Justice Committee, Constitution & Membership of IS Not-For-Profit Membership Org

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
The return of Disconnection?

The return of Disconnection?

Milestone Two - Function monitors Structure
http://www.iscientology.org/scientology-blog/466-milestone-two-function-monitors-structure

Excepts:
An associate member can become a Full Member by;

* * *

2) passing a
PTS A-J check and Help & Control Check by someone qualified to use an e-Meter;

* * * *
Staff of Milestone Two have responsibility for ethics within the Membership fraternity and community – however this is simply to hold the channels firm for the delivery and execution of Milestone Two programs and activities – not for any other dreamed up purpose or counter purpose. HCO Milestone Two is there to detect and deal with PTSes and SPs that create trouble within the organization – but has no interest in the personal lives or activities of individual members.

HCO of Milestone Two can revoke an individual’s membership with Milestone Two if a Member refuses to cooperate or deal with a PTS situation that is impacting on Milestone Two activities. They can also revoke permission for the member to use the Independent Scientology logo for whatever projects or activities they are involved in.
How can they do a "PTS A-J check" as a requirement to become a Full (voting) Member, but say they have "no interest in the personal lives or activities of individual members?" What if HCO determines the applicant for Full Membership is PTS to someone in their personal life (e.g., spouse, child, parent, friend)?

How can they say they will "detect and deal with PTSes and SPs that create trouble within the organization," but they have "no interest in the personal lives or activities of individual members?" Again, what happens if they determine that an Associate or Full Member is PTS to
someone in their personal life (e.g., spouse, child, parent, friend)?

What does it mean to "refuse[] to cooperate or deal with a PTS situation that is impacting on Milestone Two activities?" If one cannot "handle," would one be required to disconnect? If one cannot "handle," would a refusal to disconnect constitute a refusal to cooperate, resulting in the revocation of one's membership and the revocation of one's right to use the Independent Scientology logo?

Then we of course have the:
Justice Committee

A Justice Committee exists, separate to the Council and to staff and executives of Milestone Two. This committee is comprised of 3 Full Members, hatted on ethics policy and original justice codes, with the function of being a last port of call on technically incorrect findings and instances of flagrant injustice or out-ethics actions which are destructive to statistics.

The Justice Committee has a Chairman with two members, and can conduct Board of Investigations, Board of Reviews and Committees of Evidence. These are convened by the Council if situations come to their attention that have not been handled by HCO Milestone Two effectively and must be handled for the Membership Community.

As a last port of call, the Justice Committee can also initiate justice actions on any council member or executive/staff member of Milestone Two if reports to HCO have not resolved severe ethics matters.
 

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
Milestone Two - Function monitors Structure
http://www.iscientology.org/scientology-blog/466-milestone-two-function-monitors-structure
Justice Committee

A Justice Committee exists, separate to the Council and to staff and executives of Milestone Two. This committee is comprised of 3 Full Members, hatted on ethics policy and original justice codes, with the function of being a last port of call on technically incorrect findings and instances of flagrant injustice or out-ethics actions which are destructive to statistics.

The Justice Committee has a Chairman with two members, and can conduct Board of Investigations, Board of Reviews and Committees of Evidence. These are convened by the Council if situations come to their attention that have not been handled by HCO Milestone Two effectively and must be handled for the Membership Community.

As a last port of call, the Justice Committee can also initiate justice actions on any council member or executive/staff member of Milestone Two if reports to HCO have not resolved severe ethics matters.
Query:

Does "ethics policy and original justice codes" include Fair Game?

Does "ethics policy and original justice codes" include Disconnection? How else, as addressed in the prior post, would (or could) the "Membership Community" handle a PTS situation where the person who was PTS refused, or was unable, to handle?

Does "ethics policy and original justice codes" include the Kha Khan principle of ethics immunity?

Does "ethics policy and original justice codes" include doing the Greatest Good for the Greatest Number of Dynamics, as measured by statistics, such that the ends justifies the means?

Is it truly the case that "technically incorrect findings and instances of flagrant injustice or out-ethics actions" which are NOT "destructive to statistics" should not be subject to review by the Justice Committee, or if subject to review not subject to sanction or correction?
 

Gadfly

Crusader
Hint #1: Don't even try to think with this Scientology organizational nonsense and make sense of it.

THAT was the first mistake you made when getting involved with Scientology.

These bozos are going to simply create another weird bureaucracy based on Hubbard's ramblings. It sounds like the CHURCH of Scientology version 2.0. :puke2:

Hint #2: The organization of Scientology has ALWAYS been a dog's breakfast, because it is based on Hubbard's exact writings, policies and recommendations on administration, specifically regarding "how to expand Scientology all across planet Earth". Give it up. Lose all of that idiocy. The same is true for the ethics & justice policies. These are designed primarily to help the Church organization succeed (i.e. make money, get bigger and more powerful). Any slightly intelligent person can read the justice policies and lists of suppressive acts (from any version of any ethics book) and clearly see that it is all put together to benefit the C of S as the TOP priority.

If these morons keep all of the same inane key purposes and all of the same outline of the OEC volumes, justice codes, and management series, and maybe even of the Sea Org too, they will end up as the same sort of absurd sick joke that is the current Church of Scientology. Maybe they will use and apply their own OSA N/W Orders too! :duh:

Hubbard's model of an organization, with the TOP Priority to "make Scientology succeed", is the basic error and flaw. DUMP IT ALL, and then possibly they might be able to do something useful. But, it sounds like they actually believe that there really is a "Bridge to Total Freedom", and that there really are reachable states of OT.

Just goes to show you where the Bridge to Total Goofiness actually leads - it produces more goofballs. :ohmy:

Followers always need someone to follow. So, they keep following Hubbard.

Of course, the more trouble they make for the Church of Scientology, all the better! :thumbsup:
 

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
Maybe they will use and apply their own OSA N/W Orders too! :duh:
Why would one ever think that?

Milestone Two's "Eleven"
http://www.iscientology.org/scientology-blog/467-milestone-two-s-eleven
Excerpts:
The real life experience and production of the “eleven” covers every area of the org board and includes Legal, Personnel, Establishment, Registration, Marketing, Finance, Training, Auditing, Missions, Qualifications and well as all areas of Dissemination and Public Services. We also have Evaluator experience, Investigations and Programs execution experience, Writing/Editing and also IT covered. Even experience in Internal Security and Technical Compilations. In PT, each of these individuals are using and applying the tech to help others -- in big ways.
Steve Hall, aka Thoughtful

How long in Scientology: Since 1979, totalling 34 years.

Auditor Training: Hubbard Senior Sec Checker, Flag-trained Class IV, Flag “Ok to Operate an E-Meter” (valid for life), PTS-SP Course (4X), Ordained Scientology Minister, Volunteer Minister Course, Book One auditor, Book One Legionnaire, HRD auditor, Hard TRs, studied 1,025 LRH lectures,

Admin Training: Stu Hat, Hubbard Personal Ethics and Integrity Course, Ethics Specialist, KTL/LOC, OEC Vol 0, Product Debug Course, D of P Full Hat, Exec Status 1, OT Doctorate Course, Hubbard Art Course

Case Level: New OT V

Years in the SO: 2 years Guardian Activities Scientologist (Intelligence Bureau); 3 years org staff (Austin); and 20 years in the Sea Org
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation



:lol::lol::lol:


Funny, funny people ... they are still taking it all sooooo seriously.

Ah well, I suppose pretending to be 'special' is a bit more fun than facing reality.



 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
Maybe their two-tier system will run on a basis of:

Tier 1: Anything goes, let them all run riot, no real attempt to keep anything standard; maybe kicking out people who dare document the truth about Hubbard.

Tier 2: Turn the screws on and stamp out anything that isn't totally "standard" (as pronounced upon by the head honchos).

That might take care of the immediate contradictions of "open to all" but "strict KSW."

Paul
 

Mick Wenlock

Admin Emeritus (retired)
Maybe their two-tier system will run on a basis of:

Tier 1: Anything goes, let them all run riot, no real attempt to keep anything standard; maybe kicking out people who dare document the truth about Hubbard.

Tier 2: Turn the screws on and stamp out anything that isn't totally "standard" (as pronounced upon by the head honchos).

That might take care of the immediate contradictions of "open to all" but "strict KSW."

Paul

yeah its called the "public Scientologist v Sea org Member" paradigm.

Create one group and then create a more exclusive group - and never fear there will be more 'exclusive groups" as time passes.
 

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
No reason original OT levels not be considered standard. Written by Hubbard
never cancelled by him.
Interesting. Were the Original OT Levels on the last Grade Chart authored or approved by Hubbard?

If the Original OT Levels weren't on the last Grade Chart authored or approved by Hubbard, then weren't they replaced by the new NOTs levels?

If the Original OT Levels weren't on the last Grade Chart authored or approved by Hubbard, how and why could they be properly and standardly CSed for a PC or Pre-OT? Who could properly CS an Original OT Level for a PC or Pre-OT?

So there is a Grade Chart, but a CS just inserts major auditing actions into the middle of it? Major auditing actions that seemingly were replaced by newer auditing actions? Does not "New OT V" imply it replaced Old OT V?

Did anyone in the history of the "official" Church of Scientology ever audit, or be CSed to audit, on an Original OT Level after the New OT Levels were implemented and placed on the Grade Chart? If not, I wonder why that might have been....
 
Last edited:

Terril park

Sponsor
Interesting. Were the Original OT Levels on the last Grade Chart authored or approved by Hubbard?

If the Original OT Levels weren't on the last Grade Chart authored or approved by Hubbard, then weren't they replaced by the new NOTs levels?

If the Original OT Levels weren't on the last Grade Chart authored or approved by Hubbard, how and why could they be properly and standardly CSed for a PC or Pre-OT? Who could properly CS an Original OT Level for a PC or Pre-OT?

So there is a Grade Chart, but a CS just inserts major auditing actions into the middle of it? Major auditing actions that seemingly were replaced by newer auditing actions? Does not "New OT V" imply it replaced Old OT V?

Did anyone in the history of the "official" Church of Scientology ever audit, or be CSed to audit, on an Original OT Level after the New OT Levels were implemented and placed on the Grade Chart? If not, I wonder why that might have been....


In the 1978 grade chart NOTs was a special rundown to do if needed,for example
having difficulty running the original OT levels.


From 1978 book " What is Scientology", grade chart.

OT 111 expanded. Pre-requisites. OT111 and OT VII processes.

That refers to original OT 7 rather than NOTs. Expanded OT 3 is no longer on the bridge.

From http://johanw.home.xs4all.nl/CoS/levels.html

OT IV JAN 1968 Mocking-up and unmocking implants
from Clearing Course in order to
prevent future implants plus several
other steps including handling of past
auditing. Product was originally
an OT Exterior.
Replaced by New OT IV.



OT V JAN 1968 Series of drills directed at Pre-OT's
handling of and relationship to MEST.
Drills were to be done exterior.
Replaced by New OT V.



OT VI JAN 1968 Additional solo-auditing for
whole track implant materials covered
on earlier levels and/or drills and
processes dealing with emotions,
sensations, and exteriorization.
Replaced by New OT VI.



OT VII SEP 1970 Series of processes, drills, and
training steps directed at intention.
Replaced by New OT VII.

All the above can be found in Tech vol IV [ not by CO$] which has all upper levels and original upper levels with processes.

Here is a history of the grade chart. Difficult to follow even for me.

http://www.wiseoldgoat.com/papers-scientology/hubbard_story_of_mayo5a_grade_chart.html


From below one can see NOTs was not initially a replacement for original OT levels.
These are still available and being used in the FZ.

===================
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead , Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 15 SEPTEMBER 1978

ISSUE I


Advanced Courses Specialist Checksheet
ACS Auditors
ACS C/Ses

NED for OTs Series 1

C O N F I D E N T I A L

NED FOR OTs RD

THEORY OF


As has been announced, there is a special handling for OTs who have been run on Dianetics since Clear. It is called "NED for OTs". ..........



__._,_.___
 

Veda

Sponsor
In the 1978 grade chart NOTs was a special rundown to do if needed,for example
having difficulty running the original OT levels.


From 1978 book " What is Scientology", grade chart.

OT 111 expanded. Pre-requisites. OT111 and OT VII processes.

That refers to original OT 7 rather than NOTs. Expanded OT 3 is no longer on the bridge.

From http://johanw.home.xs4all.nl/CoS/levels.html

OT IV JAN 1968 Mocking-up and unmocking implants
from Clearing Course in order to
prevent future implants plus several
other steps including handling of past
auditing. Product was originally
an OT Exterior.
Replaced by New OT IV.



OT V JAN 1968 Series of drills directed at Pre-OT's
handling of and relationship to MEST.
Drills were to be done exterior.
Replaced by New OT V.



OT VI JAN 1968 Additional solo-auditing for
whole track implant materials covered
on earlier levels and/or drills and
processes dealing with emotions,
sensations, and exteriorization.
Replaced by New OT VI.



OT VII SEP 1970 Series of processes, drills, and
training steps directed at intention.
Replaced by New OT VII.

All the above can be found in Tech vol IV [ not by CO$] which has all upper levels and original upper levels with processes.

Here is a history of the grade chart. Difficult to follow even for me.

http://www.wiseoldgoat.com/papers-scientology/hubbard_story_of_mayo5a_grade_chart.html


From below one can see NOTs was not initially a replacement for original OT levels.
These are still available and being used in the FZ.

===================
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead , Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 15 SEPTEMBER 1978

ISSUE I


Advanced Courses Specialist Checksheet
ACS Auditors
ACS C/Ses

NED for OTs Series 1

C O N F I D E N T I A L

NED FOR OTs RD

THEORY OF


As has been announced, there is a special handling for OTs who have been run on Dianetics since Clear. It is called "NED for OTs". ..........

__._,_.___

And "Dianetic Clear" was not a substitute for the Clearing Course, but Hubbard changed his mind when he became obsessed with increasing the number of people who identified themselves as "Clear," and became concerned with the "reputation" of Dianetics which, he felt, needed to produce "Clears," or at least people who were convinced they were "Clear." Discovering" that Dianetics made "Clears," and that these "Clears" needed to exit Missions - which Hubbard was in the early process of looting - and go "up lines" to a place where Hubbard had easy access to their money, was a neat tie in.

Thus, starting in 1978, people were being announced as "Dianetic Clears" - and then told that they're now "at risk," as they're in the dangerous "No Interference Zone" - and encouraged to go "up lines" right away, check book or credit cards in hand.

The changes to the Grade Chart, from Power Processing through (old) OT 7, occurred between 1978 and 1981. You and your Zoner buddies can do what you want with it, but it's ridiculous to suggest that it was not Hubbard's idea.


By the way, can we expect that so called "Dianetic Clears" are now going to be run on old OT 4 where they "mock up and unmock implants from the Clearing Course" ?

To what level of the 'Hubbard Chart of Awareness Characteristics & Grade Chart' do you Zoner guys need to ascend in order to realize that the Hubbard Grade Chart is a disjointed mess that doesn't deliver what it promises?


Re. your links: The information in the upper link is more accurate.

The lower link, on the other hand, is to "Wise old goat," who posted on ESMB for a time, until banned, and is also known as Roadrunner. His web site consists of lots and lots of information mixed with disinformation.


It's really a shame that Hubbard changed the Grade Chart the way he did, messing with both the middle and upper "Bridge." By the mid 1970s, Scientology was a functioning front group&mental healing-coated psychological-political operation&Hubbard fan club-cult. Scientologists were so nicely entranced. It was almost beautiful in a horribly perverted, evil, kind of way.


Here's Rey Robles, Free Zone "Opinion Leader," giving a talk to "All Loyal Officers":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYGFOevVmHQ

Forward march!!!

Onward to Total Freedom!!!!!
 

Gadfly

Crusader
The concept of "standard tech" is inane. It is entirely IMAGINARY. Anyone who thinks with that concept is mentally-handicapped in some way.

Hubbard was changing the Bridge and what made up the Bridge at EVERY POINT during his life with Scientology and Dianetics.

There was NEVER a fully-researched, complete and finalized version of the Bridge. THAT notion was ALL PR and LIES.

At every point in the history of Scientology he pushed the IDEA, and demanded full acceptance with the idea, that "the Bridge is here now". From KSW #1, we HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY. Hubbard always, at any point along the time track of the development of Scientology, painted the Bridge as done. But, in fact, at every point he was adding to it, taking away from it, and altering it in some way. THAT is the "truth".

So, this notion of "standard tech" is ONLY an IDEA. It doesn't exist, and it never existed. It is like people who choose to believe that the Easter Bunny or Unicorns actually really exist. They do, but ONLY in your mind; only in your over-active imagination.
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on



:lol::lol::lol:


Funny, funny people ... they are still taking it all sooooo seriously.

Ah well, I suppose pretending to be 'special' is a bit more fun than facing reality.






Perhaps you think of these people as "funny"-- but I say (verily, unto you) you must not be so quick to dismiss them as loser punchlines to a bad cult joke.

These are profoundly important people, deserving of far greater respect! Why? Because, it's not easy to save the entire planet whilst living in your mom's basement with nothing more than a dog-eared photo of Ron and the little perceptic wheel* from Self Analysis.




* Former Sea Org members reborn as "Indie Scientologists" carry a perceptic wheel with them at all times. In the event that they get "enturbulated" by wog "reality" that is "not real to them", they simply whip out their handy disc and recall pleasure moments from the good old theta days when insanity-free and criminality-free Ron was around and planetary clearing was happening pocketa-pocketa (on this planet) and so forth.


Self-analysis-1ed-1951-disk.jpg
*
 
Last edited:

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
New IS Not-For-Profit Membership Org denigrating "wogs?"

New IS Not-For-Profit Membership Org denigrating "wogs?" Already?

http://www.iscientology.org/scientology-blog/468-milestone-two-disclaimer#comment-1920
# Paul M. Foster 2013-06-19 11:07
Indeed. The very existence of this group indicates OT action. It's been needed for some time and Lana and the others actually stepped up and did it. VWD for that.

My experience with founding and running groups is that there will be a few working on the objectives of the group, and a great many who are silent members. Of course, these were wog groups. Let's postulate that a group of Scientologists will do better.
 
The concept of "standard tech" is inane. It is entirely IMAGINARY. Anyone who thinks with that concept is mentally-handicapped in some way.

Hubbard was changing the Bridge and what made up the Bridge at EVERY POINT during his life with Scientology and Dianetics.

There was NEVER a fully-researched, complete and finalized version of the Bridge. THAT notion was ALL PR and LIES.

At every point in the history of Scientology he pushed the IDEA, and demanded full acceptance with the idea, that "the Bridge is here now". From KSW #1, we HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY. Hubbard always, at any point along the time track of the development of Scientology, painted the Bridge as done. But, in fact, at every point he was adding to it, taking away from it, and altering it in some way. THAT is the "truth".

So, this notion of "standard tech" is ONLY an IDEA. It doesn't exist, and it never existed. It is like people who choose to believe that the Easter Bunny or Unicorns actually really exist. They do, but ONLY in your mind; only in your over-active imagination.


i don't know as standard is totally inane

in fact i was quite impressed first studying in san francisco and then joining staff at fcdc how close the two orgs were in terms of tech and the willingness and ability of the people to apply it standardly
 
Top