Speculations on the IRS Takeover of the CoS

Gadfly

Crusader
I disagree on that somehow. While Korzybski defined sanity, and infinity valued logic, and all the other terms you state, the very specific definitions on outpoints as far as I know are Hubbards, such as added time, etc.. and that´s the true value of data series.

We shouldn´t go from one extreme to credit everything to Hubbard and then to discredit everything from him. He added and developed on existing data, and was able to gather workable systems and digest them easily for the layman, wether he did it for a hidden agenda, doesn´t change the fact, that there is many workable parts and pieces of tech.

Same on Dianectis, true many ideas are to be found in abreactive therapy, here and there. But Dianetics IS a workable therapy, no doubt.

I agree that Hubbard did delineate the various "outpoints" and "pluspoints".

Also agree that one of Hubbard's "best" abilities was in taking a larger often confusing subject or field, sifting out the fundamentals, and communicating clearly in a way others could easily understand. He sure did that with the concept of "static" (for me, and others I know). But, he also usually ADDED his own spin to it, and included "additives" or distortions of his own.

But, for me, I obtained MUCH more value reading Hayakawa's book, Language in Thought in Action, than I ever got from the "Data Series". I reiterate, Hubbard renders the subject quite unworkable for most people, because of his distortions and additives stemming from the notion of an "ideal scene". He confuses in what way any person should "grade data". I ofen ran across this talking to evaluators at Flag and INT Mgmt (people USING the Data Series on their post).

The concepts of "levels of abstraction", "the map is not the territory", "words are NOT objects", and "no thing exists by itself, but instead in a context of relationships" had amazing benefits for me in sorting out my own "conceptual universe of meaning and significance". These ideas opened up doors of self-awareness, that far over-shadowed anything I ever obtained from the ideas in the Data Series. Hubbard LEFT OUT so much of value, and as usual, seems to only have written up for others what was useful to HIM.

The single concept of "the map is not the territory", when pushed to the limits of self-knowledge and self-examination, did FAR more for me than everything else I ever studied and "applied" in Scientology. I am being entirely honest. And, I can guarantee, that I did not take my Scn studies lightly. In my experience, most people are entirely wrapped up, at an effect sort of way, in their own created mental world of meaning, definitions, significances, associations, and relationships between these things. Most people DO confuse the map with the territory, terribly and incessantly, forever viewing reality and experience through a universe of WORDS and significances. Hubbard NEVER brings out the self-awareness aspect of general semantics, where a person can become AWARE of his or her own levels of abstraction, to the great benefit of the person. I wonder why that was? Probably, because it helps any person become free of entrapping beliefs and notions. Scientology doesn't bring about "self-awareness", as it discourages "introversion" in all forms, but instead enables the creation of a person, quite unwilling to examine self in any questioning manner, with a trumped up false sense of artificial "certainty".

It is quite vital to examine Huddard from the viewpoint of, "what did he leave out"? WHY did he leave THAT out? Hubbard studied many things, and he was a very bright guy, BUT having studied some of his sources myself, it is obvious to me that he INTENTIONALLY left out things of GREAT value, again, seemingly for his OWN (selfish, ego, power) PURPOSES.

In an interesting sort of way, Hubbard often breathed sense and understanding into certain areas, but for me, I found MUCH value in going back to THOSE original areas, reviewing the subject with the added assistance of Hubbard's simplifications in the area, and then largely abandoning Hubbard's weasely versions, and keeping the EXPANDED versions of the orignal subjects I know had.

A perfect example is the concept of the "static", and how it creates via considerations and postulates. THAT idea simplifed a great deal for me in the area of Hindu thought. After going back and reading some of that stuff, it now makes MUCH more sense, and I enjoy it more, BUT I have largely abandoned the details Hubbard worked out in Scientology. Hubbard made my perception and experience of life richer, as have MANY people, but for me he now remains as only a VERY SMALL part of my own influences.
 
Last edited:

Gadfly

Crusader
I agree that Scientology wouldn´t be the same without Korzybski. For me the 2 major influences are Crowley and Korzybski, to a big extent.

I can most certainly agree with that! If an intelligent person took the time to study up on Crowley and Korzybski, I suppose it would be amazing to examine how Hubbard took, altered, and added to various information in the subjects of these two people. Also though, I think Hubbard took from the wider field of the "occult" (not at all a bad thing to me, as I very much have a strong affnity for that realm of thought); not necessarily solely or even primarily from Crowley. And, I see that Hubbard used occult ideas, more for himself, than in passing them onto others within the subject of Scientology. Such is so with affirmations, as a way to change considerations on a subconscious level. He practiced THAT, but he never passed on that within his created subject that he gave to others. I wonder how many other ideas HE USED himself, obviously because he thought that they had value, yet failed to pass along to others to use? Again, I wonder why THAT is or was?
 

paul.spiritualquest

Patron with Honors
Peace making on the crossfire

Me and Mike made peace about the "crossfire" on this thread.

He called me an idiot, and I called him a nazi. :ohmy: We agreed it is the other way round, he is the idiot and i´m the nazi, and it was all settled. :roflmao:

Now seriously, we are somehow pals and it is good so, to have a clash from time to time.

In short, I will take this discussion on the IRS shit soon so hopefully we can keep discussing about it in a more "civilized" way.
:woohoo:
 

Blue Spirit

Silver Meritorious Patron
A Few Comments

Thread is too long. TL-DR.

LRH wrote in 1965 what would happen to the CO$.

Meade Emory hatched the plot to match that in 1970.

LRH's late will was actually written the same night he died, while too

tranquilized to have done it or signed it. He would not take his family out. Too obvious.

By 30 Nov.93 all of the copyrights to LRH's work were owned by the simple

California corporation, The Church of Spiritual Technology which is nothing

more or less than a front group of Scientology's chief enemy, the IRS. I have photos of their address.

Miscavige, Starkey, and Spurlock are all traitors and criminals of the highest order.

The CO$ was given away cheap, for a tax exemption only ! INSANE.:angry:

LRH was effectively Psychotic sometime before he died, so was easily taken advantage of.

LRH is still around and I know 3 persons who have had recent contact.

He knows what has happening to the CO$ and validates the "Freezone" now and early in the 1950's.

See Valerie Stanfield's talk at the Pasadena Freezone Conference.

LRH still has case of a particular nature, understood and described to me.

He is still a Big Being. From my viewpoint he isn't doing all that is needed and is waiting for help.

Both he and Alan Walter both died while maintaining domineering personalities

which I consider detrimental to future cooperation and tech ideal scenes.


Back to the IRS. They own and run Scientology covertly through their puppet

Mr. David Miscavige. They are quite happy with his rather complete Sabotage

of the subject, and so I doubt that they will come down on Scientology now.

LRH resisted much too hard his enemies and so pulled them in, closing terminals to the degree that they took over, as he

predicted in 1965. I've posted that quote, and am too tired to find it again now.

LRH does have a good side which has benefited me somewhat directly.

I do not worship him, and in fact find his Ethics from his life sadly disgusting,

and if the occasion arises will tell him so. He will not like that. Too bad.
 

Blue Spirit

Silver Meritorious Patron
Moot Point

I've previously posted Larry's affidavit for all to use.

You read it?

It is very much a MOOT point how many corporations there are in the

Scientology structure and what there stated purposes are AND what Larry

Brennan says about them when in fact they are ALL run dictatorially by one

puppet dictator and his puppet string puller as Miscavige / IRS !

Larry Brennan is a nice guy, but from looking at him, not quite bright.

I do wish you guys would shift gears into high on your confront of Evil.

WAKE UP. :angry: I'm lonely ! :duh::grouch:
 

Lovinglife625

Patron with Honors
It is very much a MOOT point how many corporations there are in the

Scientology structure and what there stated purposes are AND what Larry

Brennan says about them when in fact they are ALL run dictatorially by one

puppet dictator and his puppet string puller as Miscavige / IRS !

Larry Brennan is a nice guy, but from looking at him, not quite bright.

I do wish you guys would shift gears into high on your confront of Evil.

WAKE UP. :angry: I'm lonely ! :duh::grouch:

LOL you're probably right about me being "not quite bright" given all that I have done to back up people and an organization that was so destructive without even realizing it.

As regards some of your notes from the posting just above this one I'd like to comment on a few in an effort to ensure other readers are not misled by what you say with respect to things with which I was directly involved:

“Meade Emory hatched the plot to match that in 1970”.

- LOL Try Meade being one of the attorneys substantially helping with the corporate reorg some 11 years after the time you listed.


“By 30 Nov.93 all of the copyrights to LRH's work were owned by the simple California corporation, The Church of Spiritual Technology”

-LOL where did you think the copyrights were going to go if not some non profit corporation or trust? To you? To “Next lifetime Hubbard”? To Xenu? Who?? If any live people were qualified it would have been MarySue and their kids that should have had rights to the intellectual property rights.


“which is nothing more or less than a front group of Scientology's chief enemy, the IRS”.

- completely unfounded poppycock. The IRS has and had ZERO interest in owning the intellectual rights. They had no love of scientology at all nor any desire for the tech. I know as I was the only staff member back then to meet with the IRS (BTW with Meade Emory who opened the door for me to meet them due to his past positions and thus contacts within the IRS). Lurk more if you’d actually like to see this explained in more detail.

If you really want to know how and why the corporate reorg happened the way it did, read my free ebook on my blogspot, linked to below. If you don't agree with it that is your right but I offer it to you in an attempt to help you see what the real scene is and was.


“LRH was effectively Psychotic sometime before he died, so was easily taken advantage of”.

- Now THAT is something with which I am in complete agreement with you FWIW


“LRH is still around and I know 3 persons who have had recent contact.

He knows what has happening to the CO$ and validates the "Freezone" now and early in the 1950's.

See Valerie Stanfield's talk at the Pasadena Freezone Conference.

LRH still has case of a particular nature, understood and described to me.

He is still a Big Being. From my viewpoint he isn't doing all that is needed and is waiting for help”.

- And I’m the “not quite bright” one?? LOL As someone who has spent years getting orders from Hubbard seeing his constant greed, lies and insanity I’d like to ask you to please tell him not to hold his breath for any more help this time around. Oh and good luck with your views. As long as you do not practice any of the MANY LRH policies and other writings involving illegal practice of medicine/psychology, fraud, fair game, lying, destroying families, financially destroying others, etc. I sincerely wish you well and certainly have no intentions of interfering with what you do.

But you know, on a serious note, this is your one quote that most got my attention:
I do wish you guys would shift gears into high on your confront of Evil.

You know, despite the fact that I was not bright enough to see through the scams and thus ended up helping a fraud-based organization cover up its misdeeds through religious cloaking and corporate veils, the thing I will most remember as being something I did object to was constant quotes from Miscavige and others about raising ones' confront of evil.

They constantly justified the most awful human rights abuses, family destructions and just plain cruelty as being a "confront of evil" and that people who would not condone abuses and mistreatments simply had a poor confront of evil. I called that bullshit then and would not abuse others. Hell I even refused to spit on busted staff when LRH himself gave us WDC members orders to do so. Screw that BS about "confront of evil". The real evil is found in human rights abuses, the destruction of family and people, the demand of money for "enlightenment", the hard selling of false gain and so much more that was part of the very fabric of organized scientology.

What REALLY took confront ASAIC is those people who loved and protected their children and other loved ones and who refused to abuse others despite constant pressure to do so. THAT to me is the type of confront needed not some delusional "confront" of non existant plots by government agencies and individuals who had zero value in "scientology technology" and no desire to run it.

Just a thought.

Peace.
 

rhill

Patron with Honors
In short, I will take this discussion on the IRS shit soon so hopefully we can keep discussing about it in a more "civilized" way.

L. Ron Hubbard's doctrines, policies, dictates were all written before the IRS granted tax-exempt status to the Church of Scientology.
 

Zinjifar

Silver Meritorious Sponsor
L. Ron Hubbard's doctrines, policies, dictates were all written before the IRS granted tax-exempt status to the Church of Scientology.

And, if the IRS were running things, they would have been dumped. If *anyone* but a Scientologist was running Scientology they would be dumped.

Zinj
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
I can help just a little

Let´s speculate a bit here on WHY and HOW did the IRS take over the management and financial structure of the Church of Scientology

<..........Snip........>

It´s Board Members, are IRS "wog" lawyers. So that means the Church of Scientology is run by ex-IRS officials. Isn´t that weird?

Who knew Starkey? What can you tell about him? What´s his post now?

Could DM just be a plant of some kind? The awl is an old illuminati sign, meaning wisdom, the 2 eyes of an awl...

I know a little about the two above points. On the Board Member thing, I think you are jumping to conclusions when you say, "It's Board Members, are IRS "wog" lawyers. So that means the Church of Scientology is run by ex-IRS officials.

Your paragraph is just not true. First of all, I believe that there are 6 Board members, 3 Scientologists and 3 non Scientologists so you are not accurate when you infer that all its Board members are "wogs". Next you infer that all are IRS lawyers. Two of the lawyers are in private practice, Sherman Lenske and his son Sherman Lenske, Jr. Neither of them was ever with the IRS. BTW, I knew Sherman Lenske at school at U.C.L.A.. I was pledging a fraternity there, Tau Delta Phi, and he was an active member at the time, 1959-1960 school year. The third non Scientology Board member is Meade Emery, an attorney and a former IRS co Commisioner. So only 1 of 6 Board members is both and attorney and an ex Scientologist whereas if what you wrote above is accepted literally one would conclude that all 6 Board Members are IRS "wog" lawyers. Also part of the function of having three non Scientology lawyers on the Board is so that they can be the agents of the corporation for the receipt of and response to subpoenas as well as receiving and filling out all ordinary Corporate legal forms I think you owe to other board members to sort out your facts better before posting them.

As to Norman Starkey, I did have some experience with him since he was Captain on the Apollo when I was there. He was a perfect Sea Org member, tough, firm and harsh and he toed the party line very strictly and without flinching. My experience with him was as follows:
1. On my first day at the Apollo, I was assigned a post in Tresury to make phone calls on the telephone in Portugual to get 3 prices for everything which the Apollo had to buy for that particular week. I did not speak a word of Portuguese plus there was no hat write up for the post. I tried making the phone calls and nobody understood a word I was saying and just hung up on me. I complained to an officer who sat near me, John Braggin, that I could not do this post and he went and got Captain Starkey.

I explained the obvious to Starkey and he had no sympathy for what I said. He told me that a Sea Org member was expected to do any job he was assigned. I asked him to show me how it was done. He picked up the phone and yelled into the receiver, Yachte' Apollo here, Yachte' Apollo here, Englis, Englis! After perhaps 30 seconds of yelling this into the phone, the operator ran and got someone who spoke English and Starkey handed me the phone. I got some prices and then hung up. On my next call, I tried to yell the same words that he used over and over into the phone and over and over the operators would hang up on me. I did not have nearly as much intention as Starkey did. The next day I was given a new post.

2. After a couple of days aboard we put to sea and within minutes I started getting seasick. I was nauseous and couldn't work, I felt like vomiting and sat down on the deck leaning against a bulkhead. Starkey came by and made me get back to work, in a minute or two I started throwing up all over the deck. Starkey ordered me down to the berthing area. I went down there and fell asleep. When I woke up I was no longer sea sick and went back up on deck and was able to continue my deck duties even though the ship was at sea.

3. One day Starkey critiqued something I was doing and I muttered under my breath, "I am probably the world's worst sailor." Starkey asked, "What was that you just said." I realized I better shut up while I was still ahead and answered him that it was nothing, just a minor cuss word. Starkey told me to repeat what I said and I told him it would be better if I didn't so he then ordered me to repeat it and so I did. He just shook his head and told me that with an attitude like that, I would not last very long on the ship and would soon be offloaded. He told me that for my own good, I needed to shape up and quit being a candy-ass.

Summary of Starkey - He did his job, he was never sympathetic nor showed any real care to the rank and file. He had a job to do and he did it. I can't really fault him for doing his job and being tough about it. That's the way he was paid to be and he did a service and did it well. I've seen much worse excuses for human beings than him. He was predictable and consistent and in a Captain those were good traits.
Lakey
 
Last edited:

Lovinglife625

Patron with Honors
Oh what the heck.

Since there have been so many threads on different forums about CST and the IRS, etc., I thought I would write a posting that goes into more detail of what was behind the formation of CST in the hopes that people will understand it better and thus deal with it better.

So here's a link to the posting I just did.

Warning it is long and boring. But it might help:

http://exscnforum.com/index.php/church-spiritual-technology-little-background-t114.html
 

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
Oh what the heck.

Since there have been so many threads on different forums about CST and the IRS, etc., I thought I would write a posting that goes into more detail of what was behind the formation of CST in the hopes that people will understand it better and thus deal with it better.

So here's a link to the posting I just did.

Warning it is long and boring. But it might help:

http://exscnforum.com/index.php/church-spiritual-technology-little-background-t114.html

Larry,
You were so gratious in your previous reply here, considering how Blue Spirit mocked you, made outragious claims without any substantiation. :thumbsup: to you for being a thorough and genuine good guy.

As always, I am grateful that you have written your ebook and have posted what you know from having been in the thick of things, an eye witness to matters at the time. It cleared up alot of misunderstanding I had and put things in perspective, which I think was your intent in the first place, lol!

Yes, it's a pain in the butt having to feel redundant by posting links to what is already been said but it' clear on this thread that some people have not done their research before they spoke up ( which DullOldFart pointed out on page one!) and this post above is necessary. Thanks for posting on this thread.

Mary McConnell
 

thefiredragon

Patron Meritorious
Let´s speculate a bit here on WHY and HOW did the IRS take over the management and financial structure of the Church of Scientology

The key data are:

1. LRH signed his new last will just one day before dying.
2. He was found with Vistaril, a psych drug in his body, by his coroner report.
3. He had signed a renunciation to be made an autopsy due to religious reason.
4. He was incinerated on the weekend, when there normally wouldn´t be any funerary service in the town.
5. His body was not to be left alone a single minute, as state by his lawyer Collier.
6. In his former last will he left many more funds to his family, leaving it all in this new last will to the Church.
7. The people close to him at his death or at the event, the Broekers are fully out of sight, so is Starkey, his trustee, as Collier, only DM being visible.
8. It contradicts his last order where he name the Brokers Loyal Officers, but here he names Starkey his trustee.
9. He left no note, although LRH was known for compulsively putting everything in writing.
10. LRH hated the IRS and fled from it all his life. He talked badly about the taxman. In the New Basic Edition, in the Ethics book, the derogatory statement about taxmen was changed! (So was his mention of Black Dianetics in the PDC)
11. The Church changed completely in their Ethics departments, and pcs were "prosecuted" internally to be completely complying with tax law, after the 1993 takeover. Funny no? The Way to Happiness was used for reference to that to comply with the laws of your country, though it is NOT Church material, as stated otherwise, but secular material...
12. After the RTC takeover, the church had a major exodus of members into the independent field, and franchises were taken over both administratively and financially.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Great post! I had the same opinion about all this mess.
 

Terril park

Sponsor
What REALLY took confront ASAIC is those people who loved and protected their children and other loved ones and who refused to abuse others despite constant pressure to do so. THAT to me is the type of confront needed not some delusional "confront" of non existant plots by government agencies and individuals who had zero value in "scientology technology" and no desire to run it.

Just a thought.

Peace.

Right on Larry.

I'm curious as to how you became a corporate/legal expert after today
reading that you dropped out of college?
 

Lovinglife625

Patron with Honors
Right on Larry.

I'm curious as to how you became a corporate/legal expert after today
reading that you dropped out of college?

I did a very extensive legal internship in the Guardian's Office and then spent many years working with some of the best attorneys in the world learning from them.

Believe me when you spend tens of millions of dollars to get help from these attorneys, read many thousands of pages of legal briefs and have to deal with literately thousands of legal matters big and small over the years you get really good at it.

The trick is surviving long enough to get good at it lol
 

Terril park

Sponsor
I did a very extensive legal internship in the Guardian's Office and then spent many years working with some of the best attorneys in the world learning from them.

Believe me when you spend tens of millions of dollars to get help from these attorneys, read many thousands of pages of legal briefs and have to deal with literately thousands of legal matters big and small over the years you get really good at it.

The trick is surviving long enough to get good at it lol

I'm fairly smart, not a dummy at least. I find it difficult to follow legal matters. They are mostly not intuitive explorations. [ least for me]You are clearly very gifted in this area, and highly intelligent. Lengthy interneships although a LRH ideal, best I know didn't happen much. Speaking as a crashed and burned FEBC.

The might of critics spent years trying to fathom the corporate structure you helped create and , really didn't do so well there.

You have written that DM couldn't really follow your corporate thoughts
well. Others, Little Bear Victor, for example have stated that he is extremely intelligent and quick thinking.

Glad you are on..." our"... side. I find that my own thoughts of the future of COS align with yours.

Go Larry :)
 

paul.spiritualquest

Patron with Honors
I did a very extensive legal internship in the Guardian's Office and then spent many years working with some of the best attorneys in the world learning from them.

Believe me when you spend tens of millions of dollars to get help from these attorneys, read many thousands of pages of legal briefs and have to deal with literately thousands of legal matters big and small over the years you get really good at it.

The trick is surviving long enough to get good at it lol

I´m studying your posts and it is a lot of read.... once I´m done I´m gonna ask specific questions and let´s debate a bit. Is a lot of reading... ufff... :yes:
 

Lovinglife625

Patron with Honors
I'm fairly smart, not a dummy at least. I find it difficult to follow legal matters. They are mostly not intuitive explorations. [ least for me]You are clearly very gifted in this area, and highly intelligent. Lengthy interneships although a LRH ideal, best I know didn't happen much. Speaking as a crashed and burned FEBC.

The might of critics spent years trying to fathom the corporate structure you helped create and , really didn't do so well there.

You have written that DM couldn't really follow your corporate thoughts
well. Others, Little Bear Victor, for example have stated that he is extremely intelligent and quick thinking.

Glad you are on..." our"... side. I find that my own thoughts of the future of COS align with yours.

Go Larry :)

Hey Terril

Neither DM nor LRH were very smart in legal matters. They would often dream up crazy stuff and then just tell legal to "make it go right". One of the reasons why DM failed so badly in trying to get the corporate evolution done before we took it over included constant, wild dreamed up solutions that just could not be made go right legally.

They wasted a great deal of time and money dreaming up solutions and giving them to attorneys for comments. They would then end up with hundreds of pages of comments from attorneys on why their solutions would not work. Lots of back and forth descussing "solutions" drempt up by people who had no business suggesting legal solutions.

What they should have done was state what they wanted to accomplish (for example WDC being able to control most things without inheriting undue legal liability for running the orgs or maybe how to control the tech using intellectual property rights while minimising legal liability for doing same, etc., etc.) and then ask lawyers how they might best accomplish that legally. Lawyers could then focus on defining and explaining the issues and then trying to design a legal solution that would let management do what it wants.

To an inexperienced person in legal matters these two approaches may seen similiar but they are very, very different. The first approach (DM's approach) dreams up insane solutions like WDC being a separate for profit corporation, etc. and then wastes countless weeks and countless hundreds of thousands of dollars hearing from attorneys why their dreamed up legal solutions are not workable.

The other approach, the one we tried to take, got a multitude of attorneys with different areas of speciality all quickly defining the issues and working on solutions that would meet the operational needs as defined by management.

For example, even if you wanted to secure most of the orgs' money in a central location and not let orgs spend it, you don't dream up some billings or other legal solutions and then ask attorneys if those solutions are ok. Instead you just tell the attorneys how you would like to control that money centrally and then get those attorneys working on defining the issues legally and working on a solution to do same with minimal legal liability from all perspectives (taxes, tax exempt status, lntellectual property rights, potential damages cases, etc., etc.).

That's why you have attorneys with different areas of speciality and why you need to coordinate what they do so that they come out with workable solutions from all legal perspectives as well as based on the needs of management. But if management tries to dream up their own legal solutions at the beginning of this process it all goes to hell in a handbucket. Management can always reject a proposed solution from the attorneys, better brief the attorneys and then get a more workable solution. Plus you never have the legal tail wagging the management dog. The key though is let each specialist work on his or her area, not have a non legal person suggesting legal solutions to a legal expert. See what I mean?

Plus there are so many legal issues in much of the corporate sortout that need coordination and we made coordination a huge part of our missions. We even hired an attorney (Larry May) with the sole job of helping coordinate the input from the other more specialized attorneys. This was vital as a "legal solution" from just one legal perspective (say from the view of controlling and licensing intellectual property) could be disasterous from another perspective (such as looking at it from the view of potential damages cases or even yet another perspective such as how it affects each organizations potential tax exempt status).

DM did not understand legal enough to grasp this concept at all. He had no real experience nor background in all those legal areas (tax, damages, tax emempt status, intellectual property rights, etc.). That alone would make it impossible to work out such a complicated corporate structure.

Of course we thought we were really going to put in some real changes with the new structure, especially as we spent millions designing it. But DM ended up making it all a lie when he took over with total dictoral control ignoring all the newly worked out structure.

Oh well lol

Bottom line is a poor understanding of legal combined with a stupid "know it all" attitude getting attorneys off the real issues and wasting time addressing nonsense.

Anyway FWIW that's part of the story of why he did not work it out before.
 

Lovinglife625

Patron with Honors
I´m studying your posts and it is a lot of read.... once I´m done I´m gonna ask specific questions and let´s debate a bit. Is a lot of reading... ufff... :yes:

Good luck LOL If you want to debate if the IRS took over organized scientology I am done with that. Everyone is free to believe anything they want.
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
Oh what the heck.

Since there have been so many threads on different forums about CST and the IRS, etc., I thought I would write a posting that goes into more detail of what was behind the formation of CST in the hopes that people will understand it better and thus deal with it better.

So here's a link to the posting I just did.

Warning it is long and boring. But it might help:

http://exscnforum.com/index.php/church-spiritual-technology-little-background-t114.html
Thanks, Larry, that put things into perspective very nicely! :)
 
Top