SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fran 82

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Francisco 1982

PDF download: http://www.mediafire.com/?jlrfpa7sl136n0r

The text was posted earlier on ESMB.

SO ED 2104 Int was identified as Exhibit EEEE at trial in Armstrong 1. The complete document includes the following chart attachments:

ex-EEEE-0042.jpg


ex-EEEE-0043.jpg


ex-EEEE-0044.jpg


SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Francisco 1982 said:
CMDR. DAVID MISCAVIGE: We're going to be briefing you on several changes that have occurred within the Church in the last nine months; legally and corporately as well as organizationally.

AUDIENCE: (Clapping.)

Most of you are probably familiar with what a trademark is but perhaps, for our purposes, a small explanation might be in order.

This briefing pertains to how these changes apply to you. The first thing you're going to hear about is trademarks and copyrights; what they're all about is and how they apply to you. First person I'm going to introduce is an Attorney, his name is Larry Heller and he is going to explain this to you. Mr. Heller?

LARRY HELLER, CHURCH ATTORNEY: A trademark is a symbol which is held out to the public representing to that public a certain quality of product or service which, when the public buys under that trademark, it's assured of getting. To give you a very simple example.

Some of you might have had a glass or a bottle of Coca-Cola with your lunch today. Hypothetically, one or two of you might be in Hong Kong tomorrow and have a bottle of Coca-Cola with your lunch as well. That Coke is going to taste exactly the same tomorrow when you get to Hong Kong as the bottle of Coke that you opened up today. As long as it has that Coca-Cola symbol on it, comes in that very distinctive bottle; that means that you're going to get a certain mixture of ingredients, a certain effervescence. Scientology, as all of you know, also has trademarks. Most of you are familiar with what those trademarks are. They relate to Dianetics, they relate to Scientology, they relate to L. Ron Hubbard. Those trademarks, just like the Coca-Cola trademarks, represents a symbol which assures the public of a certain quality of service which they are going to receive if they purchase something or receive services under that trademark.

All of the Scientology/Dianetics trademarks were previously owned by L. Ron Hubbard. L. Ron Hubbard has donated the vast majority of those to a corporation which some of you have probably heard of, by the name of Religious Technology Center. In donating those trademarks, L. Ron Hubbard imposed the duty on Religious Technology Center (RTC) of assuring that the source of those trademarks, the technology that those trademarks represent, are given and disseminated to the public in the way that he formulated those trademarks. It's what you know as being on Source, applying tech.

The duty imposed upon RTC to properly police those trademarks, to assure that Source is applied in their use by anyone to whom RTC sub-licenses them, is not only a very heavy spiritual burden but is, well, a great legal duty. RTC is legally under a duty to assure that anyone it permits to use these trademarks utilizes them according to Source as formulated by L. Ron Hubbard.

If there in a suspension after that arbitration, that award suspending your use of the trademark will be taken into a court of law. It will there be made into a lawful judgement of that United States Court. An infringement upon that judgement, specifically the use of the particular trademarks after they've been withdrawn from you subjects you to civil and criminal liability. You may be liable for contempt of court. Disobeying a court order. Violation of that court order suspending or withdrawing use by the mission of that trademark, becomes punishable by the imposition of a fine or a jail sentence. If there should thereafter be a continuation by you of any Scientology trademarks, application will be made to the District Attorney or whatever legal official is empowered to prosecute criminal acts resulting in a possible criminal conviction for an unfair business practice. You will then be fined or thrown into jail.

As an aside, this would also be true it a previously unlicensed person or corporation continued to use the trademarks after being told to cease and desist by RTC, the rightful trademark owner. It is also true that using the materials of Dianetics and Scientology but calling it something else is actionable under criminal law as a violation of trademarks and copyrights.

My law firm has been instructed to make sure that if there is in fact an unauthorized use of any of these trademarks, if it is determined that the mark was not used in accordance with Source, that we enforce RTC's rights which I've Just described to you, throughout the judicial procedure to get a Superior Court or US Court judgement and then enforce that judgement through contempt and criminal proceedings.

AUDIENCE: (Clapping.)

Thank you.

CMDR. DAVID MISCAVIGE: Scientology will go as far as it works, and when it is not applied correctly (out-tech), that's a violation of trademarks. This is a very serious matter.

Not in Texas apparently. :batseyelashes:
 
Last edited:

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

A bit more from the same DM quote:

SO ED 7 Nov 1982 said:
CMDR. DAVID MISCAVIGE: Scientology will go as far as it works, and when it is not applied correctly (out-tech), that's a violation of trademarks. This is a very serious matter.

Earlier this evening both Kingsley Wimbush and Dean Stokes were here. They have both now been declared, and we are pursuing criminal charges against them. They have both been delivering their own squirrel tech, while calling it Scientology. Kingsley Wimbush's "dinging process" is completely squirrel. You won't find it in any tech, yet he has been calling it Scientology. That's a violation of trademark laws and he now faces some serious charges for this crime.

DM, Rathbun, Rinder and their various OSA PRs and Legal personnel know and apply Hubbard's dinging process, obviously.

Hubbard said:
A PR, to get cooperation, would have to be forwarding some agreed-upon purpose.

Suppose that a PR, representing his client, was trying to work with a group of execs who had no purpose or (as in out-ethics scenes) had an entirely different purpose. It would be worse than grim-the PR would have to fight every inch of the way. There would be no money, no personnel, no volunteers-wow!

So one comes down to an overriding rule for PRs:

THE FIRST STEP IN ANY PR CAMPAIGN IS TO DING IN THE PURPOSE OF THE CAMPAIGN.

Ding” means to repeat insistently. The words “ding in” are used advisedly.

The PR does not care if the targets (people) from whom he is requesting co-operation have any purpose at all.

There are various mechanisms that can be used. When one announces a very good and worthwhile purpose, the targets can feel ashamed or guilty for not having it and can be made to agree and cooperate out of a fear they will be exposed as anti-social or a pariah.

So the PR does not really care whether they really believe in that purpose. If it is a very good and needed one, even the off-purpose and out-ethics cats have to give at least surface or public agreement to it. Thus we use the words “ding in.”

If one studies this and works out his own examples, one can see that successful campaigns all begin with a stellar, well-stated purpose. Then one uses this, repeating it often, to get done the targets that will accomplish it.

Document studied on Confidential DSA Investigations Officer Full Hat (Section S, #4). PDF format.

A bit more about what DM apparently found so serious about Kingsley Wimbush's [STRIKE]power push[/STRIKE] Responsibility of Leader application:

Rathbun said:
A couple of Mission Holders, most notably one Kingsley Wimbush, used Responsibilities of Leaders as an integral part of a process called ”De-dinging.” Wimbush would gather staff and public at the end of the evening in the course room of his mission. He would have them read The Responsibilities of Leaders. He would then insist that properly interpretted the policy required all of those who depended upon his “power” (all staff and public) to flow “power” to Wimbush. He told them that the power flow he desired was money, and he’d pressure the staff and public to fill his hat with bills, the larger the denominations the better.

http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2010/11/02/worse-than-fair-game/

LOL <cringe>
 

Gib

Crusader
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

A bit more from the same DM quote:



DM, Rathbun, Rinder and their various OSA PRs and Legal personnel know and apply Hubbard's dinging process, obviously.



A bit more about what DM apparently found so serious about Kingsley Wimbush's [STRIKE]power push[/STRIKE] Responsibility of Leader application:

Originally Posted by Rathbun
A couple of Mission Holders, most notably one Kingsley Wimbush, used Responsibilities of Leaders as an integral part of a process called ”De-dinging.” Wimbush would gather staff and public at the end of the evening in the course room of his mission. He would have them read The Responsibilities of Leaders. He would then insist that properly interpretted the policy required all of those who depended upon his “power” (all staff and public) to flow “power” to Wimbush. He told them that the power flow he desired was money, and he’d pressure the staff and public to fill his hat with bills, the larger the denominations the better.

http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/201...han-fair-game/



LOL <cringe>






So DM is essentially doing the same thing, de-Dinging, with Public in the Ideal Org campaign and the new status's of IAS membership, ie humanitarian, patron,, org builder, etc.
 
Last edited:

cakemaker

Patron Meritorious
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

A bit more from the same DM quote:

Quote Originally Posted by SO ED 7 Nov 1982
CMDR. DAVID MISCAVIGE: Scientology will go as far as it works, and when it is not applied correctly (out-tech), that's a violation of trademarks. This is a very serious matter.

Earlier this evening both Kingsley Wimbush and Dean Stokes were here. They have both now been declared, and we are pursuing criminal charges against them.


Dean Stokes was the mission holder of the Southwest Mission in Dallas. And I thought Miscavige and RTC had never had any business in Texas? :eyeroll:

The "ding in" referenced in the PR quote is completely different than "dedinging". Dedinging was a procedure invented by Kingsley Wimbush in some bizarre interpretation of the issue "Responsibilties of Leaders". Apples and oranges.
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

So DM is essentially doing the same thing, de-Dinging, with Public in the Ideal Org campaign and the new status's of IAS membership, ie humanitarian, patron,, org builder, etc.

I think you accidentally misquoted me, Gib. I didn't say that.

De-dinging in the example you give doesn't imply an interruption of the flow of power. DM is already in control there. De-dinging in the Wimbush example apparently included grabbing the power/money/assets and resources of the cult leader, with all the benefits and supply. It was evidently an unsuccessful power push, and seen as such, in the context of "HCO PL Responsibility of Leaders."

Rathbun and the Indies have apparently been doing dinging processes for years. But have they also been de-dinging? I guess we'd need to know whether the apostates they process had lost their DMentia before exposure to the Indies' black PR campaign on DM, or whether their campaign is helping to pull them out of Miscavige's control.

I think dinging and de-dinging are both dingy, and both do a disservice to the people affected. It's an aspect of standard Scientology brainwash that deserves more public attention and understanding.
 

Idle Morgue

Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

The present time Bridge FLOW by David Miss Cabbage:

images


images
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

Dean Stokes was the mission holder of the Southwest Mission in Dallas. And I thought Miscavige and RTC had never had any business in Texas? :eyeroll:

The "ding in" referenced in the PR quote is completely different than "dedinging". Dedinging was a procedure invented by Kingsley Wimbush in some bizarre interpretation of the issue "Responsibilties of Leaders". Apples and oranges.

Interesting indeed about Dean Stokes and the Southwest Mission. Thanks, cakemaker.

Dean Stokes' SP declare: http://www.holysmoke.org/mo/dean-stokes-sp-declare.htm

Kingsley and Coralie Wimbush SP declare: http://www.holysmoke.org/mo/wimbush-sp-declares.htm
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

The present time Bridge FLOW by David Miss Cabbage:

images


images

Would you prefer that the Bridge flow in Corporate Scientology increase or decrease, Idle Morgue? I'm asking because I've seen where Scientologists and some of their supporters complain about DM's downstats and/or ridicule him for it. As for me, I'd be glad if those kind of stats are going down, if that's what they're doing.
 

Gib

Crusader
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

I think you accidentally misquoted me, Gib. I didn't say that.

De-dinging in the example you give doesn't imply an interruption of the flow of power. DM is already in control there. De-dinging in the Wimbush example apparently included grabbing the power/money/assets and resources of the cult leader, with all the benefits and supply. It was evidently an unsuccessful power push, and seen as such, in the context of "HCO PL Responsibility of Leaders."

Rathbun and the Indies have apparently been doing dinging processes for years. But have they also been de-dinging? I guess we'd need to know whether the apostates they process had lost their DMentia before exposure to the Indies' black PR campaign on DM, or whether their campaign is helping to pull them out of Miscavige's control.

I think dinging and de-dinging are both dingy, and both do a disservice to the people affected. It's an aspect of standard Scientology brainwash that deserves more public attention and understanding.

No problem Caroline. I agree.

I was just kind of associating the de-dinging with the present public. I understand dinging and de-dinging otherwise.
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

No problem Caroline. I agree.

I was just kind of associating the de-dinging with the present public. I understand dinging and de-dinging otherwise.

No problem, but sorry, I still don't quite get what your thought was. And I'd like to, if possible. For example, how is DM de-dinging the present public? What is he doing or saying that amounts to de-dinging?
 

Gib

Crusader
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

No problem, but sorry, I still don't quite get what your thought was. And I'd like to, if possible. For example, how is DM de-dinging the present public? What is he doing or saying that amounts to de-dinging?

well, in a round about way DM is getting public to flow power (money) to him by getting public donating to the ideal orgs, IAS, CCHR, and other front groups, as opposed to their Bridges (money for auditing & processing).

That's all the point I was trying to make.

As I recall, one of DM's stat's is money to reserves, if I remember correctly from reading on Marty's blog many moons ago.
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

well, in a round about way DM is getting public to flow power (money) to him by getting public donating to the ideal orgs, IAS, CCHR, and other front groups, as opposed to their Bridges (money for auditing & processing).

That's all the point I was trying to make.

As I recall, one of DM's stat's is money to reserves, if I remember correctly from reading on Marty's blog many moons ago.

Okay, thanks, Gib. I'd think that would be a very serious matter between DM and the corporation he runs. (Who would have that kind of evidence?) Interestingly, Lyman Spurlock accused Bob Thomas of trying something similar.

SO ED 7 Nov 1982 said:
WARRANT OFFICER LYMAN SPURLOCK: Bob Thomas, when he was DG US [Deputy Guardian US] had his personal motives, he was going to take over the Church He figured, Oh, I'll lump everything together in this one corporation and I'll set myself up head of this corporation. Then I'll take over, for my own personal gain. It was not the best intentioned plan.

SO ED 7 Nov 1982
 

Gib

Crusader
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

Okay, thanks, Gib. I'd think that would be a very serious matter between DM and the corporation he runs. (Who would have that kind of evidence?) Interestingly, Lyman Spurlock accused Bob Thomas of trying something similar.

The first red above, don't know.

Second red above, I couldn't find that. Please point it out.

I got in, in 1987 or so, I was just a public more or less, and did a staff contract for 5 years.

what I find interesting in that MH conference, which I read last year for the first time, is this:

"WARRANT OFFICER LYMAN SPURLOCK:
Okay. Prior to the end of 1981, a few of us got together and took a look at the corporate structure of the Church with the view in mind of making it more defensible and more regular, and to make an overall improvement."

So my questions are this:

1. a few of us got together. Who is a few of us? And does that include LRH?

2. with the view in mind of making it more defensible. Like wow man. What does that mean? Like if scientology is about making OT's and LRH was an OT, why is this needed from a legal standpoint? I thought OT's can handle thought, matter, energy, space and time. Why the legal?

These questions from me when I was a true believer, when I read the MH conference last year.
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

The first red above, don't know.

Second red above, I couldn't find that. Please point it out.

Posted in my last post ^. Spurlock accused Bob Thomas of planning, for personal motives and gain, to set himself up as the head of "this corporation."

I got in, in 1987 or so, I was just a public more or less, and did a staff contract for 5 years.

what I find interesting in that MH conference, which I read last year for the first time, is this:

"WARRANT OFFICER LYMAN SPURLOCK:
Okay. Prior to the end of 1981, a few of us got together and took a look at the corporate structure of the Church with the view in mind of making it more defensible and more regular, and to make an overall improvement."

So my questions are this:

1. a few of us got together. Who is a few of us? And does that include LRH?

2. with the view in mind of making it more defensible. Like wow man. What does that mean? Like if scientology is about making OT's and LRH was an OT, why is this needed from a legal standpoint? I thought OT's can handle thought, matter, energy, space and time. Why the legal?

These questions from me when I was a true believer, when I read the MH conference last year.

Pretty good questions for a true believer to ask. Not many of us are so OT that we require an international intelligence service to defend and protect us, as Hubbard required in his life, and as DM apparently requires.
 

phenomanon

Canyon
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

Interesting indeed about Dean Stokes and the Southwest Mission. Thanks, cakemaker.

Dean Stokes' SP declare: http://www.holysmoke.org/mo/dean-stokes-sp-declare.htm

Kingsley and Coralie Wimbush SP declare: http://www.holysmoke.org/mo/wimbush-sp-declares.htm

Thanks for including my (Ladayla) message after the copy of Dean's declare.
Dean was special in my life, and I will always honor him as a Kindred Spirit.

phenomanon aka challenge aka ladayla

If you wonder at the various 'nicks', two of them were coined on this board after my inability to master the computer. lol.
 

cakemaker

Patron Meritorious
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

Thanks for including my (Ladayla) message after the copy of Dean's declare.
Dean was special in my life, and I will always honor him as a Kindred Spirit.

phenomanon aka challenge aka ladayla

If you wonder at the various 'nicks', two of them were coined on this board after my inability to master the computer. lol.

Has Dean left the building?
 

Caroline

Patron Meritorious
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

Thanks for including my (Ladayla) message after the copy of Dean's declare.
Dean was special in my life, and I will always honor him as a Kindred Spirit.

phenomanon aka challenge aka ladayla

If you wonder at the various 'nicks', two of them were coined on this board after my inability to master the computer. lol.

You're welcome phenomanon. I think you're doing just fine with the computer. :wink:

I didn't know Dean Stokes, or Kingsley Wimbush for that matter, but I remember the Mission Holder's conference and this SO ED. I was in the Sea Org at AOLA when it came out.
 

phenomanon

Canyon
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

You're welcome phenomanon. I think you're doing just fine with the computer. :wink:

I didn't know Dean Stokes, or Kingsley Wimbush for that matter, but I remember the Mission Holder's conference and this SO ED. I was in the Sea Org at AOLA when it came out.


I am not intuitive with the computer. Thank you. It means a lot from you. I have heard that you are awesome as a webpage designer.

I was auditing in AOLA's HGC When the MHC was held. I couldn't believe it. I viewed the destruction of the Mission system a really stupid mistake.
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
Re: SO ED 7 Nov 1982 The Flow Up The Bridge The US Mission Holders Conference San Fra

I am not intuitive with the computer. Thank you. It means a lot from you. I have heard that you are awesome as a webpage designer.

I was auditing in AOLA's HGC When the MHC was held. I couldn't believe it. I viewed the destruction of the Mission system a really stupid mistake.

Over the long term, the destruction of the Mission network resulted in the collapse of Scn stats.

Over the short term, it allowed Hubbard to loot the assets of the Mission network.

Hubbard was not somebody who was focused on the long term. He kept people focused on "next Thursday at 2:00". He was not interested in what might happen to Scn after he was gone.
 
Top