it.

Will I remind what policy was all about again?

“This is a permanently valid issue of all third dynamic*, org* and administrative technology. These regardless of date or age, from the know-how in running an org or group or company.”          LRH
          (from HCO PL 24 Sept 70RA (Revised 3 July 1977) “Issues–Types of”)

“HCO PLs and HCOBs are proven by time and are the senior data on which we operate.”          LRH
          (from HCO PL 9 Aug 72 “Seniority of Orders”)

Thus (you as someone when active within the Scientology organization), anything what some person is telling you to do or submit to, you are required to ask what reference they are actually operating on. This is the first step to do, then what follows is the application of the steps as found in HCO PL 9 Feb 79 “How to Defeat Verbal Tech Checklist”.

Various examined criteria

	“In 20 years an enormous amount of experience has been gained regarding the quarters and housing of orgs.
	From this experience there are only a few clear-cut lessons.”          LRH

“A.VIABILITY of the org (its economic survival including its security from political enemy motivated attack) is the first and foremost consideration. In terms of quarters an org can afford just so much expense. Therefore Viability is the first consideration – not how posh or what repute or what image. Thus we have the policy that THE FIRST CONSIDERATION IN PROCURING QUARTERS IS THE VIABILITY OF THE ORG. ... CONCLUSION:Viability of economics must not exceed the income of the org. The SAFE figure for rent and mortgage payments must not exceed 15% to 17% of the gross income of the org. ...”

“B.Quarters must be close to ample and cheap student and pc housing, restaurants and transport. ... CONCLUSION:The presence of ample cheap housing and restaurants and general and local transport is a main factor in the viability of an org.”

“C.Image is a secondary consideration. CONCLUSION:One does all he can by staff work to improve the image. If image is the reason why one must move from an area where the org was viable or had student housing, forget it. Polish up what you have already. Image is gratifying. If A and B exist, one can think about image. Image of the outer building does not much affect A and B. Cleanliness and order of what you have is the image to concentrate upon. Staff pay and food and cheap student housing do more for an org than a posh building.”

“E.Expensive office equipment is not a first priority. CONCLUSION:Enough desks and chairs and furnishings is far superior to top grade office furniture. Reserves tied up in furniture are never recoverable. Furniture quality does not influence production. Furniture lack does reduce production.”

“F.Renovations are destructive if extensive. CONCLUSION:Don't renovate at vast expense. Use and make it better as you can with your own people.”          LRH

 
Applying the correct condition

In Scientology there is this thing that is addressed as applying conditions. At any time one is in a certain condition in regards to production, expansion and all that. It is the actual products that determine how well one is doing, the better the products the higher the condition that would be assigned. With this condition assigned one will then follow some steps that firstly aim to maintain this achieved production, and secondly to add to and do even more well. These steps are simple and based on actual praxis. This means that if you do assign the proper condition formula's, and just follow these steps, that it will result in to you doing even better in continuation.

These conditions are usually measured by the statistics of that week compared with the previous week. This will give you the condition steps to apply for the following week. For example if you have been in Normal Operation you will then apply the steps of that condition that if properly executed will get you into Affluence. If something goes off the rails for some reason and you end up with lower statistics (production) for the week you will go down a step which will get you at Emergency, then you will follow the steps of that new condition. Simple and effective.

It is generally thought and an accepted line of thinking within the organization that: “If we would have that perfect building, the space, and all that, we would get in lots of people. All our problems would be solved!”. But what reason is there to think that it will? This would just happen, just like that WITHOUT applying the right condition? To me this sounds more like dreaming and is in fact highly unrealistic. Either way there is this present push from the International Management to get new buildings, to get them somehow, it being the right condition for that particular organization or not, it is being pushed and demanded rather persuasively. Is this correct? I don't think that it is. The business of Scientology is doing Scientology, it is not buying buildings and properties! Monies should be used by the individual public to get him doing Scientology, not to fund some building or anything else and not getting service for that very donation. I once again remind of “SOLVE IT WITH SCIENTOLOGY”:  “Don't engage in ‘fund raising’ or ‘selling postcards’ or borrowing money. Just make more income with Scientology.” It is made quite clear that “It's a sign of very poor management to seek extraordinary solutions for finance outside Scientology.”  LRH  (from HCO PL 24 Feb 64 “Org Programming”).

 
‘Hats, Not Wearing’  &  The matter of exchange

Hats

	“HAT TECHNOLOGY
	‘Hats’ developed in 1950 for use in Dianetic orgs as a special technology. The term and idea of ‘a hat’ comes from conductors or locomotive engineers, etc each of whom wears a distinctive and different type of headgear. A ‘hat’ therefore designates particular status and duties in an organization.
	A ‘hat’ is a specialty. It handles or controls certain particles in various actions and receives, changes and routes them.
	A ‘hat’ designates what terminal in the organization is represented and what the terminal handles and what flows the terminal directs.
	Every hat has a product.
	The product can be represented as a statistic.
	Any job or position in the world could have its own hat. The reason things do not run well in a life, an org, a group, nation or the world is an absence of hats.
	The reason why an org runs well when it does is hats.
	Any protest of anyone against things not running right can be traced to lack of hats.
	Any slump an org goes through can be traced directly and at once to an absence of one or more hats being worn”          LRH          (from HCO PL 22 Sept 70 “Hats”)

The purpose of the Scientology organization as laid out in its many policy letters is offering and for all delivering Scientology services to its parishioners. Instead funds are continuously being asked for some building to be purchased or other project. These monies being asked for then do not end up in purchasing services that will benefit the individual progress of this parishioner. In fact the pressure exercised on persons for giving donations is this excessive and demanding (in form of almost weekly organized “fund raising Barbecues” and sorts), that various Scientology parishioners have few funds left to purchase actual Scientology services. And funds asked for is not only for buying properties and/or renovating these. In addition funds are being asked for a variety of initiatives. One of them being this project for donating books to libraries.

I have observed that staff within the organizations are coercing public in making these various donations. If it is not for buying properties, or books for libraries, it is for something else. The question to ask then if this is part of their hat according to their post duties? Well, I really don't think so. This is rather effectively covered in a whole series of policy letters. See, it is simply not part of their actual ‘hat’. It is their hat to keep the organization running, to get in public to buying and receiving Dianetics and Scientology services. Asking the public for donations that create no effect on keeping their local organization solvent is not their hat!  (see also ref.: HCO PL 20 Apr 69 II “Hats, Not Wearing”)

“The only reason orgs exist is TO SELL AND DELIVER MATERIALS AND SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC AND GET IN PUBLIC TO SELL AND DELIVER TO.”          LRH
          (from HCO PL 31 Jan 83 “The Reason for Orgs”)

The matter of exchange

Another problem that arises is the matter of exchange. The only purpose for the organization being there is to actually service the public with Scientology services, selling books and so on. This is the actual exchange that the organization has with its parishioners. Now, if donations are being asked for other purposes and aims then what sort of exchange will we end up with? We should also consider that this is effecting the individual staffmember. See, if he/she is asking for donations that will not profit the local organization, then it will also not result in proper pay for the staffmember. There is an interesting policy letter that actually addresses this and in addition lays out the various conditions of exchange:

	“There is a term used in business called ‘fair exchange.’
	Let us apply this to an activity engaged in servicing the public.
	We can isolate four conditions of exchange.
	1.First consider a group which takes in money but does not deliver anything in exchange. This is called rip-off. It is the ‘exchange’ condition of robbers, tax men, governments and other criminal elements.
	2.Second is the condition of partial exchange. The group takes in orders or money for goods and then delivers part of it or a corrupted version of what was ordered. This is called short-changing or ‘running into debt’ in that more and more is owed, in service or goods by the group.
	3.The third condition is the exchange known, legally and in business practice, as ‘fair exchange.’ One takes in orders and money and delivers exactly what has been ordered. Most successful businesses and activities work on the basis of ‘fair exchange.’
	4.The fourth condition of exchange is not common but could be called exchange in abundance. Here one does not give two for one or free service but gives something more valuable than money was received for. Example: The group has diamonds for sale; an average diamond is ordered; the group delivers a blue-white diamond above average. Also it delivers it promptly and with courtesy.
	Now, believe it or not, org income and staff pay depend upon which of the above four exchanges is in practice by (a) the org or group; or (b) the staff member in the group.”          LRH          (from HCO PL 10 Sept 82 “Exchange, Org Income and Staff Pay”)

 
Building Fund Account

There was this fund where monies would be paid in for acquiring future property and various. HCO PL 18 Jan 65 “Financial Management, Building Fund Account” says: “The weekly proportion of income owing to the Building Fund Account must be paid into it weekly and may not be withheld.”  LRH.  This actually means that a certain percentage of the ordinary income through delivering services, selling books and son, is to be put in this fund. So, the reference says nothing about that the public is to raise to funds for property through fundraising. See, it just doesn't say that!

So ..., when we have all this. Then ..., what is all that about fundraising happenings? Now, is it going to be about doing Scientology or not doing Scientology?

 
The relation between ‘The Ideal Org’ initiative and the IAS

Now, is there any relation between these? Indirectly it appears that there actually is as this ‘The Ideal Org’ initiative is pretty much promoted by the IAS organization. I have been informed by those that have been present at these socalled Patron dinners (initiated by the IAS), that games are being played pretty much so as I have described in my earlier chapter “Fundraising of the IAS versus the HASI fund”. This time around however it is for this ‘The Ideal Org’ initiative.

It just seems so that as soon as some project needing fundraising doesn't draw in sufficient with donations anymore, that another new project is being introduced and promoted. In essence however it still comes down to the same strategy and outcome. Money is being asked for that is not being used for taking Scientology services! Now, what was Scientology all about again?

Vocabulary:

     AD 34:
‘After Dianetics 34’: The book Dianetics was written and published in 1950. 34 years after Dianetics would give 1984.
      HCO PL (Pol Ltr, P/L or PL):
‘Hubbard Communication Office Policy Letter’: since Jan 74 reserved for L. Ron Hubbard only, these address administrative issues. 
     LRH:
An usual abbreviation for ‘L. Ron Hubbard’.
     org, orgs:
Abbreviation for ‘organization(s)’.
     Scientology Admin(istrative) Dictionary:
This is the publication ‘Modern Management Technology Defined’ (first released 1976). Usually referred to as simply Admin Dictionary. Presently used editions of this book are identical to this first edition.
     Sec:
Usually an abbreviation for Secretary or Secretarial as in HCO Sec, Exec Sec or Sec ED.
     third dynamic:
There could be said to be eight urges (drives, impulses) in life. These we call dynamics. These are motives or motivations. The ‘third dynamic’ is the urge towards existence in groups or individuals. Also referred to as the ‘group dynamic’.