Priest-Penitent Privilege in all forms of Scientology

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
..

The use of personal information - regardless of which Scientology process is used whether it be Auditing, Confessionals, Ethics, or OSA activities - has long been a standard application within Scientology. I'm not sure when it was first codified. Nibs talks about using personal information for extortion during the 1950s while the earliest written instructions to do so, that I can find, are in this GO:


GUARDIAN ORDER

GO 121669 MSH December 16, 1969

To: All D/A/Guardians for Intelligence


PROGRAMME: INTELLIGENCE: INTERNAL SECURITY

OBSERVATION: The enemy has used the method of infiltration to obtain
information against ourselves as known from incidences in South Africa,
Edinburgh, and Washington, D.C.

The enemy has also "turned" and used as double agents
staff members as revealed by Maurice Johnson at Saint Hill and Barbara
Peake in Melbourne.

Further, the enemy has used former disaffected staff
members, Scientologists or relatives of Scientologists in their attacks -
Philip Wearne and Doug. Moon in Australia, Jean Kennedy and Gene van
Niakerk in South Africa, Michael Pernetta and Mrs. Henslow in England,
Eleanor Turner and the former Mrs. Elmo Troup in America and the O'Donnell
family in New Zealand, to name but a few of the outstanding examples.

Although infiltrators and double agents can create more
internal chaos and disorder in an organization, the enemy has been most
successful in their attacks through the use of disaffected staff, Scien-
tologists or relatives of Scientologists and the biggest gross error an
organization can make as regards its own security is violations of the
HCO Policy Letter of October 27, 1964, "Policies on Physical Healing,
Insanity and Potential Trouble Sources".

The duty of keeping the organization secure belongs in the
HCO Division, both in RAP and Inspections and Reports, but the Intelligence
Bureau has learned through long experience that it cannot leave this function
entirely up to HCO and where it has done so, it has had to suffer the
consequences. Thus this Programme is a vital one.

MAJOR TARGET: To use any and all means to detect any infiltration,
double agent or disaffected staff member, Scientologist or relatives of
Scientologists and by any and all means to render null any potential harm
or harm such have rendered or might render to Scientology and Scientologists.


VITAL TARGETS:

1. This Programme is to be done by the Asst. Guardian or the D/A/Guardian
for Intelligence, if this post is held separately.

2. To establish intelligence files on all such persons found to be infil-
trators, double agents, and disaffected staff members, Scientologists and
relatives of Scientologists.

OPERATING TARGETS:

1. To make full use of all files on the organization to effect your major
target. These include personnel files, Ethics files, Dead files, Central
Files, training files, processing files, and requests for refunds.


2. To assemble full data by investigation of each person located for
possible use in case of attack or for use in preventing any attack and to
keep files of such.

3. To be alert to usual security precautions and to see that these are
performed by the organization; such as proper locking of the premises,
security of keys, locking of files, the changing of locks if keys have
been lost, proper safes, etc.

4. To keep off staff and off org lines any person who has ever betrayed
Scientology or who has threatened to betray or blackmail Scientology.

5. To ensure the Policy Letter on Physical Healing, Insanity and Potential
Trouble Sources is not violated and to be alert to any possible violation.

6. To maintain a good liaison line to Ethics and ensure that the Ethics
Officer alerts you to any person who might attack Scientology.

7. To be alert to any organizational theft or disappearances of records
and files as a posisble indication of the presence of an infiltrator or
double agend. Infiltrators are frequently those who have recently
"joined" Scientology and so can be watched. Double agents are usually
detected by natter, down stats, disorder in their areas and no case gain.

8. To be effective and imaginative in your collection of data and in
your actions to nullify any attack or threat of attack.

9. To keep your Asst. Guardian fully advised and the D/Guardian for
Intelligence WW, who will inform the Guardian WW in such matters.

PRODUCTION TARGET: This is a continuing Programme on which Projects
will be issued from time to time.

Mary Sue Hubbard
CS-G

(Emphasis mine)

The thing to bear in mind is that Scientology will use any and all information a person provides. Of most value are the documents written in the person's own hand and, these days, admissions made on video. What makes this sad fact about Scientology so pernicious is that much of the "valuable" information is extracted from the person by others who believe they are doing good. As it turns out, those to whom the most trust is extended are the most likely to have extracted the information. Auditors are not your friend.
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
Note for Moderator(s): I posted this yesterday, but it was deleted. I have received no notification. I'm writing about a serious matter. I'll try again.

Priest-Penitent Privilege in Scientology?

[video=youtube_share;HHOGatS9qT4]http://youtu.be/HHOGatS9qT4[/video]

This is misleading. "When I left the Church...I had a boob job." However, in order for Karen's boob job to have become a "non-actionable" item in her pc folder, she had to have disclosed the information about her boob job, which was "only known in my confessional" prior to leaving "the church." Boob jobs, being boob jobs, are not meant to be secret or unseen.

Karen has been feeding intel data from her preclears to intel people since the early 1970s at least, which was during the Hubbard regime. On the International Freezone Association's web site Karen is listed as a "certified auditor", and promoted as delivering L's, NOTs, reviews and the entire bridge.

International Freezone Association (IFA) said:
Karen is now working in the field and available to deliver standard technology covering all the services of the bridge from the very basics up to the Ls and NOTs including advanced NOTs Specialist in fixing bogged cases and Reviews. She can deliver the entire bridge from start to finish.

Retrieved 12 April 2013 from http://internationalfreezone.net/Karen-de-la-Carriere.shtml

Ethics reports are clearly part of standard tech.
IFA said:
Ethics Reports

Ethics Reports and Ethics Chits form an important part of keeping the technology standard and clean. Especially in the Freezone. Each of us has a responsibility over and above that of any organisation set up to help us hold the line. Ethics Reports are a guide and assist to bring attention to outnesses so that others can be reliably informed.

Retrieved 12 April 2013 from IFA Ethics Reports

Karen's "standard tech" Ethics Reports apparently now go to the IFA. How many people have access to such reports? What assurances are provided, and what remedies for breaches exist for Scientology consumers in the FZ? I haven't seen any.

How about the wog family members, or business, or national security connections, whose names and details get reported on?

Do IFAers have org boards? Don't they have Dept. 20's?

Would not the IFA credit and want Scientology-trained ethics personnel manning the Ethics Section, just as the IFA credits and desires Karen, and makes her desirable, in the Tech section. Would not the Scientologists have had the IFA Ethics Report line moled by the sharpest ethics specialist the IFA ever heard of. This guy would be independently wealthy and work on all those ethics files and situations for no pay out of love of the subject, to save it from David Miscavige.

Karen's disregard for divulging her "very private" information ("So what?"), aside from what was probably the obvious to Karen watchers, is understandable. Hubbard taught Scientologists the following:

Hubbard said:
There's a symptom amongst pcs: when they no longer care whether the auditor talks about their case or not, they've kind of made it. This is a little index I use and I use it quite frequently. When I find somebody getting desperate and caring desperately whether or not his case is mentioned, I know the boy hasn't made it yet. I don't know anything cruel about him; I just know he hasn't made it yet, that's all. Because he still has a withhold-reach mechanism which is all frozen up into a thing called secrecy. And when he continues on with auditing and has that undone, he'll then find out that the facts he has always considered so sordid aren't very sordid, now that he doesn't consider them sordid. It's quite remarkable. In the general add-up of a case, that is about its make-break point.

Hubbard, L. (1986) 8-C and Circuits. Hubbard Dissemination Course. Los Angeles: L. Ron Hubbard Library

Hubbard had that little index used on him, and he sure hadn't made it yet. Judge Breckenridge talked about Hubbard's case. Hubbard maxed out the index. He's had generations of his sycophants, even the supposedly independent Scientologists attack Gerry, the Judge, Mike Flynn, the courageous witnesses, and people connected to them.

Judge Paul G. Breckenridge said:
In 1970 a police agency of the French Government conducted an investigation into Scientology and concluded, “this sect, under the pretext of ‘freeing humans’ is nothing in reality but a vast enterprise to extract the maximum amount of money from its adepts by (use of) pseudo-scientific theories, by (use of) ‘auditions’ and ’stage settings’ (lit. to ‘create a theatrical scene’) pushed to extremes (a machine to detect lies, its own particular phraseology . . ), to estrange adepts from their families and to exercise a kind of blackmail against persons who do not wish to continue with this sect.”2 From the evidence presented to this court in 1984, at the very least, similar conclusions can be drawn. In addition to violating and abusing its own members civil rights, the organization over the years with its “Fair Game” doctrine has harassed and abused those persons not in the Church whom it perceives as enemies.

The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder LRH. The evidence portrays a man who has been virtually a pathological liar when it comes to his history, background, and achievements. The writings and documents in evidence additionally reflect his egoism, greed, avarice, lust for power, and vindictiveness and aggressiveness against persons perceived by him to be disloyal or hostile. At the same time it appears that he is charismatic and highly capable of motivating, organizing, controlling, manipulating, and inspiring his adherents. He has been referred to during the trial as a “genius,” a “revered person,” a man who was “viewed by his followers in awe.” Obviously, he is and has been a very complex person, and that complexity is further reflected in his alter ego, the Church of Scientology. Notwithstanding protestations to the contrary, this court is satisfied that LRH runs the Church in all ways through the Sea Organization, his role of Commodore, and the Commodore’s Messengers.3 He has, of course, chosen to go into “seclusion,” but he maintains contact and control through the top messengers. Seclusion has its light and dark side too. It adds to his mystique, and yet shields him from accountability and subpoena or service of summons.

The Breckenridge Decision

Karen still sells Hubbard as if he made it. His case will be mentioned. She also has not made it, and her case -- that is, her character -- will be mentioned. It is very easy for her to acquire the character to stop selling character. People should not be fooled into supporting the idea that she rightfully should be selling it, or has it to sell.

Scientology and Scientologists use the "priest-penitent privilege," not to protect their victims, but to protect themselves when their victims seek justice for the abuses Scientologists heap on them.

It is time for Karen to stop victimizing people, which she does by promoting and delivering Scientology, and has done with her attacks on good wogs, including people who blew the whistle on pc folder abuse thirty years ago.

This 1986 legal filing by the Scientologists in Scientology v. Armstrong is long-standing proof of their utter disregard for the priest-penitent privilege. Mark Rathbun was responsible for Scientology's legal actions against Armstrong, and he has done nothing about this disgrace. Rathbun participated in culling of pc folders.

Declaration of Vicki Aznaran said:
I, Vicki Aznaran, declare:

1. I joined the Church of Scientology of California ("Scientology") in 1972, and was a member until I left in April 1987. From 1984 until 1987, I was Inspector General of the Religious Technology Center, an affiliated Scientology organization. At that time, this was one of the highest worldwide offices in Scientology. One of my offices was located at 4751 Fountain Avenue, Los Angeles.

2. By virtue of my high position, I was "in the loop" to receive communications about some of Scientology's most secret operations. The facts set forth in this declaration are based on my own personal knowledge, which came from many sources, including numerous discussions and meetings with top Scientology "intelligence officials" and other Scientologists and reading documents which passed across my desk or came to my computer.

[...]

6. Attached as Exhibit A is a true copy of an internal Scientology memorandum, dated 6/21/86, which discusses this "Swearinger Investigation". I received a hard copy of this document at about that time, and I believe I also received a copy of this document on my computer. The Linda referred to on the first page is Linda Hamil, who at the time ran the MFTC. The Marty referred to on the first page is Marty Rathbun, a top Scientology "intelligence" official, who ran this operation.

7. Scientology's "ambush interview", discussed in Exhibit A, makes the Mike Wallace/60 Minutes interview called by the same name look tame. The "ambush interview" generally involves doing whatever it takes -- threats, physical force, bribery, or whatever -- to get an unprepared and unsuspecting target to say what is wanted.

8. I understand that Lynn Farny has submitted a declaration stating that Scientology complied with Judge Swearinger's order in the Wollersheim case to produce Wollersheim's pre-clear files. This is false. As I stated in my Fishman declaration, I personally culled and destroyed (shredded) from these files evidence which would help Wollersheim and hurt Scientology in the case. I was personally ordered to do so by David Miscavige, the head of Scientology, and Marty Rathbun. The culling and destruction took place at the Fountain Avenue building in Los Angeles. I was assisted in the document
destruction by then Scientologist Jessie Prince. Lynn Farny was a low level Scientology official, and was not at the meetings where this was discussed. However, Lynn Farny is not telling the truth, because as a Scientology staff member he knows it is Scientology policy never to turn over information in litigation without first culling out (deleting and destroying) material that will harm Scientology. It is also, however, Scientology policy to lie to cover up such misdeeds.

Declaration of Vicki Aznaran (19893, 29 June). http://gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/legal/aznaran/decl-aznaran-1993-06-29.html

Aznaran also culled Gerry’s pc folders after Judge Breckenridge ordered their production in Scientology v. Armstrong.

Declaration of Vicki Aznaran said:
12. During litigation between Gerald Armstrong and Scientology, which was before Judge Breckenridge of Superior Court for Los Angeles County, the court ordered the production of Armstrong's pre-clear ("PC") folders. These are files maintained by Scientology on those who submit to interrogation sessions in a process called auditing. During the course of that litigation I was ordered to go through Armstrong's folders and destroy or conceal anything that might be damaging to Scientology or helpful to Armstrong's case. As ordered, I went through the files and destroyed contents that might support Armstrong's claims against Scientology. This practice is known within Scientology as "culling PC folders" and is a common litigation tactic employed by Scientology.

Declaration of Vicki Aznaran (1988, 9 August). http://gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/legal/aznaran/decl-aznaran-1988-08-09.html
 

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
Re: Karen video: Priest-Penitent Privilege in Scientology?

Note for Moderator(s): I posted this yesterday, but it was deleted. I have received no notification. I'm writing about a serious matter. I'll try again.

Caroline, it might not have been deleted. There was an issue with the forum where the test or backup forum was up in error and in place of the main forum. It might have been posted to there during the brief time it was up. Here is a thread by ethercat about the problem and issues that came up because of the error. Some were having problems as of yesterday
http://forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?31278-Earlier-glitch-with-ESMB
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
Re: Karen video: Priest-Penitent Privilege in Scientology?

Caroline, it might not have been deleted. There was an issue with the forum where the test or backup forum was up in error and in place of the main forum. It might have been posted to there during the brief time it was up. Here is a thread by ethercat about the problem and issues that came up because of the error. Some were having problems as of yesterday
http://forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?31278-Earlier-glitch-with-ESMB

The post propagated. It was absent this morning when I checked the thread. I logged in to see whether I had received any notifications. I had not. The mods will be able to figure it out from their logs of course.
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
Re: Karen video: Priest-Penitent Privilege in Scientology?

Note for Moderator(s): I posted this yesterday, but it was deleted. I have received no notification. I'm writing about a serious matter. I'll try again.

Priest-Penitent Privilege in Scientology?

[video=youtube_share;HHOGatS9qT4]http://youtu.be/HHOGatS9qT4[/video]

This is misleading. "When I left the Church...I had a boob job." However, in order for Karen's boob job to have become a "non-actionable" item in her pc folder, she had to have disclosed the information about her boob job, which was "only known in my confessional" prior to leaving "the church." Boob jobs, being boob jobs, are not meant to be secret or unseen.

Karen has been feeding intel data from her preclears to intel people since the early 1970s at least, which was during the Hubbard regime. On the International Freezone Association's web site Karen is listed as a "certified auditor", and promoted as delivering L's, NOTs, reviews and the entire bridge.

International Freezone Association (IFA) said:
Karen is now working in the field and available to deliver standard technology covering all the services of the bridge from the very basics up to the Ls and NOTs including advanced NOTs Specialist in fixing bogged cases and Reviews. She can deliver the entire bridge from start to finish.

Retrieved 12 April 2013 from http://internationalfreezone.net/Karen-de-la-Carriere.shtml


Ethics reports are clearly part of standard tech.

IFA said:
Ethics Reports

Ethics Reports and Ethics Chits form an important part of keeping the technology standard and clean. Especially in the Freezone. Each of us has a responsibility over and above that of any organisation set up to help us hold the line. Ethics Reports are a guide and assist to bring attention to outnesses so that others can be reliably informed.

Retrieved 12 April 2013 from IFA Ethics Reports -


Karen's "standard tech" Ethics Reports apparently now go to the IFA. How many people have access to such reports? What assurances are provided, and what remedies for breaches exist for Scientology consumers in the FZ? I haven't seen any.

How about the wog family members, or business, or national security connections, whose names and details get reported on?

Do IFAers have org boards? Don't they have Dept. 20's?

Would not the IFA credit and want Scientology-trained ethics personnel manning the Ethics Section, just as the IFA credits and desires Karen, and makes her desirable, in the Tech section. Would not the Scientologists have had the IFA Ethics Report line moled by the sharpest ethics specialist the IFA ever heard of. This guy would be independently wealthy and work on all those ethics files and situations for no pay out of love of the subject, to save it from David Miscavige.

Karen's disregard for divulging her "very private" information ("So what?"), aside from what was probably the obvious to Karen watchers, is understandable. Hubbard taught Scientologists the following:

Hubbard said:
There's a symptom amongst pcs: when they no longer care whether the auditor talks about their case or not, they've kind of made it. This is a little index I use and I use it quite frequently. When I find somebody getting desperate and caring desperately whether or not his case is mentioned, I know the boy hasn't made it yet. I don't know anything cruel about him; I just know he hasn't made it yet, that's all. Because he still has a withhold-reach mechanism which is all frozen up into a thing called secrecy. And when he continues on with auditing and has that undone, he'll then find out that the facts he has always considered so sordid aren't very sordid, now that he doesn't consider them sordid. It's quite remarkable. In the general add-up of a case, that is about its make-break point.

Hubbard, L. (1986) 8-C and Circuits. Hubbard Dissemination Course. Los Angeles: L. Ron Hubbard Library



Hubbard had that little index used on him, and he sure hadn't made it yet. Judge Breckenridge talked about Hubbard's case. Hubbard maxed out the index. He's had generations of his sycophants, even the supposedly independent Scientologists attack Gerry, the Judge, Mike Flynn, the courageous witnesses, and people connected to them.

Judge Paul G. Breckenridge said:
In 1970 a police agency of the French Government conducted an investigation into Scientology and concluded, “this sect, under the pretext of ‘freeing humans’ is nothing in reality but a vast enterprise to extract the maximum amount of money from its adepts by (use of) pseudo-scientific theories, by (use of) ‘auditions’ and ’stage settings’ (lit. to ‘create a theatrical scene’) pushed to extremes (a machine to detect lies, its own particular phraseology . . ), to estrange adepts from their families and to exercise a kind of blackmail against persons who do not wish to continue with this sect.”2 From the evidence presented to this court in 1984, at the very least, similar conclusions can be drawn. In addition to violating and abusing its own members civil rights, the organization over the years with its “Fair Game” doctrine has harassed and abused those persons not in the Church whom it perceives as enemies.

The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder LRH. The evidence portrays a man who has been virtually a pathological liar when it comes to his history, background, and achievements. The writings and documents in evidence additionally reflect his egoism, greed, avarice, lust for power, and vindictiveness and aggressiveness against persons perceived by him to be disloyal or hostile. At the same time it appears that he is charismatic and highly capable of motivating, organizing, controlling, manipulating, and inspiring his adherents. He has been referred to during the trial as a “genius,” a “revered person,” a man who was “viewed by his followers in awe.” Obviously, he is and has been a very complex person, and that complexity is further reflected in his alter ego, the Church of Scientology. Notwithstanding protestations to the contrary, this court is satisfied that LRH runs the Church in all ways through the Sea Organization, his role of Commodore, and the Commodore’s Messengers.3 He has, of course, chosen to go into “seclusion,” but he maintains contact and control through the top messengers. Seclusion has its light and dark side too. It adds to his mystique, and yet shields him from accountability and subpoena or service of summons.

The Breckenridge Decision


Karen still sells Hubbard as if he made it. His case will be mentioned. She also has not made it, and her case -- that is, her character -- will be mentioned. It is very easy for her to acquire the character to stop selling character. People should not be fooled into supporting the idea that she rightfully should be selling it, or has it to sell.

Scientology and Scientologists use the "priest-penitent privilege," not to protect their victims, but to protect themselves when their victims seek justice for the abuses Scientologists heap on them.

It is time for Karen to stop victimizing people, which she does by promoting and delivering Scientology, and has done with her attacks on good wogs, including people who blew the whistle on pc folder abuse thirty years ago.

This 1986 legal filing by the Scientologists in Scientology v. Armstrong is long-standing proof of their utter disregard for the priest-penitent privilege. Mark Rathbun was responsible for Scientology's legal actions against Armstrong, and he has done nothing about this disgrace. Rathbun participated in culling of pc folders.

Declaration of Vicki Aznaran said:
I, Vicki Aznaran, declare:

1. I joined the Church of Scientology of California ("Scientology") in 1972, and was a member until I left in April 1987. From 1984 until 1987, I was Inspector General of the Religious Technology Center, an affiliated Scientology organization. At that time, this was one of the highest worldwide offices in Scientology. One of my offices was located at 4751 Fountain Avenue, Los Angeles.

2. By virtue of my high position, I was "in the loop" to receive communications about some of Scientology's most secret operations. The facts set forth in this declaration are based on my own personal knowledge, which came from many sources, including numerous discussions and meetings with top Scientology "intelligence officials" and other Scientologists and reading documents which passed across my desk or came to my computer.

[...]

6. Attached as Exhibit A is a true copy of an internal Scientology memorandum, dated 6/21/86, which discusses this "Swearinger Investigation" . I received a hard copy of this document at about that time, and I believe I also received a copy of this document on my computer. The Linda referred to on the first page is Linda Hamil, who at the time ran the MFTC. The Marty referred to on the first page is Marty Rathbun, a top Scientology "intelligence" official, who ran this operation.

7. Scientology's "ambush interview", discussed in Exhibit A, makes the Mike Wallace/60 Minutes interview called by the same name look tame. The "ambush interview" generally involves doing whatever it takes -- threats, physical force, bribery, or whatever -- to get an unprepared and unsuspecting target to say what is wanted.

8. I understand that Lynn Farny has submitted a declaration stating that Scientology complied with Judge Swearinger's order in the Wollersheim case to produce Wollersheim's pre-clear files. This is false. As I stated in my Fishman declaration, I personally culled and destroyed (shredded) from these files evidence which would help Wollersheim and hurt Scientology in the case. I was personally ordered to do so by David Miscavige, the head of Scientology, and Marty Rathbun. The culling and destruction took place at the Fountain Avenue building in Los Angeles. I was assisted in the document
destruction by then Scientologist Jessie Prince. Lynn Farny was a low level Scientology official, and was not at the meetings where this was discussed. However, Lynn Farny is not telling the truth, because as a Scientology staff member he knows it is Scientology policy never to turn over information in litigation without first culling out (deleting and destroying) material that will harm Scientology. It is also, however, Scientology policy to lie to cover up such misdeeds.

Declaration of Vicki Aznaran (19893, 29 June).http://gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/legal/aznaran/decl-aznaran-1993-06-29.html


Aznaran also culled Gerry’s pc folders after Judge Breckenridge ordered their production in Scientology v. Armstrong.

Declaration of Vicki Aznaran said:
12. During litigation between Gerald Armstrong and Scientology, which was before Judge Breckenridge of Superior Court for Los Angeles County, the court ordered the production of Armstrong's pre-clear ("PC") folders. These are files maintained by Scientology on those who submit to interrogation sessions in a process called auditing. During the course of that litigation I was ordered to go through Armstrong's folders and destroy or conceal anything that might be damaging to Scientology or helpful to Armstrong's case. As ordered, I went through the files and destroyed contents that might support Armstrong's claims against Scientology. This practice is known within Scientology as "culling PC folders" and is a common litigation tactic employed by Scientology.

Declaration of Vicki Aznaran (1988, 9 August). http://gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/legal/aznaran/decl-aznaran-1988-08-09.html

Whoa!! I hadn't quite realised that the requirement for Standard Ethics Reports had filtered across to the Free Indie Dependent Zone quite so thoroughly. That's worrying. Even the name and "sins" of people even mentioned in session must be reported if the session is deemed to be "Standard". Thank you for bringing it to our attention, Caroline. Is there a list of "Auditors" who are bound by this requirement?
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
Re: Karen de la Carriere YouTube Channel

..

If it wasn't real, it would be hillarious. According to APIS:

. . . Ethics Reports and Ethics Chits form an important part of keeping the technology standard and clean. Especially in the Freezone. Each of us has a responsibility over and above that of any organisation set up to help us hold the line. Ethics Reports are a guide and assist to bring attention to outnesses so that others can be reliably informed

Therefore it is important that, as part of the purpose of preserving and protecting the technology, that we put into place an alert system to bring attention to any outnesses that may occur. This should be done sanely and in a manner that brooks no human emotion and reaction and does not incur the accusation of 'third party' simply because a knowledge report is written . . .

. . . the site has a handy on-line form for the filing of said Ethics Reports. I'm guessing it must be flat out. Consider the KSW Standard L Ron Hubbard List of High Crimes consisting of issue affecting publicly departing Scientologists or committing suppressive acts:

. . .
142) Using the trademarks and service marks of Dianetics and Scientology
without express permission or license from the owner of the marks or it's
authorized licensee.

143) Falsifying records.

144) Testifying or giving data against Scientology falsely or in
generalities or without personal knowledge of the matters to which one
testifies.

145) Organizing splinter groups to diverge from Scientology practices still
calling it Scientology or calling it something else.

146) Organizing a splinter group to use Scientology data or any part of it
to distract people from standard Scientology.

147) Using Scientology (or perverted and alter-ised tech and calling it
Scientology) harmfully so as to bring about disrupte to an org, group or
Scientology itself.

148) Issuing alter-ised Scientology technical data or information or
instructional or admin procedures, calling it Scientology or calling it
something else to confuse or deceive people as to the true source, beliefs
and practices of Scientology.

149) Unauthorized use of the materials of Dianetics and Scientology.

150) Holding, using, copying, printing or publishing confidential materials
of Dianetcis and Scientology without the express permission or license from
the auther of the materials or his authorized licensee.

151) Falsely attributing or falsely representing oneself or others as source
of Scientology or Dianetics technology; or using any position gained with
staff and/or public to falsely attribute nonsource material to source or to
falsely represent nonsource material as authorized Scientology or Dianetics
technology.

152) Acts calculated to misuse, invalidate or alter-is legally or in any
other way the trademarks and service marks of Dianetics and Scientology.

153) Intentional and unauthorized alteration of LRH technology, policy,
issues or checksheets.

154) Developing and/or using squirrel processes and checksheets.

155) Knowingly giving testimony whiich is false, a generality or not based
on personal knowledge to imperil a Scientologist.

156) Public disavowal of Scientology or Scientologists in good standing with
Scientology organizations.

157) Public statements against Scientology or Scientologists but not to
Committees of Evidence duly convened.

158) Proposing, advising or voting for legistlation or ordinances, rules or
laws directed toward the suppression of Scientology.

159) Pronouncing Scientologists guilty of the practice of standard
Scientology.

160) Testifying hostilely before state or public inquiries into Scientology
to suppress it.

161) Reporting or threatening to report Scientology or Scientologists to
civil authorities in an effort to suppress Scientology or Scientologists
from practicing or receiving standard Scientology.

162) Bringing civil suit against any Scientology organization or
Scientologist, including the nopayment of bills or failure to refund,
without first calling the matter to the attention of the International
Justice Chief and receiving a reply.

163) Demanding the return of any or all fees paid for standard training or
processing actually received or received in part and still available but
undelivered only because of departure of the person demading (the fees must
be refunded but this policy applies).

164) Writing anti-Scientology letters to the press or giving
anti-Scientology or anti-Scientologist data to the press.

165) Continued membership in a divergent group.

166) Continued adherence to a person or group pronounced a suppressive
person or group by HCO.

167) Failure to handle or disavow and disconnect from a person demonstrably
guilty of suppressive acts.

168) Being at the hire of anti-Scientology groups or persons.

169) Calling meetings of staffs or field autitors or the public to deliver
Scientology into the hands of unauthorized persons or persons who will
suppress it or alter it or who have no reputation for following standard
lines and procedures.

170) Infiltrating a Scientology group or organization or staff to stir up
discontent or protest at the instigation of hostile forces.

171) Mutiny.

172) Seeking to splinter off an area of Scientology and deny it properly
consituted authority for personal profit, personal power or "to save the
organization from the higher officers of Scientology."

173) Engaging in malicious rumormongering to destroy the authority or repute
of higher officers or the leading names of Scientology or to "safeguard" a
position.

174) Delivering up the person of a Scientology without justifiable defense
or lawful protest to the demands of civil or criminal law.

175) Receiving money, favors or encouragement to suppress Scientology or
Scientologists.

176) Using an org position or comm line to build up a private practice which
reroutes org students, pcs, and/or staff off org lines.

177) Severe breach of ecclesiastical and/or fiduciary duty as an executive
or corporate official of any Scientology or Dianetics organzation which has
resulted in severe harm, loss or disrepute for Scientology or the
organization.

178) Using Scientology lines for personal profit in such a way as to cause
disruption in the organization or to block the flow of public up the Bridge.

179) Using the mailing lists of Scientology or Dianetics organization for
personal profit or gain.

180) Employing org staff members to the detriment of the production or the
establishment of the organization.

181) Providing an organiztaion's preclear folders, ethics files, student
files, accounts files, Central Files' folders or Central Files lists or
partial lists or Addresso lists or partial lists to any individual, group,
organization, mission or other unit or agency for any reason or purpose,
except those coverd explicitly in existing Church policy; or to provide such
files or lists to any individual, group, organization, mission or other unit
or agency which is unauthorized by or in bad standing with the Mother
Church.

182) Calculated efforts to disrupt Church services or the flow of public up
the Bridge through the Churches.

183) Refusal to allow staff or public to progress up the Bridge or creating
blocks on the Bridge preventing such progression.

184) Blatant and willful obstruction of Church operations or interference
with Church contractual and other obligations to the detriment of Church
expansion or activities.

185) Violation or neglect of any of the ten points of Keeping Scientology
Working, as listed here:

186) Not having the correct technology

187) Not knowing the technology

188) Not knowing it is correct.

189) Not teaching correctly the correct technology

190) Not applying the technology

191) Not seeing that the technology is correctly applied

192) Not hammering out of existence incorrect technology

193) Not knocking out incorrect applications.

194) Not closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology

195) Not closing the door on incorrect application

Violations of any of the ten points listed below that are Technical
Degrades:

196) Abbreviating an offical course in Dianetics and Scientology so as to
lose the full theory, processes and effectiveness or the subjects.

197) Adding comments to checksheets or instructions labeling any material
"background" or "not used now" or "old" or any similar action which will
result in the student not knowing, using and applying the data in which he
is being trained.

198) Employing after 1 September 1970 any checksheet for any course not
authorized by myself or the Authority, Verification and Correction Unit
International (AVC Int.)

199) Failing to strike from any checksheet remaining in use meanwhile any
such comments as "historical," "background," "not used," "old," etc., or
VERBALLY STATING IT TO STUDENTS.

200) Permitting a pc to attest to more than one grade at a time on the pc's
own determinism without hint or evaluation.

201) Running only one process for a lower grade between 0-IV, where the
grade end phenomena has not been attained.

202) Failing to use all processes fro a level where the end phenomena has
not been attained.

203) Boasting as to speed of delivery in a session, such as "I put in Grade
0 in three minutes." Etc.

204) Shortening time of application of auditing for financial or
labor-saving considerations.

205) Acting in any way calculated to lose the technology of Dianetics and
Scientology to use or impede its use or shorten its materials or its
application.

206) Musical chairs (transfers of persons around an org) is the single most
destructive action to an org's stat.

207) Making a hole in one place to remedy a hole in another.

208) Training a person for tech but not admin and putting him in admin.

209) Using the Technical Divisions as personnel pools from which to man
other divisions.

210) Rapid shifts of post.

211) Leaving areas in an org unmanned.

212) Noise, session interruption. Loud sudden noises, loud bursts of
laughter, shouting, whistling, noisy conversation in the area of sessions.

213) Comm cycle additives. There are NO additives permitted on teh auditing
comm cycle.

214) Withhold of vital information.

215) Informing fellow staff members and others that one is leaving staff.

The following policy violation is the highest crime in Tech or Qual:

216) Tolerating the absence of or not insisting upon star-rated checkouts on
all processes and their immediate technology and on relevant policy letters
on HGC interns or staff auditors in the Tech Division or staff auditors or
interns in the Qual Division for the levels and actions they will use before
permitting them to audit org pcs, and on Supervisors in Tech an dQual who
instruct or examine or failing to insist upon this poicy or preventing this
policy from going into effect or minimizing the checouts or lists.

217) Spreading false tales to invalidate Clears or spreading libelous and
slanderous statements about the alleged behavior of Clears.

218) It is a high crime to cut the basic communication lines of Scientology.

219) Knowingly falsifying an auditing report in order to make oneself seem
more competent than one is or to hide departures from the Case Supervisor or
to omit vital data necessary to cse supervising resulting in upsets to a
case and time spend in investigation by seniors is actionable by Committee
of Evidence, and if the matter is proven beyond reasonable doubt, a
cancellation of all certificates and awards, a declare and expulsion order
are mandatory.

Permitting in a couse room any of the six out-ethics activities listed below
is a Committee of Evidence offense, and Supervisors, Directors of Training,
Technical Secretaries, Qualifications Secretaries or Ethics Officers so
found guilty are subject to decalre as a supppressive person.

220) Not mustering students in the morning, after lunch and after dinner,
precisely on time, not noting absences and taking action.

221) Permitting students to talk to each other or wander around or take
unscheduled breaks or good off during course hours.

222) Permitting students to eat or smoke in the course room.

223) Permitting persons to come into the course room and bother students for
any reason.

224) A Course Supervisor standing around or sitting at his desk not actively
handling students who need help.

225) Not getting students through their course and graduated.

226) Any Case Supervisor case supervising for a level for which he has not
been trained is subject to the suspension of all certificates and
deprivations of all bonuses as well as refund of all bonuses ever obtained
while case supervising, as a Case Supervisor, levels for which he has not
been trained above or below his class. This does not limit the penalties
which can be applied which can include declare and expulsion.

227) Any staff member who either verbally or by his actions threatens to
crash or deliberately crashes his stats in order to avoid a legal or
on-policy order or ethics action is to be instantly declared.

228) It is a high crime for any staff member to knowingly or unknowingly
waste org book stocks or cause them to be wasted or tampered with.

229) It is futher a high crime for a staff member, Bookstore Officer or
executive to fail to take the necessary precautions for the preotection and
correct use of org book stocks.

230) It is a high crime to publicy depart Scientology.

Any repeated or continued violation of the five points of out study tech
listed below, after two Courts of Ethics for viloation of these points,
subjects the person to a Committe of Evidence on the charge of committing an
act or omission undertaken to knowingly suppress, reduce or impede
Scientology or Scientologists, and if found guilty beyound reasonable doubt,
the person may be declared suppressive and expelled with full penalties:

231) A person my be summoned to a Court of Ethics or Executive Court of
Ethics if it be found that he has gone past a word he does not understand
when receiving, hearing or reading an order, HCOB, Policy Letter or tape,
any and all LRH written or printed materials including books, PABs,
despatches, telexes and mimeo issues which resulted in a failure to do
duties of his poist, without his at once making an effective effort to clear
the words on himself, whether he knew he was missing them or not, as a
source of his ination or damaging actions.
The charge is NEGLETING TO CLARIFY WORDS NOT UNDERSTOOD.

232) A staff member who does not use study tech or get it known while
studying or instructing may be summoned to a Court of Ethics or an Executive
Court of Ethics.
The charge is FAILURE TO EMPLOY STUDY TECH.

233) A student is alter-ising or misadvising othters on the use of study
tech may be summoned before a Court of Ethics.

The charge is ADVOCATING A MISUSE OR NEGELCT OF PROPER STUDY TECH.

234) An auditor failing to clear each and every word of every command or
list used may be summoned before a Court of Ethics.

The charge is OUT-TECH.

235) Any Public Division person, staff member or Scientologist found using
terms, circumstances or data on raw public in public lectures or promotion
or in PR beyound the public ability to grasp without stressing study tech or
at once taking effective measures to clarify, or releasing materials broadly
to a wrong public may be summoned to a Court of Ehtics if any flap or upset
results.

The charge is FAILURE TO APPLY STUDY TECH IN DISSEMINATION.

236) To alter and pervert tech or procedure to prevent discovery of
withholds is classified as a suppressive act. This enters many areas:

237) changing or losing issues

238) issuing issues in Board Technical Bulletin (BTB) or Board Policy Letter
(BPL) form that contain incorrect and misleading data,

239) posting known criminals or incompetents to training posts,

240) verbal tech or any action which would prevent tech from being known or
correctly used.

241) Where proven beyond reasonable doubt that funds and business have been
diverted from an org to its detrimetn, a declare order on those responsible
is mandatory, and possible criminal prosecution may be undertaken.

242) Failure to strenuously act to clean up an "ARC broken field" shall be
a high crime for an Executive Council.

243) It is a high crime to permit suppressive and PTS people in Publications
Orgs (now Bridge) or departments or in Department 17 (Division 6,
advertising) as these will starve both the public and the org.

244) Any executive issuing an order tha certain HCO PLs or HCOBs are not to
be followed, where this is proven beyond reasonable doubt, shall be
considered as having committed a high crime, and this can carry the
assignment of the condition of Treason for both the person issuing th order
and the person who recieves and executes it.

245) Any audiotr seeing a rock slam on a preclear and failing to mark it
down and report it is guilty of a high crime, as this injures society, the
org and the person himself.

246) When a preclear has roller-coastered despite a floting needle at
session end and at Examiners and if neither Tech nor Qual makes any effor to
remedy, then the matter becomes a high crime.

247) If red tags, per the Examiners 24-hour rule, continue unhandled by Tech
or Qual, the matter becomes a high crime.

248) It is a high crime for a Case Supervisor not to WRITE in a preclear's
folder what the case supervised instructions are and a high crime for an
auditor to accept verbal C/S instructions.

249) Word clearing any words on any test at any time is a high crime.

250) It is a high crime for a person to supervise a course who does not
know, apply and continually use his study tech and every individual student.

251) It is also a high crime for a Director of Training or a TEch Sec or an
Esto to have anyone supervising without FULL USE OF STUDY TECH.

252) It is a Committee of Evidence offense for a Case Supervisor or auditor
to C/S or accept for processing and precess any illegal pc. (Ref: HCOB 6
Dec. 76RB, Illegal PCS, Acceptance of, High Crime Bulletin)

253) Fedding the Clear cognition to any individual, evaluating for a pc on
this subject or coaxing him to any cognition is criminal and a comm-evable
offense.

254) Declaring a Dianeic Clear "achieved in other practices."

255) Falsely declaring someone Dianetic Clear who isn't and failing to
declare one who made it on Dianetics or the Clearing Course or who has
ALWAYS been Clear.

256) It is a high crime for an executive to penalize auditors, C/Ses,
Tech/Qual or Ethics Officers for following HCOBs or HCO PLs, especially when
it is due to the executives' withholds.

257) It is also a high crime to falsely charge an executive with the above.

258) Attempting to undermine or advising or encouraging or condoning the
abandonment or reduction of use of the full technology of locating and
handling overts, evil purposes, destructive intentions and nonsurvival
considerations.

259) Neglecting, advising against the application of, failing to enforce or
tolerating the omission of standard Wrod Clearing and star-rate checkouts on
all new or newly revised HCO Policy Letters, as well as the key HCO PLs of
the Basic Staff Member Hat and the key policies of the staff member's
specific assigned post, by every staff member. In the Sea Organization this
applies to LRH CBOs and Flag Orders as well as HCO Policy Letters.
Violation of any of the eleven points listed below which are Admin Degrades:

260) Abbreviating an official course in standard Scientology administrative
policy so as to lose the full theory, administrative procedures and
effectiveness of the subject.

261) Adding comments to the Org Executive Course or other administrative
checksheets or instructions, policies or directives labeling any material
"background" or "not used now" or "old" or "it doesnt need to be followed
exaclty," or any similar action which will result in the student not
knowing, using and applying the standard administrative data in which he is
being trained.

262) Employing any checksheet for any administrative course not authorized
by the Authority, Verification and Correction Unit International. (AVC Int).

263) Failing to strike from any administrative or hat checksheet any such
comments as "historical," "background," "not used," "old," etc., or VERBALLY
STTING IT TO STUDENTS.

264) Failing to hat and apprentice a staff member on the full policy and
actions of his post.

265) Discouraging or preventing a staff member, administrator or executive
from training on the full Org Exec Course and Flag Executive Briefing Course.

266) Failing to insist upon precise and exact application of the Data Series
policy letters in investigaions and evaluations.

267) Running any organization on squirrel "policy" or third dynamic
administrative or managment procedures that are contrary to approved policy.

268) Using any squirrel administrative procedure in managing an organiztaion
while falsely labeling it Scientology policy.

269) Using Scientology policy but calling it something else or attributing
it to some other source.

270) Acting in any way calculated to lose standard Scientology policy to use
or impede its use or shorten it materials or its application.

271) It is a high crime for anyone who has not fully and successfully
completed the Hubbard Key to Life Course to supervise or otherwise
administer this course to another or others.

272) Feeding a person the end phenomena of the Hubbard Key to Life section
2B Clay Table process is classified as a suppressive act, because it will
probably harm his progress and hurt his chances. Penalties for doing so
could include expulsion.

273) Forcing auditing on a pc when he is refusing or protesting it, rather
than finding out why the pc doesn't want the auditing and straightening it
out is using auding suppressively. Any C/S or auditor guilty of this must be
handled with group justice proceedings which would include a Comm Ev and
could include a penalty of being declared suppressive and expelled from the
Church.

274) Additionally, a crime, if severe and of magnitude, harmful to many and
committed repeatedly, can be reclassed as a high crime.

Rights of a Suppresive Person or Group

"A truly suppressive person or group has NO RIGHTS of any kind as
Scientologists."

Bizarre.
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
Re: Karen video: Priest-Penitent Privilege in Scientology?

Whoa!! I hadn't quite realised that the requirement for Standard Ethics Reports had filtered across to the Free Indie Dependent Zone quite so thoroughly. That's worrying. Even the name and "sins" of people even mentioned in session must be reported if the session is deemed to be "Standard". Thank you for bringing it to our attention, Caroline. Is there a list of "Auditors" who are bound by this requirement?

Yes, there is a list of eight practitioners bound by the certification process delineated on this page: http://internationalfreezone.net/certified-auditors.shtml

International Freezone Association operating as The Association of Professional Independent Scientologists said:
Please note: The Association of Professional Independent Scientologists (APIS) receives no commercial interest direct or otherwise from any of the people listed above. APIS does not recommend any particular auditor listed and this list is provided on an informative basis only. Each individual is responsible for their own integrity and case.

Also please note that this list does NOT include all those private individuals who have elected to support APIS by offering a donation and agreeing with the purposes and aims of APIS and do not wish to provide public details about themselves.

To find out more about the process go to Certification Process
Information on how to be certified can be obtained here. How to be Certified
More about Technical Issues - Upper Levels Technical Issues
For Certification Terms go to Certification Terms & Conditions
The donations for certification are available here. Certification Donations
To apply for Certification go to Certification Application.


Retrieved from http://internationalfreezone.net/certified-auditors.shtml
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
Re: Karen video: Priest-Penitent Privilege in Scientology?

Yes, there is a list of eight practitioners bound by the certification process delineated on this page: http://internationalfreezone.net/certified-auditors.shtml

Thanks for that. Crazy APIS is crazy. As odd as it sounds, one can only hope that the claim to provide "Standard Tech" is false advertising. Perhaps that is one of the Free Indie Dependent Zone's "dirty little secrets" because, if APIS really did provide "Standard Tech", at least three of those eight "Auditors" are guilty of one or more of L Ron Hubbard's Scientology "High Crimes". If Steve Hall really is as zealous as he comes across, it might explain his FAIL attempt to get ethics in on the group and why his crew have subsequently decided to start up their own org. Either way, people fresh out of the cult need to be warned about these operators lest they get dragged back into a similar fraudulent money-spinning mind fuck. Thank goodness for ESMB where these things can be highlighted and discussed.
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
---snip

Karen's disregard for divulging her "very private" information ("So what?"), aside from what was probably the obvious to Karen watchers, is understandable. Hubbard taught Scientologists the following:



Hubbard had that little index used on him, and he sure hadn't made it yet. Judge Breckenridge talked about Hubbard's case. Hubbard maxed out the index. He's had generations of his sycophants, even the supposedly independent Scientologists attack Gerry, the Judge, Mike Flynn, the courageous witnesses, and people connected to them.



Karen still sells Hubbard as if he made it. His case will be mentioned. She also has not made it, and her case -- that is, her character -- will be mentioned. It is very easy for her to acquire the character to stop selling character. People should not be fooled into supporting the idea that she rightfully should be selling it, or has it to sell.

Scientology and Scientologists use the "priest-penitent privilege," not to protect their victims, but to protect themselves when their victims seek justice for the abuses Scientologists heap on them.

It is time for Karen to stop victimizing people, which she does by promoting and delivering Scientology, and has done with her attacks on good wogs, including people who blew the whistle on pc folder abuse thirty years ago.

---snip

I challenge you to show me somebody Karen has "victimized" by delivering Scientology.

vic·tim noun \ˈvik-təm\

Definition of VICTIM


1
: a living being sacrificed to a deity or in the performance of a religious rite
2
: one that is acted on and usually adversely affected by a force or agent <the schools are victims of the social system>: as
a (1) : one that is injured, destroyed, or sacrificed under any of various conditions <a victim of cancer> <a victim of the auto crash> <a murder victim> (2) : one that is subjected to oppression, hardship, or mistreatment <a frequent victim of political attacks>
b : one that is tricked or duped <a con man's victim>

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/victim?show=0&t=1366144676

Can you demonstrate that these alleged victims were tricked into paying her money for auditing? Can you demonstrate that they did not receive the service they paid for or were unhappy with the results? (These are questions).

Where is your evidence? What is your evidence? (More questions).

Or is that really just your theoretical perspective - a personal belief system about Scientology that: all auditing victimizes people = Karen is auditing = Karen victimizes people? (Do not answer. This is a rhetorical question to express my personal evaluation of your position).

Where are the horror stories such as one sees on ESMB? (This is a question).

Note that these really are questions i.e. something I am actually asking you personally, Caroline, not something I am pretending to ask so that I can diss you.

You claim she is victimizing people. Prove it.

Otherwise, libel much.
 

Idle Morgue

Gold Meritorious Patron
Note for Moderator(s): I posted this yesterday, but it was deleted. I have received no notification. I'm writing about a serious matter. I'll try again.



This is misleading. "When I left the Church...I had a boob job." However, in order for Karen's boob job to have become a "non-actionable" item in her pc folder, she had to have disclosed the information about her boob job, which was "only known in my confessional" prior to leaving "the church." Boob jobs, being boob jobs, are not meant to be secret or unseen.

Karen has been feeding intel data from her preclears to intel people since the early 1970s at least, which was during the Hubbard regime. On the International Freezone Association's web site Karen is listed as a "certified auditor", and promoted as delivering L's, NOTs, reviews and the entire bridge.



Ethics reports are clearly part of standard tech.


Karen's "standard tech" Ethics Reports apparently now go to the IFA. How many people have access to such reports? What assurances are provided, and what remedies for breaches exist for Scientology consumers in the FZ? I haven't seen any.

How about the wog family members, or business, or national security connections, whose names and details get reported on?

Do IFAers have org boards? Don't they have Dept. 20's?

Would not the IFA credit and want Scientology-trained ethics personnel manning the Ethics Section, just as the IFA credits and desires Karen, and makes her desirable, in the Tech section. Would not the Scientologists have had the IFA Ethics Report line moled by the sharpest ethics specialist the IFA ever heard of. This guy would be independently wealthy and work on all those ethics files and situations for no pay out of love of the subject, to save it from David Miscavige.

Karen's disregard for divulging her "very private" information ("So what?"), aside from what was probably the obvious to Karen watchers, is understandable. Hubbard taught Scientologists the following:



Hubbard had that little index used on him, and he sure hadn't made it yet. Judge Breckenridge talked about Hubbard's case. Hubbard maxed out the index. He's had generations of his sycophants, even the supposedly independent Scientologists attack Gerry, the Judge, Mike Flynn, the courageous witnesses, and people connected to them.



Karen still sells Hubbard as if he made it. His case will be mentioned. She also has not made it, and her case -- that is, her character -- will be mentioned. It is very easy for her to acquire the character to stop selling character. People should not be fooled into supporting the idea that she rightfully should be selling it, or has it to sell.

Scientology and Scientologists use the "priest-penitent privilege," not to protect their victims, but to protect themselves when their victims seek justice for the abuses Scientologists heap on them.

It is time for Karen to stop victimizing people, which she does by promoting and delivering Scientology, and has done with her attacks on good wogs, including people who blew the whistle on pc folder abuse thirty years ago.

This 1986 legal filing by the Scientologists in Scientology v. Armstrong is long-standing proof of their utter disregard for the priest-penitent privilege. Mark Rathbun was responsible for Scientology's legal actions against Armstrong, and he has done nothing about this disgrace. Rathbun participated in culling of pc folders.



Aznaran also culled Gerry’s pc folders after Judge Breckenridge ordered their production in Scientology v. Armstrong.

Scientology ~ just plain old SCUM!
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
I challenge you to show me somebody Karen has "victimized" by delivering Scientology.



http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/victim?show=0&t=1366144676

Can you demonstrate that these alleged victims were tricked into paying her money for auditing? Can you demonstrate that they did not receive the service they paid for or were unhappy with the results? (These are questions).

Where is your evidence? What is your evidence? (More questions).

Or is that really just your theoretical perspective - a personal belief system about Scientology that: all auditing victimizes people = Karen is auditing = Karen victimizes people? (Do not answer. This is a rhetorical question to express my personal evaluation of your position).

Where are the horror stories such as one sees on ESMB? (This is a question).

Note that these really are questions i.e. something I am actually asking you personally, Caroline, not something I am pretending to ask so that I can diss you.

You claim she is victimizing people. Prove it.

Otherwise, libel much.

:bump2: Caroline. You claim Karen is victimizing people. Prove it. See above.
 

Dean Blair

Silver Meritorious Patron
I have known Karen for some time when she was in and since she left the Church of Scientology and I respect her posts. She has done more than many people to expose the C of $ and that is a very good thing.

The information that she has posted here and in numerous other places has been a blessing and what she has had to put up with regarding OSA, David Miscavige, and the current members of the C of $ is probably more than most of us could stand.:yes:
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
I challenge you to show me somebody Karen has "victimized" by delivering Scientology.



http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/victim?show=0&t=1366144676

Can you demonstrate that these alleged victims were tricked into paying her money for auditing? Can you demonstrate that they did not receive the service they paid for or were unhappy with the results? (These are questions).

Where is your evidence? What is your evidence? (More questions).

Or is that really just your theoretical perspective - a personal belief system about Scientology that: all auditing victimizes people = Karen is auditing = Karen victimizes people? (Do not answer. This is a rhetorical question to express my personal evaluation of your position).

Where are the horror stories such as one sees on ESMB? (This is a question).

Note that these really are questions i.e. something I am actually asking you personally, Caroline, not something I am pretending to ask so that I can diss you.

You claim she is victimizing people. Prove it.

Otherwise, libel much.

This is what I said:

It is time for Karen to stop victimizing people, which she does by promoting and delivering Scientology

It doesn't take anything more than the links I have already provided to demonstrate that Karen promotes Scientology. Scientology was convicted of fraud in France. There have been numerous successful civil fraud claims against the Scientologists. Scientology is fraud. Fraud is victimization. Whether the Scientologists have acquired for themselves a ministerial exception to criminal fraud does not lessen the fraud, but could in fact magnify it.

By 1970, it was known that Scientology was a fraud. The Scientologists, of course, committed all sorts of crimes and immoralities to prevent their fellow Scientologists, and wogs, from acquiring and digesting this knowledge.

Judge Breckenridge said:
In 1970 a police agency of the French Government conducted an investigation into Scientology and concluded, "this sect, under the pretext of 'freeing humans' is nothing in reality but a vast enterprise to extract the maximum amount of money from its adepts by (use of) pseudo-scientific theories, by (use of) 'auditions' and 'stage settings' (lit. to 'create a theatrical scene') pushed to extremes (a machine to detect lies, its own particular phraseology . . ), to estrange adepts from their families and to exercise a kind of blackmail against persons who do not wish to continue with this sect." From the evidence presented to this court in 1984, at the very least, similar conclusions can be drawn. In addition to violating and abusing its own members civil rights, the organization over the years with its "Fair Game" doctrine has harassed and abused those persons not in the Church whom it perceives as enemies. The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder LRH. The evidence portrays a man who has been virtually a pathological liar when it comes to his history, background, and achievements. The writings and documents in evidence additionally reflect his egoism, greed, avarice, lust for power, and vindictiveness and aggressiveness against persons perceived by him to be disloyal or hostile. At the same time it appears that he is charismatic and highly capable of motivating, organizing, controlling, manipulating, and inspiring his adherents. He has been referred to during the trial as a "genius," a "revered person," a man who was "viewed by his followers in awe." Obviously, he is and has been a very complex person, and that complexity is further reflected in his alter ego, the Church of Scientology. Notwithstanding protestations to the contrary, this court is satisfied that LRH runs the Church in all ways through the Sea Organization, his role of Commodore, and the Commodore's Messengers. He has, of course, chosen to go into "seclusion," but he maintains contact and control through the top messengers. Seclusion has its light and dark side too. It adds to his mystique, and yet shields him from accountability and subpoena or service of summons.

From The Breckenridge Decision
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
This is what I said:



It doesn't take anything more than the links I have already provided to demonstrate that Karen promotes Scientology. Scientology was convicted of fraud in France. There have been numerous successful civil fraud claims against the Scientologists. Scientology is fraud. Fraud is victimization. Whether the Scientologists have acquired for themselves a ministerial exception to criminal fraud does not lessen the fraud, but could in fact magnify it.

By 1970, it was known that Scientology was a fraud. The Scientologists, of course, committed all sorts of crimes and immoralities to prevent their fellow Scientologists, and wogs, from acquiring and digesting this knowledge.

Name one person she has victimized. One.
 

NoName

A Girl Has No Name
It doesn't take anything more than the links I have already provided to demonstrate that Karen promotes Scientology. Scientology was convicted of fraud in France. There have been numerous successful civil fraud claims against the Scientologists. Scientology is fraud. Fraud is victimization. Whether the Scientologists have acquired for themselves a ministerial exception to criminal fraud does not lessen the fraud, but could in fact magnify it.

By 1970, it was known that Scientology was a fraud. The Scientologists, of course, committed all sorts of crimes and immoralities to prevent their fellow Scientologists, and wogs, from acquiring and digesting this knowledge.

This was covered when OSA trolled Karen on here a while back. This is Karen's reply:


I know that OSA is DYING to know why OT 8s show up at my door.
Messed up caved in "OT 8s" spinning from their latest FREEWINDS "auditing techniques"
I know that you are trying hard to find out what I do.
What do I do when the fucked up cases come pouring their hearts out ?
I am sure you would like to know.....
You were sent here to find out more ~~
That ad is there for a PURPOSE.

(snipped for brevity)

So, there you go.

Personally, I think Karen is more ethical (I mean that in both a Scn and wog sense) than most of what I've seen coming out of the Indie camp. I think it's pretty disgusting that a certain someone will spill the beans on what Tom Cruise said while not being audited while simultaneously congratulating himself for not spilling the beans on what Tom Cruise said while being audited. That sort of rationalizing will end in a pretty spectacular footbullet at some point, and I will be sure to have plenty of popcorn on hand when that happens.

Meanwhile, if you want to cover the history of Karen's auditing ad, and why I'm sick of hearing about it, here is a bit of light reading:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?28752-Derailment-snippage-(from-How-did-DM-assume-power)

Note that 5th Invader Force was doxed around page twentysomething of the thread and turned out to be an OSA operative. I'm not saying you're OSA, but I'm pointing out why there is a fair amount of eyerolling at your questions. This has been done to death.
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
This is what I said:



It doesn't take anything more than the links I have already provided to demonstrate that Karen promotes Scientology. Scientology was convicted of fraud in France. There have been numerous successful civil fraud claims against the Scientologists. Scientology is fraud. Fraud is victimization. Whether the Scientologists have acquired for themselves a ministerial exception to criminal fraud does not lessen the fraud, but could in fact magnify it.

By 1970, it was known that Scientology was a fraud. The Scientologists, of course, committed all sorts of crimes and immoralities to prevent their fellow Scientologists, and wogs, from acquiring and digesting this knowledge.

IMO, you should tailor some of your posts to have a somewhat different criticism for the Freezone/Indies (not official CofS).
Just a suggestion. :confused2:
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
Yes, this old war/old wounds stuff reminds me of those soldiers who didn't hear about the end of the war, they were tucked away in their jungle foxholes still thinking the war was underway and fighting against imagined enemies long after the rest of the world had moved on. It's sad, really.

Meanwhile, back in present time, there is a whole other war going on. It's being waged against the current and continuing crimes and abuses of today's Church Of Scientology. More power to those who combat it. :)
 

NoName

A Girl Has No Name
Name one person she has victimized. One.

Not only that - I think it's important to know that the fucked up OT8's mentioned above are likely unwilling to go get professional help due to fear indoctrination against mainstream mental health care by the cult. So while I agree with Caroline that all flavors of Scn are a fraud, I think Karen fills an important need. She helps people who have been seriously fucked up by the cult but wouldn't get any other form of help. I don't see how that is victimizing or exploiting anyone.
 
Top