Birth of the Sea Org

lexmark

Patron with Honors
Joe
Great post. Since the days of L Ron Hubbard and his writings much progress has occurred in the field of science regarding the human spirit and consciousness. I would dare to say more advanced than LRHs writings. LRH did not have the quantum physics or mechanics to guide him. There are scientists out there actively disseminating their findings to create a better world.
The scientists of yesterday have brought about a mindset of materialism amongst the politicians and people of our world. Even our religions are base on materialism. According to one of the new scientists involved with quantum physics the financial crisis we have experienced is due to a system of economics based on materialism.
I would not like to guess about how many ex Scientologists and Sea Org members are out there, many on Facebook and on this message board however I would presume it to be quite a lot. David Miscaviage appears to be digging a grave for Scientology with his policy of disconnection and other hostile actions towards people. Is it not feasible for us as a group to establish a new group maybe similar to Scientology or not and use what we know. The group would be friendly and not create mistrust or use disconnection policy in the society.
I think LRH became a rather angry old man towards the end of his life.

Regards,

Travers
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
Nothing really new here!

Really? Assuming this is so, was this before or after his 1951 "dispose of quietly and without sorrow" statement, his 1955 "ruin utterly" statement, his 1959 "There are men dead because they attacked us" statement, his introduction of Security Checking in 1961, and the "deadly serious activity" 'Keeping Scientology Working', SP Doctrine and 'Fair Game Law' in 1965?

This would be very "in character" for Ron. Saying one thing and doing exactly the opposite. Your counter examples really do not prove at all that he never said, "If it isn't fun, it isn't Scientology. His nickname could be L. Ron "say one thing and do exactly the opposite" Hubbard.

Because I am fair and prefer truth, I will concede that I never actually heard Ron say this, even on tape or CD's. Neverthelss, I heard it said all the time by a lot of different people, formemost of whom was Yvonne Jentzsch. She said it to the staff repeatedly over the 4 years I was at CCLA. Also, I believe it was said at my intro lecture though I am not positive and the statement was made at various events and rallies and a it was especially used a lot at Friday graduations or when giving wins after course when we all had to voice our wins from the study period we had just concluded. I heard that statement uttered probably at least 500 times in my Scio career and often it had the words, Ron says prefacing it. Yet, I concede that I never heard Ron actually say it either personally or on a recording so make of it what you will.
Lakey
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
Nice post for your very first post!

Joe
Great post. Since the days of L Ron Hubbard and his writings much progress has occurred in the field of science regarding the human spirit and consciousness. I would dare to say more advanced than LRHs writings. LRH did not have the quantum physics or mechanics to guide him. There are scientists out there actively disseminating their findings to create a better world.

I believe some progress has been made in the field of science regarding the human spirit and consciousness. The problem is that most of the newer theories are brain centered in nature and tend strongly to deny the existence of the human spirit as being something outside of the physical universe. I did say most but certainly not all. Dulloldfart's Dr. Newton is an example of a new scientific approach which allows for a non physical component to the human spirit and there are several others If LRH found basic truths, then basic truths do not go out of date from one generation to the next so his writings may be rendered obsolete by modern developments or they may not, more depending on the validity of his technologies rather than just the mere passage of time.

The scientists of yesterday have brought about a mindset of materialism amongst the politicians and people of our world. Even our religions are base on materialism. According to one of the new scientists involved with quantum physics the financial crisis we have experienced is due to a system of economics based on materialism.

Yes, Unfortuneately the above is true.

I would not like to guess about how many ex Scientologists and Sea Org members are out there, many on Facebook and on this message board however I would presume it to be quite a lot. David Miscaviage appears to be digging a grave for Scientology with his policy of disconnection and other hostile actions towards people. Is it not feasible for us as a group to establish a new group maybe similar to Scientology or not and use what we know. The group would be friendly and not create mistrust or use disconnection policy in the society.

Several such groups have already been formed. For those who think that Hubbard had the correct answers and DM ruined Hubbard's work, The Freezone is such a group, an international group at that. Knowlegeism is a group founded by the late Alan Walters, and claims to have evolved technologies more advanced than Hubbard's but it is not allied with science as practiced in the Universities. Mike Goldstein has his Idenics which he and an oldtime Hubbard founding member John Galusha developed. It appears to me to be an updating of Dianetics but it is its own subject now and is quite different from standard Dianetics.

I think LRH became a rather angry old man towards the end of his life.

Regards,

Travers

The last few years, Hubbard was more than just angry, he was an eccentric recluse and unfortunately he appears to have "lost his marbles" so to speak. Apparently, he audited so many things on himself and messed around with his own case to such an extent that he was never handled casewise and as he got older, his case kicking back at him caused him terrible trauma both physically and mentally. I feel bad about this happening to Hubbard but he did bring it upon himself. I believe that his losing his marbles at or near his life's end made it easy for someone shrewd, such as DM, to step in and take control of Hubbard's empire. We exes and the ones still in C of S plus Hubbard's immediate family members have all paid a huge price for Hubbard failing to properly turn over his hats at his life's end.

For a first post, you wrote a good one. Keep reading and studying this stuff and please keep posting!
Lakey
 

RogerB

Crusader
A Successful Mission??

Joe van Staden; said:
BIRTH OF THE SEA ORG – THE DIE IS CAST

. . . snipped . . . .

A clue as to the direction the Sea Org was heading was provided one evening during a visit by LRH to the ship. He announced that it was time the Sea Org came out of non-existence – it was time to make an impact on the orgs out there beginning with St Hill. It was mission time. The mission’s purpose was mainly to assert and affirm SO authority and presence. As it turned out the three members of this first SO mission was my wife Jill, Fred Payer and me.

The first SO mission arrives at St Hill

Arriving from Las Palmas, before walking into St Hill, Jill, Fred and I changed into our SO uniforms and made our dramatic entrance as intended by LRH. The incident of me going into the manor monkey room and sticking the dagger into the ceiling is described by Bent Corydon in his book; Messiah or Madman.

To tell the truth, this dagger thing was a bit embarrassing for me, I didn’t share L Ron Hubbard’s leaning toward the theatrical.

During the mission Reg Sharpe was removed from post. Up to then he had been LRH’s right hand man. Reg left and with him his girlfriend, Jenny Edmonds. Where they SP’s? Of course not. It was the missions brief to get rid of anyone who in any way questioned the authority of the Sea Org – there was to be no doubt about the SO’s powers and position at the top of the ladder. And as has been confirmed since, the mission was a success.

A note on the concept of SP

At the time of the first SO mission I only suspected but later became certain that SP declares were as much a political tool as anything else. In the bigger scheme of things it had less relevance to an individual’s case. Sure, there are anti-social characters running around, but let’s face it; by no stretch of the imagination did Reg Sharpe and Jenny Edmonds along with hundreds of other declared people fit the definition of SP as described in policy.


Joe,

I have been biting my tongue since you posted your intro.

It makes a jolly story, the sort of thing one would read in a Boy’s Own Best Venture Series.

But you were very glib and passed over a critical issue you and your wife need to fess up to and take responsibility for. I say that kindly as we are in a time of forgiveness, but nonetheless, truth must be dealt with.

You state above, you and your wife and Fred were the first SO Missionaries sent on mission, as you say, whose “purpose was mainly to assert and affirm SO authority and presence.” You also state: “And as has been confirmed since, the mission was a success.”

Pardon me for pointing it out, but you and your wife set the standard with that mission as the first and basic on the chain of SO and “upper management” behavior that is the destruction of Scientology and the what was then a winning organizational operation.

For those interested, they can view elsewhere on this board the facts of the Reg Sharpe scenario, the brutality toward and lies told about a stellar man whose name ought have been revered but who is now forgotten and besmirched.

I’ll give you another example of the utter crass stupidity and violation of correct tech and decency that was carried out by that “first SO mission.”

There was a Dist Sec in London at the time. He had been commended by the Guardian for totally turning London Org around and named as being the source of London’s affluence. He had raised the stats from 3 a week when he went into the area to over fifty weekly in the day org, and from 1-2 to over 25 on foundation. It happened that because of short staff, he held both day and foundation positions: indeed he was the entire foundation’s Div 6.

It was noted by the Guardian that the Dist Sec London was producing more Div 6 stat than any continental zone of orgs combined. Such was the magnitude of his success.

The key to his success was that he created a cohesive and productive FSM team, along with clever implementation of HCO PLs.

However, the HCO side of the org was recalcitrant, lazy, and living off of the Div 6 production. Indeed the Dist Sec had to write a High Crime chit of the HCO Exec Sec for her refusal to implement the policy on “FSM Rewards.” She also refused a B of I into Div 2 that the Dist Sec requested when he noticed the anomaly that the GI affluence of London was from Div 6 developed traffic not from Div 2 and/or CF names.

All this traffic was known at GGWW at the time . . . which happened to be when you did the mission you write of.

In March of 1968, London was assigned a Condition of Power and Mark and Ellen Jones (Qual Sec and ED respectively) were going off to Flag to do OT3. Unfortunately the ED (Ellen) was replaced by the husband (Tim Littler) of the HCO Exec Sec who was sent up from FOLO. The man was a buffoon. He was explicitly told by the ED he was relieving to leave the Dist Sec alone, don’t interfere, he is the source of our Power Condition.

Littler was not that bright . . . . the first thing he did was to begin to interfere with and change everything in sight that his dull mind thought should be “improved.”

By the end of the first week of him on post, org stats had crashed from Power to Non-Existence.

On the Thursday afternoon, prior to WW declaring Conditions assignments, the Dist Sec learned of the divisional and org stats and realized what a catastrophe was at hand. He telexed WW under the headline: “Dist Sec London By-passing a Danger Condition,” and wrote up all his observations as to what had crashed the stats.

And there was an SO mission into London as a result. Your wife Jill is the name I remember as the missionary.

To cut the long story short, I was that Dist Sec, and she never spoke to me nor obtained any info from me or otherwise investigated what could have been found out by properly doing so. All she did was smooch with the HCO Exec Sec and the relief ED . . . both of whom were the cause and source of the strife in the org.

Hell, all she had to do was go through my ethics folder and see the job endangerment chits I’d filed in the months prior to get a glimpse of the real scene! . . . That apart from the volume of commendations.

I became the target and was put through the usual ringer of round the clock “sec checking” over out ruds of course! Hell, why not? I had kicked up a stink to say there was some bad shit going on!

Her first other action (later claimed as a success) was to put all staff on duty 24 hours a day to have all staff do the successful action I had created for two particular FSMs . . . all staff were sent out to body route folks in off the street for Intro Lectures and be sold books. During the evening when it was too late to body route, the staff were to clean the org premises from top to bottom.

Guess what was found . . . over 600 invoices of new names that had never made into the Central Files for Div 2 to use! They’d simply accumulated in a pile in addresso! (Would have been corrected months prior had the B of I I’d requested been granted!)

Of course, all of the staff doing what had before been to work of two part-time FSMs (a function I had created) did get a better stat for the action. Added to that were the “new found” names in CF. Wow, was all this trumpeted as a “successful” mission? You betcha . . . it was even used to prove the former Dist Sec was suppressive! Ya see, we removed him and the stats went up!

Of course, SO mission power rules supreme: they're able to violate policy and remove executives from post without comm-ev, as was done to me.

Of course as soon as all the staff returned to normal duties down went the stats again . . . . heh, but by then our intrepid missionary was out of the area writing up her version of the “successful action.”

A year and a bit later, an SO Last Court of Appeal reversed all the bullshit and returned me to good standing. Of course nothing was done to deal with or handle the true miscreants Sue and Tim Littler.

And so, Scientology as an enterprise went from bad to worse . . . . it was slow, of course, but the standard you and Jill (Fred I cannot comment on as I had no dealings with him on that mission) set with that first SO mission set the slide going.

You and she could have behaved kindly and with some honor towards those who were proven producers . . . you might even have been smart enough to have listened to them and to find out what they had to say that would have steered things straight. You, and in particular Jill, could have actually done thorough and proper investigations . . . but no! You characters were into dominate, control and know-best. . . . and that is always a recipe for disaster.

You set a bad, a very bad standard of conduct on that first SO mission.

To be honest I find it disingenuous when you speak of Reg Sharpe and what was done to him in the way you do, and how you now simply gloss over it to say “by no stretch of the imagination did Reg Sharpe and Jenny Edmonds along with hundreds of other declared people fit the definition of SP as described in policy.”

Yes, well, I for one can tell you the shit you guys pulled destroyed lives, dreams and aspirations . . . and that, unfortunately is the standard you set on that first SO mission.

Joe, I’d like to see you and Jill take responsibility for your part in allowing and forwarding . . . and in your cases, practicing . . . the crass brutality and inept handling of people and scenarios (as exemplified by Reg’s and my cases here).

Look at the video of Hana Eltringham Whitfield, and see a gracious lady taking responsibility for her very little part in the barbarity and abuses of correct and decent practices . . . see her moved to a gentle tear as she reflected on the point that all she did was stand by and allow it! But, for one of integrity and decency, that is enough to see one has wronged.

I've not seen that reflected in what you have presented here. I'd like to see that.

Then I’d give you and Jill a very warm welcome here on ESMB . . . till then, it’s a simple glad you’re here and out of “there.”

RogerB
 
Last edited:

nexus100

Gold Meritorious Patron
A step you might consider taking, Joe, is releasing any and all beliefs in things Scientological. That step isn't likely to do any harm and can be quite useful in expanding one's perspective
 
You set a bad, a very bad standard of conduct on that first SO mission.

To be honest I find it disingenuous when you speak of Reg Sharpe and what was done to him in the way you do, and how you now simply gloss over it to say “by no stretch of the imagination did Reg Sharpe and Jenny Edmonds along with hundreds of other declared people fit the definition of SP as described in policy.”

Yes, well, I for one can tell you the shit you guys pulled destroyed lives, dreams and aspirations . . . and that, unfortunately is the standard you set on that first SO mission.

Joe, I’d like to see you and Jill take responsibility for your part in allowing and forwarding . . . and in your cases, practicing . . . the crass brutality and inept handling of people and scenarios (as exemplified by Reg’s and my cases here).

Look at the video of Hana Eltringham Whitfield, and see a gracious lady taking responsibility for her very little part in the barbarity and abuses of correct and decent practices . . . see moved to a gentle tear as she reflected on the point that all she did was stand by and allow it! But, for one of integrity and decency, that is enough to see one has wronged.

I've not seen that reflected in what you have presented here. I'd like to see that.

I agree that acknowledging own responsibility is hugely important. It is certainly far more rational approach to life as a scientologist than the oft heard variation on the theme: Hubbard was a monster and I was swept up by the group and powerless to act independently.

I personally take a lot of inspiration from Ken Urquhart's remarks acknowledging his own responsibility for his actions while a member of the SO. These remarks were first posted on "ex-scientology kids" and subsequently duplicated by a friend here on esmb.

Ken simply focuses on his own errors of judgement, being something he can seek to redress in himself, and leaves aside the matter of Hubbard's failings as not directly relevant to his own personal failings of responsibility.

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=14906


Mark A. Baker
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
Roger. thank you for revealing this important info.

Roger - Thank you for revealing this important piece of Scientology and Sea Org history from your position right on the inside at the time. Your story is very passionate and very convincing and is something that the rest of us can only learn from someone who lived it, one who was actually involved right in the middle of the action. Thank you again!
Lakey
 

DartSmohen

Silver Meritorious Patron
The dispatch of the first mission

As I was actually there in Las Palmas when the first mission was sent off, I can contribute some further information on the matter. :yes:

The mission of Joe & Jill Van Staden and Fred Peyer were briefed directly by Hubbard on what they were to do. They simply carried out his instructions.:omg:

It was Hubbard's idea to ram a SO dirk into the wall in the Monkey Room.:angry:

He wanted to let everyone know that the mission (and the Sea Org) had UNLIMITED ethics power and presence. :angry:

Why the mission? The stats were falling and this was a threat to Hubbard's income plans.:grouch:

Why were they falling?

Because Hubbard had pulled virtually all the senior WW and St Hill execs off post into the Sea Project without properly replacing them. :duh:

You must remember that this was not the time of the big incomes. In the USA Alan Walter had set up several successful missions and was sending a high number of public/staff to St Hill for processing & training. :clap:

Our whole operation in Las Palmas was run on a tight financial constraint.

Some may say that when Hubbard and his two vessels sloped off in the middle of the night, there were some large unpaid bills left behind. Perhaps this is why he never returned there. :confused2:

I also heard from my mother who was helping out in Treasury WW with Julia Salmon. They were all shocked by the behavour and attitude of these three missionaires. :nervous:

Remember, just a few months previous, the three of them were pleasant and humerous members of the St Hill group. Everyone knew them and they were always fun and friendly.:ohmy:

The reports sent back to Hubbard put him into a towering rage. He was crying, screaming, swearing and threatening the most dire of consequences on all and sundry. :omg:

I remember him saying "Goddammit, it looks like we are back in the org business again" :bigcry:

In essence Hubbard had his new game taken away from him and the old game dumped back in his lap. It was completely his own fault and his subsequent behavour and policies were designed to make the public and staffs very, very wrong for this happening.

Dart
 

Holly

Patron
Hi Joe,

Just want to tell you, I very much enjoyed reading your whole story. You're quite the story-teller! I also was very intrigued by your philosophical thoughts and conclusions at the end. Perhaps we'll have some interesting discussions on those.

Thanks for posting here.

:)
Holly
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
The views from the inside players are appreciated!

As I was actually there in Las Palmas when the first mission was sent off, I can contribute some further information on the matter. :yes:

The mission of Joe & Jill Van Staden and Fred Peyer were briefed directly by Hubbard on what they were to do. They simply carried out his instructions.:omg:

It was Hubbard's idea to ram a SO dirk into the wall in the Monkey Room.:angry:

He wanted to let everyone know that the mission (and the Sea Org) had UNLIMITED ethics power and presence. :angry:

Why the mission? The stats were falling and this was a threat to Hubbard's income plans.:grouch:

Why were they falling?

Because Hubbard had pulled virtually all the senior WW and St Hill execs off post into the Sea Project without properly replacing them. :duh:

You must remember that this was not the time of the big incomes. In the USA Alan Walter had set up several successful missions and was sending a high number of public/staff to St Hill for processing & training. :clap:

Our whole operation in Las Palmas was run on a tight financial constraint.

Some may say that when Hubbard and his two vessels sloped off in the middle of the night, there were some large unpaid bills left behind. Perhaps this is why he never returned there. :confused2:

I also heard from my mother who was helping out in Treasury WW with Julia Salmon. They were all shocked by the behavour and attitude of these three missionaires. :nervous:

Remember, just a few months previous, the three of them were pleasant and humerous members of the St Hill group. Everyone knew them and they were always fun and friendly.:ohmy:

The reports sent back to Hubbard put him into a towering rage. He was crying, screaming, swearing and threatening the most dire of consequences on all and sundry. :omg:

I remember him saying "Goddammit, it looks like we are back in the org business again" :bigcry:

In essence Hubbard had his new game taken away from him and the old game dumped back in his lap. It was completely his own fault and his subsequent behavour and policies were designed to make the public and staffs very, very wrong for this happening.

Dart

Dart - It seems that beyond a doubt, this first Sea Org Mission was a critical moment in Scientology history. It reveals a lot about Hubbard and what his aims and priorities were. Getting inside information from Joe, then Roger and now yourself, a pretty consistent picture has been formed of what actually took place at that time and what Hubbard was trying to achieve and what messages he was trying to send. What I get from all this is that my view of Hubbard is lowered from what it was before reading the inside scoop on this Mission. It is an early instance of him creating a situation, then blaming it on others and causing heads to roll and people being labeled as wrong targets, resulting only in chaos, confusion and the wrong people being punished.

This type of behavior is not appropriate for someone who is starting a major world religion to "free mankind" and who refers to himself as "Source." It is clear that he was Source of something, as regards this mission, but that something had nothing to do with a technology of freedom but rather dealt with the technologies of intimidation and causing well meaning and hard working people a lot of pain and losses.
Lakey
 

TR'SIN

Patron with Honors
Important

Thank you for your time and your story. Easy to read and interesting. I think it's important for guys like me with my short 17 yr history to hear about the early years in "real speak". :clap:
 

Sharone Stainforth

Silver Meritorious Patron
Yes, it is very important!

My Father is very ill right now in hospital. Due to the severity of his illness I was unable to speak with him.

I did speak with him last week and he informed me I had it wrong, Jill van Staden was the Commanding Officer at Abellund. This makes sence as quite often Joe was not there.

Who held what title makes no difference to me, what makes and made a difference to me is that L. Ron Hubbards' scientology and sea organization ruined both my life and my Fathers lives and many other lives.

As a friend put it today, I hope you don't mind but I was talking about you (Me) and we were discussing Narconon in St. Leaonards and how people are not happy about it being there. The person said "I told them, they stole your childhood"

Damned right, they did and they stole my family. They (scientology) took away any semblance of normality in my life as a young child and turned it into a grotesque, macabre and terrifying life that left me scarred and scared for life.What right does one man have the right to do this, not just to me but to hundreds of other children?

By what right does Scientology address its' right to abuse people in this fashion? It's all for money, right! Well let me tell you something Scientology, I will have my 15 minutes of fame, but it won't be for money, it won't be for power and it sure as hell won't be for putting the fear of God into young children, but it will be to address the abuses committed by you to abuse the rights of young children and adults alike.

You can try and hide behind your religious cloaking all you like, at the end of the day the only money ever made by you was from the blood, sweat and tears from the people you fooled into buying ino your con, the con is over and when that volcano erupts you had better pray to god that Xenu is there, for you will have body thetans crawling all over you.

My Father has told me on several occasions that in the early days at Abellund, Himself and Joe went on a visit round all the Scientology european franchises with the aim of getting money up front for scientology courses. That money went into bank accounts in switzerland. The very bank accounts that L. Ron Hubbard did not have according to L. Ron Hubbard himself on the shrinking world of L. Ron Hubbard.

L.Ron Hubbard was NOT a bare faced Messiah, He was a bare faced Liar and he cared not a jot for those who devoted their lives to him. Very sad, but true.
 

R6Basic

Patron Meritorious
Thank you for your post Joe. It's great to hear from people who were there from the beginning.
 

cyril johnson

New Member
Hi Joe,
I just got off the phone to Malcolm Nieman who is currently visiting Sylivia Calhoun in Huntington Beach, California.
I knew he was going to be there as he told me a couple of weeks ago just prior to his departute.
Anyway, I just wanted to say hello! and to say that I enjoyed the story you posted about your time in the S.O.
It answered a few unanswered questions I had and I found your personal conclusions interesting as well.
You arrived at the same conclusions as myself and I'm sure many others did too. However, your description was
somewhat better than how I put it.
I'm back in Australia again after 35 years in the U.S. and am enjoying my old age (if you can call it that )
best wishes,
Barry Stephenson
 
Top