COB RTC David Miscavige has destroyed the management structure of Scientology

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
COB RTC David Miscavige has destroyed the management structure of the Church of Scientology.

The inaugural post new Milestone Two Independent Scientology Third Dynamic Engrams blog:

Abolishing management
http://milestonetwo.org/abolishing-management/

* * * * * BEGIN QUOTATION * * * * *

By Lana M.

Though many parishioners would be unaware of changes in Scientology Management, there will be staff members at all echelons that will have noticed significant changes in management functions, priorities and activities in the last 20 years. We are not just talking about the Ideal Org Program, or the Golden Age of Tech (I or II), but about actual functions and roles.

LRH ED 339R is a vital issue that lays out key management functions (hats) that LRH wore when he was in charge of Scientology worldwide. In this issue he lays out the functions that are vital to expansion in an org.

“INGREDIENTS OF EXPANSION

“What does it take to make an org run?

“1. ESTABLISHMENT. This also includes legal and defence, not just more hatted staff. This is Div 7 and HCO. And staff correction and enhancement in Qual.

“2. BOOKS, CASSETTES. This is Div 2 and many other outletsincluding mail order.

“3. MARKETING. This is Div 7, Div 2, anything that gets books, cassettes services and products known to and in public and Scn field hands.

“4. AN ACTIVE FIELD. This is Div 6, field auditors, missions, WISE, and any other activity outside the org including the furthest reaches of possible publics.

“5. AN INFLUX OF PUBLIC. This is Div 6 in all its divisions and activities.

“6. GROSS INCOME. Without money and an exchange with the society, you cannot operate at all. This includes the reges in Div 2, Div 6. It includes a continual keep up and work of Central Files and Addresso. It includes the Treasury Div–Div 3. And it is overseen by the FBO NW.

“7. SERVICES. This means any and all services the org offers, major and minor. Without good and meaningful services to exchange, an org cannot long exist. Training and Processing have similar importance: you and the world need auditors who are trained. A processed person cannot go all the way without being trained.

“8. QUALITY. Services anywhere in an org or field have to be kept up to high quality; otherwise you lose ground. And the quality of executive and staff member performance must be enhanced for expansion to occur. This is Div 5.

“9. CALL IN. People must be called in for services fully or partially paid for, must be scheduled, recovered when fallen off lines and put into the pc chair or course rooms. This, in orgs, is the tech services department.

“10. FILMS. For both training and public, films, properly used, can play a vital role. This is a visual communications age.

“11. COORDINATION. An org or management body with all its different functions, with all its executives with different spheres of interest, as per the recent HCO PL 1 Jul 82

“MANAGEMENT COORDINATION, must be smoothly coordinated. If not they impede one another. Coordination comes from the CO or ED and the Executive and Advisory Councils and in Divisional and staff meetings.

“The above actions are VITAL FUNCTIONS of an org. (Actually they are vital functions in any service organization if it is to persist.)

“At this moment there is a SENIOR EXEC STRATA COMMITTEE at Flag and it has an executive in charge of each one of those functions.” LRH, LRH ED 339R INT


As detailed by LRH, each of the above functions were covered by a Scientology executive, and they were all big names and experts in their field and function. Headed by ED International, and also including an Evaluator Corps of experts trained in the Data Series, the International Executive Strata was to wear LRH’s hat of management for International Scientology.

Through the provision of simple 339R programs that could be used by orgs as a tool to get in functions at ground level, the Int Executive Strata was to be an open line to orgs, providing advice, assistance and accurate evaluations to help orgs expand and achieve their purpose.

But where are they?

Where is ED International? Where are the Exec Ints? Where are the 339R programs? Where is the Universe Corps that is promised in the same ED?

Starting in the mid-1990’s, this vital international management structure was cross-ordered, musical chaired, suspended, and then finally dissolved, by David Miscavige, the Chairman of the Board RTC. Now we can argue if this was a premeditated and well organised campaign, or simply the result of a bumbling idiot who could not manage his way out of paper bag or establish anything Scientological using standard policy and tech. But regardless, the result has been the same. With the removal of these executives and the cross order of LRH’s Birthday Game program by the “Ideal Org” strategy, key functions that are vital to expansion at ground level have evaporated.

An org cannot be built from broken straws — and it cannot be build with brick and mortar.

A Scientology org requires key functions to be performed so that it can service the field and achieve its valuable final products (VFPs). This cannot be short cut with shiny AV systems that spurt out glowing successes to new people, or by demanding that parishioners spend their hard won money on funding expensive buildings instead of becoming competent auditors.

It is now 2014 — a full 20 years since the unmock of the Exec Strata.

The ‘management’ of Scientology organisations around the world is now micromanaged by alternate channels and Sea Org missions established by Miscavige himself. The Senior Danger condition has been applied for years (bypassing those responsible) and statistics will continue to go down and down till the condition of Non-Existence is achieved.

Having worked at the Int base and working in RTC in the mid-1990’s, I can testify that every executive that was worth his salt was overtly attacked, undermined, invalidated, introverted and stopped, one by one, by Miscavige. After an initial attack on specific individuals, the focus went onto the entire management structure, which was eventually imprisoned in “The Hole”, and each Int Executive was declared a Suppressive Person by Miscavige and removed from the lines. The only ones that are active on ‘management’ lines now, are those that have gotten back into favour by propitiation (and doing his bidding to others), and these lines are micro-managed by Dave personally.

From the view of a group engram — this has been a significant one on a chain of many, so if you have information/knowledge regarding this, or regarding the impact of this at org/Flag levels, please do add them below. This blog posting will become a key archive of information for all who need to know what occurred to Int Management.

So, what can we do now?

Well for starters, we can take LRH ED 339R Int, and start to apply it in local delivery in the field. Whether you are a field auditor, a supervisor, or a group, these key functions must be expressed on the org board and need to be performed. Providing high quality service and delivering what has been promised, is the backbone to what LRH’s Scientology is actually about.

Please take the time to reread the full LRH ED again, in a new unit of time, and work out how you can follow LRH’s instructions.

You can find the full bulletin here, and by clicking on LRHED’s28.doc.

* * * * * END QUOTATION * * * * *

LRHED’s28.doc
http://www.matrixfiles.com/Scientology Materials/index.php?dir=LRHEDs/
 

uncover

Gold Meritorious Patron
Who cares ? LRH-Co$-management destroys itself - with its "technology"....

There was a controversary discussion if Marty wants to take over the Co$ once Miscavige is removed ..... I bet Lana and here sandpit-friends would (if they could)....
 

Chris Shelton

Patron with Honors
Interesting. I think I covered this whole subject of management unlock pretty extensively already in video form. Funny that Lana doesn't mention that in her article, yet as far as I know it was the most extensive explanation of exactly bow Hubbard and Miscavige got it so wrong organizationally. I wonder why Lana omitted any mention of me? LOL. I'd drop a link in her article to it, but I doubt they'd let me comment there.:p
 

BunnySkull

Silver Meritorious Patron
Interesting. I think I covered this whole subject of management unlock pretty extensively already in video form. Funny that Lana doesn't mention that in her article, yet as far as I know it was the most extensive explanation of exactly bow Hubbard and Miscavige got it so wrong organizationally. I wonder why Lana omitted any mention of me? LOL. I'd drop a link in her article to it, but I doubt they'd let me comment there.:p

That right there is why she would never refer your great video or let you comment. Can't let any truth about Hubbard spread on Target, I mean Milestone, Two. The party line is all that is wrong with scientology is DM and his buddies, period.
 
Last edited:

mockingbird

Silver Meritorious Patron
Um , dare I ask WTF is Milestone Two ?

Is it a competitor to Coldstone Creamery ? They have GREAT ice cream ! YUM !!
 

beltway

Bone Idle
Hubbard was motivated on multiple levels. He was a sociopath, but a narcissistic sociopath. He was hungry for money and power, but his pre-cult life is a testament to the fact that, more than anything, Hubbard wanted to be worshipped. Forever.

That goal required enormous contributions to making the cult - on all levels - functional, successful and able to work and grow within the constraints of society, at least until it had undermined the various 'control points' sufficiently that the balance of power shifted in its favor and IT could dictate the constraints of society.

Miscavige is motivated on far fewer levels. Who knows if he even believes in Hubbardism anymore. Has there been any discussion as to whether anything notable happened around the years around the time that Hubbard claimed he would return 20-whatever years after his death? I'm just guessing, of course, but perhaps Miscavige played it safe 'just in case' and only truly began shutting down what he saw as pointless wastes of money and effort once he was sure there would be no second coming of duck-lips.

EDIT: Oops... Now I see the report is from indie Hubbardists working the "That Darn Miscavige" angle... Never-in, never mind.
 

strativarius

Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband
Um , dare I ask WTF is Milestone Two ? Is it a competitor to Coldstone Creamery ? They have GREAT ice cream ! YUM !!
I'm surprised that such an assiduous researcher as yourself would ask that question mockingbird. Google is only a mouseclick or two away.
 

uncover

Gold Meritorious Patron
Um , dare I ask WTF is Milestone Two ?
.....
Google is your friend. As I already wrote here:
http://www.forum.exscn.net/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=983643
Why all this drama ? Here is an explanation:

March 1952:
El Con Hubbard finds a way to make some money after the Dianetics-flop with a new con: "Scientology".
This is called: "Milestone One":
http://scientologyreviews.com/lectures/milestone-one

Spring 2013:
After several destitute years working for the con in the SO some "true believers"* find a way to try to make some money (for their own pocket) after they have been chucked out of the Co$.
This is called: "Milestone Two".


* A "true believer" is someone whose decisions have been made and who doesn´t want to get confused with facts.
 

bts2free

Patron with Honors
EDIT: Oops... Now I see the report is from indie Hubbardists working the "That Darn Miscavige" angle... Never-in, never mind.

Here is where cognitive dissonance comes into play with those who have left the COS for any number of reasons, but still believe that LRH had nothing to do with the dark side of Scientology or its own destruction.

To those who play the blame-it-all-on-the-evil-dwarf game, they should ask themselves a few more questions and dig a little further. The problem is that when they do start digging further they realize that Hubbard had a lot to do with it and that gets into the disproving Santa is real dilemma.

The "glaring outpoint" from their own point of view is and should be, why did Ron not apply his own "Tech" in relation to safeguarding "mankind's only hope" - a) Scientology and b) the Sea Org? Scientologically speaking, he wrote the definitive tome on evaluating human behavior in his book "Science of Survival" and continued to add to this subject numerous technical bulletins and administrative policies that would detect and weed out anti-social personalities and Suppressive Persons. That being the case, why did he not spot David Miscavige, the biggest enemy and SP Scientology has ever had? From everything I've heard and what I know, Ron loved the guy and trusted him to no end. Per Scientology's own doctrine, could it be that Ron and Miscavige had "mutual out-ruds" or that Ron was "blinded by his own overts and withholds?" That's for a Scientologist to ask.

Here's another question to ask. Why did Ron not apply his own "Multiple Viewpoint of Management System" after he went into hiding? Ron emphatically stressed that under no circumstance should any management body accept and operate on information provided from one single source, yet when he was in hiding all the way up until his death, he solely relied on ONE viewpoint and line of communication for the entire Scientology network and that was who? You guessed it, David Miscavige. Yeah, I also understand that Hubbard was for PR reasons "no longer on Management lines" or "running the COS," however anyone who has been at Gold or Int for any length of time knows that's complete BS due to the binders and binders of * or R "advices" to various managers in Scientology over those years. Still, he violated and squirreled his own policies when continuing to operate and order top Scientology managers from a distance. Talk about being destructive.

May the door crack open just a little bit more...
 

Lulu Belle

Moonbat
Here is where cognitive dissonance comes into play with those who have left the COS for any number of reasons, but still believe that LRH had nothing to do with the dark side of Scientology or its own destruction.


Hey bts2free,

Just want to say how great it is to see you back here.

:wave:
 

mockingbird

Silver Meritorious Patron
Strativarius , I do research as defined by Wilipedia:

Begin quote

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Research comprises "creative work undertaken on a systematic basis in order to increase the stock of knowledge, including knowledge of man, culture and society, and the use of this stock of knowledge to devise new applications."It is used to establish or confirm facts, reaffirm the results of previous work, solve new or existing problems, support theorems, or develop new theories. A research project may also be an expansion on past work in the field. To test the validity of instruments, procedures, or experiments, research may replicate elements of prior projects, or the project as a whole. The primary purposes of basic research (as opposed to applied research) are documentation, discovery, interpretation, or the research and development (R&D) of methods and systems for the advancement of human knowledge.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
End quote


Now , I do technically fit that description ; I have an element of being creative I made up several attempts to understand what Scientology is ( they may or may not be good for the intended result - that they are creative to ANY degree is all it takes to fit the definition .

I have used a systematic basis - there will be forthcoming details on that and I have already given Jon Atack info on this and it may end up in one or several books on recovery .

I have used it to establish and confirm facts and support theorems and develop theories etc. etc. FULLY fitting the definition .





Now , none of that means I am correct in any of my findings or theories .

It does not mean I am an established authority or smart or know my ass from a whole in the ground - it just means I fit a definition and that is all.

There are researchers who are stupid and have incorrect findings , poor methods and absurdly wrong theories - so I certainly may be one of them .





I am starting to get a strong feeling that there is a small anti-intellectual or not willing to accept someone new who says " hey I do research and think you need to learn about somethings to have an educated opinion on them and there is no way around that " backlash .


It is like " how dare this asshole think he can tell me I need to learn things I do not know to learn " sentiment exists .


Well , I have certainly been an asshole many , many times in my life .



BUT , thinking that discrediting my character or even info on other matters in any way diminishes the truth of other statements I make is committing one or more logical fallacies.


It is simple : if it is raining and an idiot tells you his so then being an idiot does NOT discredit the TRUTH of it raining !

If a known liar tells you it is not raining it will not START to rain to fit YOUR opinion .

That is the genetic fallacy !


I have encountered many people who habitually use ad hominem and in studying the fallacy and human thought have strongly been convinced it destroys rational thought .

It can reduce grown people to a very low immature irrational level - without them being aware of it.


I am now ready to when I walk by and some one throws out an insult or subtle dig just say " ad hominem " and keep on doing whatever I WANT !

If they ask I will simply inform them that irrelevant insults are just distractions from anything and not worth ANY attention !

Now , I am some one who has certain...advantages that can make others accepting my behavior in person easier for me at times .


But really if you want to feel good and sound good and get the last word then ad hominem and the genetic fallacy may be for you .



Now regarding assiduous I will use a quote from Dictionary.com

Begin quote.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

If you call someone assiduous, it's a compliment. It means they're careful, methodical and very persistent.


XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

End quote .

I think it is VERY premature to seriously call me that YET .

I have a LOT more work to do before that is warranted.


Now if you call me an assiduous researcher to PROVE I am not in fact...

That is just a cheap insult and falls under ad hominem .



Now regarding Milestone Two - I have been informed there are HUNDREDS of splinter and offshoot practices from the Scientology and Dianetics main cult .


Well , just as I have decided to NOT waste the rest of my life researching EVERY school of persuasion and hypnotism as there are HUNDREDS I will similarly NOT waste forever on all the offshoots.


My time is far more limited than the number of practices and ideas I could pursue that have some relationship to what I am interested in .


I am going to have to use some judgement and try to zero in on the right and best and most relevant bodies of info to look at .


I may never pick or even understand the right ones ( if they exist at all ) .



But , my question to anyone who is waiting eagerly to find ANY slight flaw or error to jump at and try to bring me down to Earth with is what is going on with YOU ?

See , I KNOW I make errors and need to improve and learn more and if one statement or idea is flawed or wrong it does not invalidate a body of work or destroy credibility: those are fallacies .


If your mailman is a great guy for years and one day is grouchy do you smugly decide he is an asshole and you are better ?


IF your spouse is terrific and loving for decades and one day swears at you do you decide you are better and ALL your problems are because of inferiors ?


The impulse to tear down a new guy , or someone who comes off as knowing something WITHOUT serious prolonged careful inspection - to me stems from the SAME causes.


SO , if anyone wants to tear me down...I feel sorry for them .


And if they rush to find any slight POSSIBLE flaw and disregard all my other work - they may convince themself I am completely " whatever " but I will look at it differently .
 
Last edited:

strativarius

Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband
Strativarius , I do research as defined by Wilipedia:

Begin quote

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Research comprises "creative work undertaken on a systematic basis in order to increase the stock of knowledge, including knowledge of man, culture and society, and the use of this stock of knowledge to devise new applications."It is used to establish or confirm facts, reaffirm the results of previous work, solve new or existing problems, support theorems, or develop new theories. A research project may also be an expansion on past work in the field. To test the validity of instruments, procedures, or experiments, research may replicate elements of prior projects, or the project as a whole. The primary purposes of basic research (as opposed to applied research) are documentation, discovery, interpretation, or the research and development (R&D) of methods and systems for the advancement of human knowledge.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
End quote

[highlight]I am starting to get a strong feeling that there is a small anti-intellectual or not willing to accept someone new who says " hey I do research and think you need to learn about somethings to have an educated opinion on them and there is no way around that " backlash .[/highlight]

[highlight]BUT , thinking that discrediting my character or even info on other matters in any way diminishes the truth of other statements I make is committing one or more logical fallacies.[/highlight]

[highlight]I have encountered many people who habitually use ad hominem and in studying the fallacy and human thought have strongly been convinced it destroys rational thought .[/highlight]

[highlight]But really if you want to feel good and sound good and get the last word then ad hominem and the genetic fallacy may be for you .[/highlight]

[highlight]Now if you call me an assiduous researcher to PROVE I am not in fact...

That is just a cheap insult and falls under ad hominem .
[/highlight]

[highlight]But , my question to anyone who is waiting eagerly to find ANY slight flaw or error to jump at and try to bring me down to Earth with is what is going on with YOU ?[/highlight]

Mockingbird my dear fellow, all I said was I'm surprised you hadn't looked up Milestone 2 instead of asking the question here, and that is all I meant.

If you call someone assiduous, it's a compliment. It means they're careful, methodical and very persistent.

Yes, I chose my words very carefully.

Perhaps the statement didn't really need to be made and I was just writing out of sheer boredom. I'm not that paranoid that I believe some of the foregoing comments are aimed in my direction. If they are I suggest you need to chill out a little and not take things quite so seriously.

(But of course that's what any self-respecting SP would say isn't it?)

Stratty.
 

mockingbird

Silver Meritorious Patron
Sorry strativarius ,

I have been dealing with all kinds of...communications and am on auto defend mode .


I get veiled slights and end up going " look , if you mean this as the conclusion or implication of your line of reasoning here is MY answer ..." !


And , of course it is polite and respectful...not really .


It gets to be a pain to sort out hidden or unclear slams that if not answered can SEEM to be given tacit consent , at least to the person who wrote them .



Look , for all the would be clever insulters out there - if someone does not answer YOU ARE NOT RIGHT AND DID NOT WIN ANYTHING !


So , I hope you can see why I am always ready to shoot first and not ask questions .
 
Top