Advertisement
“An Overview of Scientology” banner

Scientology pages index  |  Contact

The dawning of ‘Religious Technology Center’ (RTC) and
     new management (1982-83)
(Witch hunts from the early ’80s or the hunt for squirrels and unlicensed field auditors)
(to other Scientology pages)

>> Do you want to help with preserving the original technology? <<  Consult my want list here!

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

        
“I consider all auditors my friends. I consider them that even when they squirrel. I believe they have a right to express themselves and their own opinions. I would not for a moment hamper their right to think. I think of auditors and Scientologists as the Free People.”
        
  L. Ron Hubbard            
  (from ‘PAB 79’, 10 Apr 56 “The Open Channel: What Do I Think of Auditors?”)  


A new management that had come with discomforts. Here is tracked what are its specifics, that which came with it, its consequences, how matters settled and how it all worked out in the final end.

 
Index:

  Foreword
    
The establishment of the RTC and new management
  A new management dawns (an array of new corporations, Feb 79-Nov 84)
  The ‘Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology’ vs The RTC
      - ‘Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology’ (Feb 79-Dec 81)
- ‘Religious Technology Center’ (RTC) (Jan 1982- )
 
And the things that came with the RTC
  An internal ‘snitch’ system established, rough ethics and ‘scare’ factor (Jul & Oct 1982)
             (RTC involvement and the infamous US Mission Holders Conference, San Francisco, Oct 82)
  Squirrels and unlicensed auditors tracked down by the RTC (Mar 1983- )
      - A manhunt on ‘squirrels’, inside and outside of the orgs, spearheaded by RTC
        (RTC perfecting and taking advantage of the ultimate ‘snitch’ system)
      - Are all those that practice Scientology without a license deemed squirrels?
             (A war at hand... but why? - Restricting the freedom of the auditor)
      - Pathing the way for ‘RTC licensed auditors only’?
        (The matter of HCO PL 9 Feb AD29(R) “Dianetic Counselling Groups (and Field Auditors), 10% Remittances to WW”)
      - The hunt for squirrels à la (in the manner of) L. Ron Hubbard!
  Practice of Disconnection reinstated; Change of rules for Declares (Sept 1983)
 
Aftermath
  After the new administration settled in... (1984- ) vs A “New Order”
  A résumé, coincidences(?) and a reminder...



 
Back to Main Index Foreword
RTC logo
RTC logo

These years 1982-83 were times that matters turned rather hectic. Suddenly you could be assigned to lower conditions for no apparent reason and without the means of any proper ethics gradient applied or having your rights taken in consideration. Among other we were here on the hunt for supposed squirrels. You could receive this stamp rather quickly, and as it appeared far too quickly.

The funny thing here in fact is that the Scientology initiative are all said to be for non-profit. But how are you going to defend that position if you start hunting people that are practicing Scientology procedures out there in the field, and then demand them to pay for licenses and all that when US law does not even support that?
The indications that we find though is that starting from so about 1979 to 1982 that the organizational outset and focus appear to have shifted from non-profit to for-profit. Coincidentally at least since 1982 we don't either see the line “The Church of Scientology is a non-profit organization.” printed in the books anymore. Something that used be found in all books. Therefore the logical and sensible question to ask is did Religious Technology Center (formed Jan 1982) represent the transformation to a for-profit organization?

Go to index

 
The establishment of the RTC and new management

Back to Main Index A new management dawns (an array of new corporations, Feb 79-Nov 84)

The early ’80s were obviously hectic times for the Church of Scientology organization wise. Reason was that a new management was put in place. We see that the till then familiar Worldwide (WW) was replaced with International Management (IMEC), internally in the organization commonly referred to as simply Int Management or simply Int. These were the Senior Executive Strata under control of the Executive Director International (ED Int). This ED Int was something new.
It was said that this “International structure” was “established” by L. Ron Hubbard (see ‘International Scientology News, Issue 27’, May 2004, on page 19), and the “reorganization of the Church's corporate and management structures” was “authored” by Mr. David Miscavige (according to their website, external link (last checked: 13 Nov 2019).

Prior to this however L. Ron Hubbard had divided the control to various networks. The Sea Org, Guardian Office and the service organizations were separate entities where each had different rights, duties and purposes. One of the purposes for example of the Guardian Office was to send out missions to orgs to handle flaps on the lines, but the Executive Director of the local service organization still had the right to factually cancel their orders. They had thus no carte blanche. The local service organizations each had their own so-called Advisory Council (AC), Executive Council (EC) and Financial Planning (FP) that for example other allowed them to set their own prices for services and make various decisions on their own volition.
With this new management put in place since 1982 this balance of powers was essentially gotten rid off. From this time forward it was the very top of the pyramid that could control and micromanage all of Scientology and on an international level. What we see happening is that the local organizations were not allowed to decide anything themselves anymore. Prices were now set internationally and not by the individual service organizations, herewith violating the policy letters on AC, EC and FP. Orders were now issued from the top and simply had to be complied with.
The Scientology organization and its various units and entities did not run like that during its first 32 years of existence. Therefore, was it really L. Ron Hubbard that “established” this new “International structure”?

Part of this new set up of things included the creation of a manifold of new corporations that all had to answer to and were controlled by International Management (IMEC). The book ‘What Is Scientology?’ (1992 edition) list amongst other the following corporations during the Feb 79-Nov 84 time frame. Below listing as adapted from pages 645-50 & 662:
  
 Date:                         Corporation:
1 FEBRUARY 1979      The World Institute of Scientology Enterprises (WISE) founded to assist businessmen and women in improving efficiency, quality and ethical standards in their own business and in the business community at large.
 1 FEBRUARY 1983:  World Institute of Scientology Enterprises (WISE) incorporated. (this 1983 incorporation date is not found in this book, however micro fiche copies do exist of such a document)
AUGUST 1980  Source Productions becomes Golden Era Productions and is established as the international dissemination center for Scientology.
1 NOVEMBER 1981  Church of Scientology International (CSI) founded as the mother church of Scientology. CSI is the corporation which houses international Church management.
1 JANUARY 1982  Formation of the Religious Technology Center.
 16 MAY 1982:  Religious Technology Center (RTC) incorporated. L. Ron Hubbard donated all trademarks of Dianetics and Scientology to RTC.
11 JULY 1982  The International Network of Computer Organized Management (INCOMM) was formed within the Church of Scientology International to establish and operate a major international management computer system which assists in the standard application of Scientology policy and technology and as a result facilitates rapid expansion.
1983  The Planetary Dissemination Organization formed to provide campaigns to make Dianetics and Scientology even more widely available.
DECEMBER 1983  Formation of the Office of Special Affairs International, a network within the Church of Scientology International which plans and supervises the legal affairs of the church, under the board of directors.
7 OCTOBER 1984  The International Association of Scientologists (IAS) formed and the Pledge to mankind signed at Saint Hill in England, uniting Scientologists everywhere.
8 NOVEMBER 1984  Celebrity Center International formed to give guidance to the network of Celebrity Centres throughout the world.

For some reason it fails to list:
  
Date: Corporation:
2 FEBRUARY 1981  Bridge Publications, Inc (BPI) incorporated. Responsible for the publication and distribution of books for USA.
13 OCTOBER 1981    Author Services Incorporated (ASI) incorporated. These were involved with dealings concerning L. Ron Hubbard's literary legacy. This is a for-profit corporation.
23 DECEMBER 1981  Scientology Missions International (SMI) incorporated.
28 MAY 1982  Church of Spiritual Technology (CST) incorporated. From the incorporation papers: “Specifically its purpose is to espouse, present, propagate, practice, ensure, and maintain the purity and integrity of the religion of Scientology.”. In practice however it meant that CSI answers to RTC that answers to CST. CST owns the copyright registered as ‘L. Ron Hubbard Library’.
24 NOVEMBER 1982  International Hubbard Ecclesiastical League of Pastors (I-HELP) incorporated. Licensing body for Field Auditors (annual fee and 10% of gross income). Provide for guidance and help to operate successfully in the field.

Neither of these are particularly insignificant.

Another change of significance was:  
        
“The Church of Scientology of California is reorganized and is no longer the Mother Church. The Mother Church will be the Church of Scientology International, which will include ecclesiastical management units such as Senior Management, IMO and ITO (International Management & Training Organization).”
(from HCO PL 25 Nov 81 I “Corporate and Other Changes”)
        
This policy letter was issued by the then Executive Director International Bill Franks.

 
Back to Main Index The ‘Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology’ vs The RTC

 
Go back ‘Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology’ (Feb 79-Dec 81)

The later in 1982 established Religious Technology Center (RTC) in principle acted as a Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology. The term had been in use as early as Feb 1979 and a last time in December 1981. The month following we then see this RTC formed. A coincidence? Not likely, they are obviously the same entity. This is actually interesting as it points at that the managing entity of RTC had already been realized and was operating at least as early as 1979.
A particular incriminating factor is that the very first instance the Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology was used it established a mandatory 10% tithe for Dianetic Counselling Groups. The second time it was used was in the revision of that same reference that was released 9½ months later this time including any and all Field Auditors for that 10% tithe. It was the RTC that was to become that controlling micromanaging entity that was issuing these licenses required that were allowing you to operate as a field auditor.

Commonly it is figured by the Scientology parishioner (inside the Church of Scientology and those active outside of their reign, Free Zone, Ron's org, etc.) that it was all formed and established in 1982. It's only that the actions taken were more detailedly circumscribed, and that the unit finally was given a name. Later on things like owner of various trademarks and such were added. Essentially and in effect it is rather obvious that it is the very same entity, an RTC in the making you may wish to say.

You can track the use of Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology most prominently in HCOBs and HCO PLs that were released in that given period. (more info here, separate window)

 
Go back ‘Religious Technology Center’ (RTC) (Jan 1982- )

  
Date: Corporation:
1 JANUARY 1982       Formation of the Religious Technology Center.
16 MAY 1982:  Religious Technology Center (RTC) incorporated. L. Ron Hubbard donated all trademarks of Dianetics and Scientology to RTC.

Its incorporation papers can be consulted at the below link (pop-up window).
    “Articles of Incorporation of Religious Technology Center”

Interesting is that in ‘What Is Scientology?’ (1992 edition) on page 662 at “NOVEMBER 1, 1981” a direct association is made between the Guardian Office and the Religious Technology Center, the happenings relating to the former caused the latter to come into being. It says:  (underlining is mine)
        
“The Church of Scientology International was founded, signaling a new era of Scientology management. A strong standardized corporate structure was required to facilitate the rapid expansion of Scientology and maintain high ethical standards in a widespread international network of churches. This followed a series of Sea Org inspections that discovered that the Guardian's Office (which had been established in 1966 to protect the Church from external attacks and care for its legal matters) had become entirely autonomous and corrupt. The Guardian's Office had been infiltrated by individuals antithetical to Scientology and had become an organization that operated completely apart from the day-to-day activities of the Church. Their secret actions in violation of Church policy had resulted in eleven members being jailed for obstruction of justice. Sea Organization executives overthrew the Guardian's Office and disbanded it. Part of the measures taken to ensure a similar situation could never recur was the formation of the Religious Technology Center on 1 January 1982. L. Ron Hubbard bestowed the trademarks of Scientology to RTC, whose purpose is to safeguard the proper use of the marks and ensure they remain in good hands and are properly used.”
        
Ain't that interesting, the RTC coming into being because of the Guardian Office! We may add here that this RTC in turn had to answer to Church of Spiritual Technology (CST). We find however that the Church of Scientology does not reveal or mention that anywhere in any published material! The Scientology parishioner does thus not know about CST. The existence though of CST and that it stands for however can easily be verified, we have the incorporation papers for that, and if for example you go in to the U.S. copyright database website at www.copyright.gov/records you will find that the materials of Scientology are all copyrighted in the name of this CST. So, RTC does not actually own any of the copyrights (the subject matter or if you like the spiritual legacy), they only own some of the trademarks and service marks (which are graphical designs). RTC executes with the permission of CST. The RTC is the outward face. Why however is the Scientology parishioner not informed about this?

A claim is made that L. Ron Hubbard would in 1982 have “bestowed the trademarks of Scientology to RTC”. According to ‘What Is Scientology?’ (1992 edition), page 359, that was in “May of that year”, thus at the time of its incorporation.

Matters however do tend to get rather confused here as it had already been determined long since that all copyrights, marks and rights, by blanket assignment are the property of and will remain the property of HCO Ltd the main office” (from HCO PL 15 Nov 58 III “Outstanding Copyrights and Marks”). Till this day this policy letter is considered a valid policy letter, and there is no other policy letter known saying anything else than that!


Oh, wait a minute here! How did L. Ron Hubbard came to actually own these trademarks, as after all they were the property of HCO Ltd.? See further reading at given link here below:
    “Copyrights and trademarks: Who ‘owns’ Scientology?”  (separate window)

 
And the things that came with the RTC

Back to Main Index An internal ‘snitch’ system established, rough ethics and ‘scare’ factor (Jul & Oct 1982)
(RTC involvement and the infamous US Mission Holders Conference, San Francisco, Oct 82)

Mid-1982 we see a firm establishment of a reporting system with the release of HCO PL 22 Jul 82 “Knowledge Reports”. This reporting system soon would turn to one of the tools that will be heavily promoted and put in use by especially Religious Technology Center. In effect we have a ‘snitch’ system put in place.
The problem essentially is that it among directed that “Any person who knew of an outness or crime and failed to report it and thus became an accessory receives the same penalty as the person disciplined as the actual offender.”. The policy letter lists 8 such criteria and they all say or imply that not reporting may make you an “accessory” to whatever you did not write down or report about. This word just keeps turning up in this reference! The consideration of the reader became, to be on the safe side, you better send in your report. In practice this then turned to be in disregard if a situation had already been resolved or attended to or not. This policy letter created a situation in where persons were writing reports about the most insignificant occurrences irrelevancies, worst of all these reports added a lot of unnecessary traffic on the Ethics Division of an organization resulting in that situations that required urgent handling were buried in the paper stack of insignificancies and already handled situations and thus did not receive the attention needed. Various organizations I have seen had insurmountable backlogs that came in stacks of papers and boxes overfilled with to be filed reports.
This policy letter essentially cancelled the ethics gradients as laid out in HCO PL 29 Apr 65 III “Ethics Review”. It directed steps taken and if it was resolved prior to step “9. Reporting on a person to Ethics.”  LRH, then a report was simply not written. It also passes by writing a so-called ‘Things that shouldn't be’ despatch to the Inspection Officer. In where you may have observed something and don't know what to think of it or other. A despatch (thus not a report) could be send to an org terminal that will assess it and will do what is necessary.
A detailed analysis of this reference can be consulted at below link:  (separate window)
    “HCO PL 22 Jul 82 ‘Knowledge Reports’ vs acquiring information about people & control (includes a note about HCO PL 2 March 84 ‘O/W Write Up’)”

RTC logo Standard EthicsThen a rather harsh tone we find is exerted during the US Mission Holders’ Conference held in San Francisco on 17 Oct 1982. It is something that I would refer to as exercising and implanting a scare factor. People among other were ordered en masse to write down their own overts and accordingly knowledge reports. Although the approach exercised may not necessarily result in that you may wish to have happen. Mind that Scientology Missions International (SMI Int), incorporated 23 Dec 1981, had to answer to RTC. These occurrences are all related. I address the US Mission Holders’ Conference occurrence in more detail at link here below:  (separate window)
    “Rough ethics and the ‘scare’ factor (US Mission Holders Conference, San Francisco, 17 Oct 82)”

 
Back to Main Index Squirrels and unlicensed auditors tracked down by the RTC (Mar 1983- )

 
Go back A manhunt on ‘squirrels’, inside and outside of the orgs, spearheaded by RTC
(RTC perfecting and taking advantage of the ultimate ‘snitch’ system)

These years are being perceived by many Scientology old-timers as rather hectic. It is reported that many persons ended up on the RPF or found themselves expelled without even having a Comm Ev convened. But as easily things could also be turned around and condition assignments reverted. Either way much was happening. January 1983 had seen the release of ‘SO ED 2192 Int’, 27 Jan 83 “List of Declared Suppressive Persons”, that was listing 607 names who were declared during late 1982 and early 1983. Many of these persons had been in the organization since a variety of years, reportedly a variety of previously high ranking Sea Org members and high classed auditors were purportedly listed. Somehow it was thus thought that persons could turn from being a productive auditor and loyal Scientologists, that were active for as much as 30 years, suddenly it could be found about that they in reality were bad (suppressive) persons after all? This could apply to some individuals I am sure, but this time around are not too many persons found that would fit this bill and criteria?

The year 1983 had also seen the periodical ‘KSW News’ coming into which was published by the Religious Technology Center. Especially the early run of this periodical contained a variety of reports how various squirrels were stopped from practising or so we our told. The reasons given usually related to trademark violations and such. We are not supplied with exact specifics.

Religious Technology Center stated its purpose in ‘RTC Information Letter #1’, 2 Mar 83 as “to see to it that the services delivered under the many trade and service marks of Dianetics and Scientology are 100% Standard Tech and that the Bridge remains pure, workable, and available to all who wish to go free”.

‘RTC Information Letter #2’, 2 Mar 83 announced the establishment of The Inspector General Network. Its purpose could be perceived being twofold. One affected the trademarks, the other to uncover and counteract so-called squirrels. It reads:
        
“The Inspector General Network has the purpose to safeguard the proper use of the Trademarks of Dianetics™ spiritual healing technology and Scientology applied religious philosophy, protecting the public, and making sure that this powerful technology remains in good hands and is properly used.
        
 
Though not the most pleasant of topics, there are those who view Scientology technology in some perverted fashion — some going so far as to squirrel the standard procedures of Dianetics and Scientology technologies as written and recorded by the Founder, L. Ron Hubbard. Such persons commit this out-tech pretending to use Dianetics and Scientology technologies while doing something else (their ‘own brand’, not what LRH says). You can always tell a squirrel because both his advice and his pcs don't get better.”
 
The Information Letter then mentions: “You may have heard of some such fellows (now removed from the Church).”. Evidently this would be referring to David Mayo who had been removed from his post of Senior C/S International in late August 1982. He and the whole of the staff of the Senior C/S Int office were made subject to a so-called Committee of Evidence. Its findings were then published in ‘RTC Conditions Order 1’, 9 Oct 82. It did not turn out so well for these persons. David Mayo's head was put on a pike with the release of ‘Flag Conditions Order 7138’, 2 Mar 83 “Writ of Expulsion and Suppressive Person Declare David Mayo”. Note that this release carries the same issue date as RTC Information Letter 1 & 2. It should be obvious that all these happenings are quite related. In a sense it is ironic as David Mayo was one of the original cofounders of the Religious Technology Center! (more info here, separate window) As a thank you he was then honoured having the first ever released RTC Conditions Order to be about his person and his staff.

A further development was the activation of the ‘Keeping Scientology Working Alert Form’, this Form was issued as such on 19 Jul 1983. It said: “This Alert Form is being supplied so that you may officially notify the Religious Technology Center to any instances you may find of squirreling, squirrel groups, and enturbulation or distractions to the smooth operations of an org and Public moving up the Bridge.”. The 5 questions as they appear on this form:
        
“Name of the squirrel/squirrel group.
        
 
Where are they located?
 
 
Who is involved in the activity?
 
 
What are they doing that is squirrel?
 
 
Do you have any other data regarding this that you feel RTC should know about?”
 

 
Go back Are all those that practice Scientology without a license deemed squirrels?
(A war at hand... but why? - Restricting the freedom of the auditor)

Then we have someone in a monotone voice that changes speed every so often telling about how successful the hunt had been on Ron's Journal 38 “Today and Tomorrow: The Proof” (tape released 31 Dec 83). It is promoted that it was L. Ron Hubbard speaking, although a voice analysis applied on this deemed that virtually impossible. It reads:
        
“Wins against squirrels. RTC has also been the major driving force behind handling squirrel groups internationally so that Scientologists are protected against those who deal in shoddy substitutes for personal gain.” ...
        
 
RTC currently has a number of missions out in 16 locations all over the world which are directly handling squirrel groups to get them handled and closed down. ...”
 
On the tape it runs of various examples of how a variety of squirrel groups had been dismantled, shut down, prevented from starting, or prosecuted for trademark violations.

One may wonder though what had happened with:
        
“I consider all auditors my friends. I consider them that even when they squirrel. I believe they have a right to express themselves and their own opinions. I would not for a moment hamper their right to think. I think of auditors and Scientologists as the Free People.
        
 
Just as they consider one another their people, so I consider them my people.
 
 
I think their errors of the past, when they existed, came about because we are new and we are finding out and I don't think any of their errors were intentional any more than mine were.”          LRH
(from ‘PAB 79’, 10 Apr 56 “The Open Channel: What Do I Think of Auditors?”)
 

        
“Squirreling (going off into weird practices or altering Scientology) only comes about from non-comprehension.”          LRH
(from HCO PL 7 Feb 65 “Keeping Scientology Working”)
        

Mind also:
        
No squirrel has lasted more than 2 or 3 years in the past sixteen years. And there have been many. That they squirrel shows enough bad faith to drive away the public the moment the public hears of the original.”          LRH
(from HCO PL 4 Dec 66 “Expansion - Theory of Policy”)
        
Well, did they hunt them down back then? Wouldn't think so. Well, then why do we see such an enormous effort exercised by RTC hunting them down?
Is it may be this?
        
“My earnest advice is: Only deal with or associate with those organizations licensed by RTC and auditors in good standing with the Church.”
(from ‘Ron's Journal 38’, 31 Dec 83 “Today and Tomorrow: The Proof”)
        
Where the free Scientologist by definition is obliterated from existence, and where every practicing field auditor is consigned to pay 10% of his gross income to the Scientology corporation I HELP (International Hubbard Ecclesiastical League of Pastors), incorporated 24 Nov 1982.
A problem is that persons in effect were already not considered (or at least hinted at) not being in “good standing” if you were not properly “licensed by RTC” or if there was an unwillingness to do so. This reasoning has since turned into a vicious circle!

A historical sequence of things and its details can be consulted at links here below:  (separate windows)
    “Restricting the freedom of the auditor (1): Demand for ordination (Sept 73)”
  “Restricting the freedom of the auditor (2): Making a profit (any and all practicing Scientologists must now pay a license) (Feb & Nov 79, Apr 82)”

 
Go back Pathing the way for ‘RTC licensed auditors only’?
(The matter of HCO PL 9 Feb AD29(R) “Dianetic Counselling Groups (and Field Auditors), 10% Remittances to WW”)

This is also a rather strange statement:
        
“Recent surveys have been done on public and one of the main things that they are interested in is ensuring that the squirrels get handled and off the lines. RTC is the organization that is effectively doing this. The response to RTC's handling of the squirrels has been excellent. The public detests them.”
(from ‘Ron's Journal 38’, 31 Dec 83 “Today and Tomorrow: The Proof”)
        
Now why would the Scientology public be worried about people that use Scientology technology? As that is what it comes down to. Mind: “I consider all auditors my friends. I consider them that even when they squirrel.”  LRH
The matter is that real squirrels would perish by themselves because of no income, no need to hunt them down! Some writing (for example an Ethics Order) issued on these persons that will be informing the Scientology parishioner, and good promotion for the Scientology organization would do the trick! The problem though that arises with this new approach is that it was somehow figured that any unlicensed practicing Scientologist was considered/assumed by RTC to be a squirrel, and he is therefore also hunted down.
But it being “one of the main things that they [the public] are interested in”? Really? I have always found that the Scientology parishioners are more interested in their own progress and that they themselves are able to practice Scientology. That is all they'll talk about, I have not ever seen any particular focus on so-called squirrels among Scientology parishioners!

These announcements made and actions taken by the RTC effectively prepared the way for creating a monopoly for the Church of Scientology in where only they would be allowed to practice Scientology and those that are licensed by them, and where each of the practicing Scientologists (auditors) pays a 10% remittance of their gross income to them.
And this is exactly the mind-set we find today in the organization among staff and public! After all they are trained through excessive PR to believe that only the Church of Scientology can and does deliver standard tech. If you would go elsewhere and the local organization learns about that then there is a fat chance that the ethics officer will call you in, interrogate you and ask for a name. Something which this ethics officer is not supposed to just for stated reason (see here, separate window).


The references that caused this 10% tithe into being were:
     HCO PL 9 Feb AD29 “Dianetic Counselling Groups, 10% Remittances to WW”
And its revision::
     HCO PL 9 Feb AD29R (Revised 29 Nov 79) “Dianetic Counselling Groups and Field Auditors, 10% Remittances to WW”
These were the first 2 references that were issued by the Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology. Detailed information about them is found at link here below:  (separate window)
    HCO PL 9 Feb AD29(R) “Dianetic Counselling Groups (and Field Auditors), 10% Remittances to WW”


A reminder should be:

“For no man has any monopoly upon the wisdom of this universe. It belongs to those who can use it to help themselves and others.”          LRH   
(from “My Philosophy” [ca 1965])

“... if anyone wants a monopoly on dianetics, be assured that he wants it for reasons which have to do not with dianetics but with profit.”          LRH   
(from ‘Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health’; Book Three: Therapy; Chapter I: The Mind's Protection; 1950, 1973 edition, p168)

It is simple reality that L. Ron Hubbard did not ever demand licensing. Quite the contrary. At that it is not even lawful doing so in regards to auditing procedures of which he was very well aware. A detailed study and chronology about this can be consulted at below link:  (separate window)
    “A ‘science of mind’ vs ‘licensing and regulation’ or Can/should the subject of Scientology & Dianetics be legislated?”

 
Go back The hunt for squirrels à la (in the manner of) L. Ron Hubbard!

Here above we have seen how the Religious Technology Center (RTC) goes about this thing squirrels. Now how did L. Ron Hubbard go about these things in the earlier days?
  (1)
First you would need to properly define what type of squirrel it would be about;
 
  (2)
then you may wish to establish if it would be in need of any handling;
 
  (3)
lastly you would figure out a way how to deal with it.
 

There is something we can consult. There is this reference. It talks about squirrels, establishes what they would be about, and offers steps how to effectively deal with these. It is a confidential LRH ED dating back to 1966. These mid-’60s, per the reports, was a time when the organization endured various attacks. (more info here, separate window) This then had to be dealt with. It was referred to as “Project Squirrel”.

These particular squirrels were defined circumscribed as “SPs engaged in Squirrel actions or anti-Scientology actions.”.
These were to be “investigated” and “proper evidences and witnesses, not rumour” were to be presented.
It states that “It will be found uniformly (despite first view there is no evidence of it) that anti-Scientologists have in their background this life crimes for which they could be arrested.”.

It would appear these are not the kind of persons that RTC has been going after. This confidential LRH ED reveals about persons that do actual damage to the organization.

Once this reference was confidential, then Bridge Publications decided to include it in their ‘The Original LRH Executive Directives’ and released these volumes in 1983 where it appears on pages 909-910. I am regarding the year of release, which is 1983. Bridge Publications, Inc (BPI) was one of the corporations that came with the RTC and was established 2 Feb 1981. Reflecting on this was there a consideration to have it included to somehow justify the things that RTC had been up to? Whatever the reason for inclusion, it failed either way to excuse for this matter. The full reference can be consulted at link here below:  (pop-up window)
    ‘LRH ED 149 Int’, 2 Dec 66 “Branch 5 Project, Project Squirrel (CONFIDENTIAL)”

 
Back to Main Index Practice of Disconnection reinstated; Change of rules for Declares (Sept 1983)

Then September 1983 had welcomed a package of changes of a rather intrinsic nature. Now it may have turned into a matter of who is controlling who? I introduced the general idea and its outcome in a little essay that I wrote:  (separate window)
    “The ‘new ways’ or Turning from a self-correcting system into something where others can be given the power to control you?”
Briefly summarized it amounts to:
    a) HCOB 10 Sept 83 “PTS-ness and Disconnection” which is a re-introduction of the Practice of Disconnection (previously cancelled by HCO PL 15 Nov 68 “Cancellation of Disconnection”);
  b) HCO PL 9 Sept 83 “Writing a Declare Order” (Limited Distribution) introduced exceptions to HCO PL 2 Jun 65 I “Writing of an Ethics Order”, as it dictates that one is to be unspecific in regards to information given when issuing Declare Orders. This is a problem as this HCO PL 9 Sept 83 is a confidential release, in the same as it also clashes with HCO PL 16 Apr 65 I “The ‘Hidden Data Line’”;
  c) HCO PL 23 Dec 65RA (Revised and reissued 10 Sept 83) “Suppressive Acts, Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists” introduced the datum: “A Suppressive Declare Order upon a person or group and all of the conditions inherent within it remain in force until the order has been officially cancelled by an authorized and published Church issue.”, which in effect is clashing with HCO PL 15 Dec 69 “Orders, Query of”!
  (a study of ‘a)’ can be consulted here, a study of ‘b)’ & ‘c)’ can be consulted here (separate windows).
These adjustments may have been incorporated and thought up with the best of intentions in order to handle a situation, however judging the results and what it caused it may not have worked out particularly well. Either way the fact of the implementation of these adjustments does raise some questions as explained in a), b) & c) here above.

 
Aftermath

Back to Main Index After the new administration settled in... (1984- ) vs A “New Order”

By 1984 the particular hectic times from the few foregoing years seem to have gone for a break. The periodical ‘International Scientology News 4’ [ca Feb 84] reports about an “enormous international expansion”. Religious Technology Center however steadily kept walking on the path they had chosen.

In 1991 we see the release of ‘Flag ED 2830’, 10 Sept 91 “Suppressive Persons and Suppressive Groups List”, listing approximately 415 groups and 2,230 individuals. Per the routing indicated on this reference these were distributed to ‘ALL E/Os ALL ORGS AND MISSIONS around the world as an attempt “to ensure that these individuals or members of these groups are not connected to or on lines at your org or mission in any way.”. It is claimed all to be for safeguarding purposes and the sake of Keeping Scientology Working. Till this day the Religious Technology Center encourages and motivates to send in your reports about matters this through their magazine ‘KSW News’, but also through the Internet via their website, external link (last checked: 29 Oct 2019). In the same they are insisting that field auditors are to be licensed and only run that version of the technology that they have approved. If you want to run something other or older you are expected to seek approval first.
In that respect what are we to think of that which L. Ron Hubbard wrote in 1956: “I think of auditors and Scientologists as the Free People.”?

It is in effect a misapplication of:

“Any process ever taught on the SHSBC or ever released in ANY book can be audited and be Standard Tech.”          LRH
(from HCOB 26 Feb 70 “Standard Tech and Invalidation”)

        
“Inevitably, when any new approach or process is released, some will instantly assume that all ‘older’ (actually more basic) data has been cancelled. There is no statement to that effect. ...
        
 
This idea that the ‘old’ is always cancelled by anything ‘new’ has its root in the idea that a later order cancels earlier orders, which is true. But orders are one thing and Tech basics another.”          LRH
(from HCOB 30 Jun 70R (Revised 6 Mar 73) “VIII Actions”)
 

It is a misapplication as one should not have to ask permission for running processes that are already contained within the subject matter of Dianetics and Scientology historical wise or other wise. Generally the scene is that one is only allowed to freely use the latest versions of processes and that are in use at present within the Church of Scientology. For anything else you will need permission, which is not something you are likely to get either. In addition of this of course you still also will have to pay your 10% tithe if you are this field auditor.
I find it is these things that are stressed by the Church of Scientology, apparently by order of and instruction from RTC. You run approved processes, do as you are told, and pay your tithe. If you take services from an auditor unregistered with the church they will want to know about it and ask you for a name, which essentially still is none of their business. In case you question anything, you are then frowned upon and if you persist you may be summoned to pay the Ethics Officer a visit, be send to cramming or even worse. Through all the years I have seen this pattern playing out. Usually people submit very quickly though.


The remedy...

        
“There is only one thing that could happen to Scientology and that is to say that it would be buried—the remedy would be buried. If it ever went out of sight, this world's done. All you've got to do is invalidate it and put it out of sight and hide it, and it'll come up in the wrong place doing the wrong thing and mankind will find itself a slave.
        
 
So anybody that knows the remedy of this subject—anybody that knows these techniques—is himself actually under a certain responsibility; that's to make sure that he doesn't remain a sole proprietor. That's all it takes; just don't remain a sole proprietor. Don't ever think that a monopoly of this subject is a safe thing to have. It's not safe. It's not safe for man; it's not safe for this universe.
 
 
This universe has long been looking for new ways to make slaves. Well, we've got some new ways to make slaves here. Let's see that none are made.” 
 
        
sound  Sound snippet (2:12) 
        

        
[Did you ever read poor old George Orwell's 1984? Yes, yes, that's wonderful. That would be—could be the palest imagined shadow of what a world would be like under the rule of the secret use of Scientology with no remedy in existence.]...
        
 
It's a very simple remedy. And that's---just make sure that the remedy is passed along. That's all. Don't hoard it, don't hold it; [and if you ever do use any Black Dianetics, use it on the guy who pulled Scientology out of sight and made it so it wasn't available. Because he's the boy who would be electing himself ‘The New Order’. And we don't need any more new orders. All those orders, as far as I am concerned, have been filled.]”          LRH 
(from Philadelphia Doctorate Course lecture #20 “Formative State of Scientology, Definition of Logic”, given on 6 Dec 52)
 
        
sound  Sound snippet (1:52) 
        
 
(Please note that above sound snippet is longer than the printed text that you find here above.)
 

Coincidentally the text from this second clip here above of this lecture has been edited since its 1991 re-release. The pieces about George Orwell and Black Dianetics (see between brackets) are missing. Are these warning signs may be?


There exist this write-up that circulated among the Scientology community so about mid-1983. It was copied many times and spread forth. It addressed in particular these occurrences of the early ’80s. It is critical about a variety of matters. It however also offers interesting angles of how to look upon these occurrences. I present this writing as is. You simply have to make up your own mind about it. Of all the writings that have been written about these matters, of which various are posted on the Internet, this is one of the more practical, easy to understand and interesting ones.
    “Dane Tops Debrief (mid-1983)”  (pop-up window)

 
Back to Main Index A résumé, coincidences(?) and a reminder...

The ‘Board(s) of Directors of the Churches of Scientology’ (forerunner of the RTC)

The earliest reference that could be found using this BOARDS OF DIRECTORS of the CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY was HCO PL 9 Feb AD29 “Dianetic Counselling Groups, 10% Remittances to WW”.
The second time it was used was for the release of its revision HCO PL 9 Feb AD29R (Revised 29 Nov 79) “Dianetic Counselling Groups and Field Auditors, 10% Remittances to WW”. This time around it was even setting aside L. Ron Hubbard whose name was removed from the signature area and initials from this reference. It was simply signed “BOARD OF DIRECTORS of the CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY” [now dropping the S from BOARDS]. Composer/typing initial accordingly list ‘BDCS:dr’. L. Ron Hubbard was thus completely absent from this release.
Its use was discontinued and lastly used in December 1981. The month following the Religious Technology Center was then formed on 1 Jan 1982 and incorporated on 16 May 1982.


10% Remittances to Dianetic Counselling Groups/Field Auditors

Is it a coincidence that the first reference that used BOARDS OF DIRECTORS of the CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY and which at the same time also implemented a mandatory 10% tithe for all Dianetic Counselling Groups and 9½ months later included Field Auditors? Therefore was this entity created to transform the Church of Scientology from a non-profit organization into a for-profit organization? It was the RTC that would become the entity that gave out the licenses and that was hunting down people that were not licensed.


An array of new corporations, Feb 79-Nov 84

The various corporations that came with the RTC fall in the time period Feb 1979-Nov 1984. The first one listed was the World Institute of Scientology Enterprises (WISE), which was incorporated 1 Feb 1979. This is just 8 days apart from the first occurrence of BOARDS OF DIRECTORS of the CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY being used.

Would this be another coincidence? The particular month may be, but everything gives a clear indication that all these occurrences were well planned long in advance and have been implemented step by step, spread out over a number of years! The concept of an RTC must have been dawning already in February 1979 and even earlier. It is the natural sequence of events that you first would overhaul (swap or implement your main changes in) an original technology (Sept 1973-Sept 1978), and have these changes accepted as correct by everyone, where after you would start to unfold and establish your new management with its new rules piece by piece. Then if there are disagreements about the new management but not the technology, the apostate is still likely to adopt and will continue to use the overhauled version of that technology as he will not, or will refuse to see that this was already a result of the previous actions undertaken by that same new management...

 

Vocabulary:

     ..R, ..RA, ..RB (etc) or #R, #RA (etc):
For example: ‘HCO PL 24 Sept 70R’ & ‘HCO PL 24 Sept 70RA, etc. The given date denotes the first time it has been published in issue-form. The R, RA indication may also follow after an issue-number. The R stands for ‘Revision’ and would refer to that it has been revised since it was first published. If it is revised a 2nd time it is indicated as RA, a 3rd time RB, then RC, and so on.
     AD..:
After Dianetics ..’. The main book ‘Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health’ was first published in 1950. Therefore for example AD8, AD12, and AD29 would respectively give the years 1958, 1962 and 1979.
     ASI:
Author's Services, Incorporated’. These were involved with dealings concerning L. Ron Hubbard's literary legacy. Incorporated on 13 October 1981.
     audit, auditing, auditor:
The application of Scientology processes and procedures to someone by a trained auditor (listener). The goal of the auditor is to make the receiver of the auditing look at incidents and reduce the mental charge which may lay upon them. The auditor may not evaluate and has to adhere to the Auditor's code.
     Black Dianetics:
1. Hypnotism. (5109C17A)  2. There are those who, to control, resort to narcotism, suggestion, gossip, slander–the thousands of overt and covert ways that can be classified as Black Dianetics. (Journal of Scientology Issue 3-G, Sept. 1952, Danger: Black Dianetics!)
     Comm Ev:
Committee of Evidence’. A fact-finding group appointed and empowered to impartially investigate and recommend upon Scientology matters of a fairly severe ethical nature. (Introduction to Scientology Ethics, p. 28)
     cramming:
A section in the Qualifications Division where a student is given high pressure instruction at his own cost after being found slow in study or when failing his exams. The cramming section teaches students what they have missed. This includes trained auditors who wish to be brought up-to-date on current technical developments.
     HCOB:
Hubbard Communications Office Bulletin’. Color flash–red ink on white paper. Written by LRH only , but only so starting from January 1974. These are the technical issue line. All data for auditing and courses is contained in HCOBs. For more information go here (separate window).
    HCO PL:
Hubbard Communication Office Policy Letter’. Color flash–green ink on white paper. Written by LRH only, but only so starting from January 1974. These are the organizational and administrative issue line. For more information go here (separate window).
     LRH:
An usual abbreviation for ‘L. Ron Hubbard’.
     LRH ED:
L. Ron Hubbard Executive Directive’. Earlier called SEC EDs (Secretarial EDs). These are issued by LRH to various areas. They are not valid longer than one year if fully complied with when they are automatically retired. They otherwise remain valid until fully complied with or until amended or cancelled by another LRH ED. They carry current line, projects, programs, immediate orders and directions. They are numbered for area and sequence for the area and are sent to staffs or specific posts in orgs. They are blue ink on white paper with a special heading. (HCO PL 24 Sept 70R)
     org(s):
Short for ‘organization(s)’.
     overt, overt act:
A harmful act or a transgression against the moral code of a group. When a person does something that is contrary to the moral code he has agreed to, or when he omits to do something that he should have done per that moral code, he has committed an overt. An overt violates what was agreed upon. An overt can be intentional or unintentional.
     O/W Write-up:
Overt/Withhold Write-up’. Basically writing down overt acts and withholds in a particular format on a piece of paper that is then forwarded to the Ethics section of a Scientology organization. It's purpose is to relieve the conscience of the person, and make him feel better. It is also a standard practice to be done prior to receiving auditing, as one is told that it will save the person costly auditing hours.
     pc(s):
Short for ‘preclear(s)’. See at that entry in vocabulary.
     preclear (pc):
1. A person who, through Scientology processing, is finding out more about himself and life. (The Phoenix Lectures, p. 20)  2. A spiritual being who is now on the road to becoming Clear, hence preclear. (HCOB 5 Apr 69)  3. One who is discovering things about himself and who is becoming clearer. (HCO PL 21 Aug 62)
     PTS, PTSness:
potential trouble source’.  1. Somebody who is connected with an SP (suppressive person) who is invalidating him, his beingness, his processing, his life. (SH Spec 63, 6506C08)  2. He's here, he's way up today and he's way down tomorrow. (Establishment Officer Lecture 3, 7203C02 SO I)  3. The mechanism of PTS is environmental menace that keeps something continually keyed in. This can be a constant recurring somatic or continual, recurring pressure or a mass. (HCOB 5 Dec 68)
     RPF:
Rehabilitation Project Force’. For more detailed information see article here (separate window).
     Sea Org (SO):
Short for ‘Sea Organization’. This is the senior organization within the Church of Scientology that see to it that Advanced Organizations (AOs) and the Class IV-V organizations do function well. They send out so-called missions if there are indications or if they find that improvement or corrections are called for. They also provide for dissemination and other programs that the Scientology organizations are to comply with. Missions may be send out to implement these and instruct the organizations.
     SO ED:
Sea Org(anization) Executive Directive’. This is basically an ED (temporary policy) issued by the senior echelon within the Church of Scientology.
     SP:
Short for ‘suppressive person’.
     squirrel:
Going off into weird practices or altering Scientology. (HCO PL 7 Feb 65, Keeping Scientology Working)
     World Wide:
Located in London, England. The corporation that (in the early days) owned and controlled Scientology organizations.


Go to top of this page


Advertisement