the game of blame, money and the confidential materials!!

“A donation or fine

would not be acceptable amends.”

1 May 65 ‘Staff Member Reports’ by L. Ron Hubbard

An old-timer Scientologist once told me

that when he was auditing on OT7

while LRH was at Flag, his 6 month check eligibility

was nothing more than few verbal questions

from the MAA about how it was getting along in life,

this to check if there were major ethic troubles

and if not, off they were back into a short cramming

and into soloing again.

At that time people were keeping the confidential materials

in a pouch bag and auditing in the bathroom at airports

or anywhere where they could.

Than it got more and more complicated…

when I went on OT7 I was using a light cloth bag

with a 3 numbers lock.

The 6 months check was an extensive sec check FPRD style.

You were put into ethic if you were lodging outside the base.

At $7.400 at intensive, averaging between 2 to 4

per six month check, plus a Solo C/Sing cost

of $1850 and above, to stay on the level was needed

an average of $25 thousand to $35 thousand.

This if everything was smooth and did not include

the accommodation that was enforced at the base…

Calculating the cost of added time

needed in trying to handle the MAA on the reason

you wanted to stay with friends and not to add

to your already huge debts, it would turn up

to be cheaper to stay at the Yatchman or at the Sand Castle.

A friend of mine once came to us quite upset telling us

that at the org the accommodation I/C convinced her

to use her paid night at the Fort Harrison.

She did, to find out later that she did not have the paid room

and now she was asked to pay $150 for that night.

She was already in debts and stayed with us for few days.

On the top of this the D of P and the call inner

where always trying to get you there before the 6 months

were over.

A year later I got an order to install a safe in the apartment,

hidden into a closet and it needed to be approved,

you had to have the material into a double lock briefcase

and have it tied up to yourself when traveling.

You were not allowed to leave it anywhere

except in your safe.

Now you must have it in a safe and have an alarm

connected to it.

You cannot talk to anyone about the security

otherwise you get in trouble.

When the pre OT forgets to lock the case

or leaves the briefcase with the materials in the locked car,

or forget a worksheet (totally nonsense for anyone not

on the level) they get assigned a condition of Treason.

You are made feel you are putting in danger

the world by giving this very powerful tech in the hands of the SP.

You now have to give your $$$$$

In the Church on $ you are valued only if you have more and more $$

Once you are sent to ethic you are a shark bite.

All sorts of regs are lurking at you…

especially the squirrel ones,

the one that do not even know anymore that $cientology

is a religion and not some sort of Bank Institution.”

Working hard and producing is not enough

and not accepted anymore to get approved by the MAA

on the liability conditions.

The MAA themselves are regging you for money donations,

which , by the way, is out-policy and not something an MAA

should ever go into anyway.

“A donation or fine

would not be acceptable amends.”

1 May 65 ‘Staff Member Reports’ by L. Ron Hubbard

OT’s are made feel they potentially very dangerous

when the truth is, all the OT materials are already out.

This point gives the Church a way to make more

and more money using the “material security”

… as another excuse to extort donations

or to give you more sec checking… ($$$)



“Those who have been on OT7 know the severe pressure

that is applied to them for the security

of the confidential materials.

OT7s spend 10s of thousands per year, each, for sec-checks

to insure the confidentiality of those materials.

They have to carry those materials

in locked briefcases attached to their bodies, for years.

They have nightmares about going out-security

and being assigned Treason conditions

and they have been pressured

for huge donations for their liability conditions,

for being out-security (off policy, reference … ).


However, truth be told, not only is this intimidation

out-tech (non-interference zone policy),

it is also FRAUD.

The fact is that OSA and DM have known for years,

now, that the materials are not secure.

They are readily available to anyone,

in a matter of minutes,

on the internet.

I went through the exercise,

it took about 20 minutes

without any prior knowledge

to locate them, anyone with google can do this.

These material are authentic.

Flag and DM are milking 10s of millions of dollars

per year from its OT7s to protect a secret

that is not secret.

They charge big money for this.

This is by any reasonable definition a huge fraud.

A person who gives more money

is more of a member of the group,

isn’t he?


I was personally asked to write a post dated check… anything to get the money!


It is explained that the funds

for various IAS activities

are to support various social causes.

I have heard IAS regges state that IAS

contributions go towards OT eligibility.

It is even implied that not giving

to the IAS will make a person

ineligible to do the OT levels.

'Without us you are going DOWN!!!'

“Gung-ho Groups introduce a new idea

into social or civic groups.

The essences of a true group

are participation and contribution.

Group members must be able

to participate in action

to become a true team.

And each must be permitted

to contribute to the action for a group

to generate a life of its own.

Giving money or things to a group

are both a form of participation and contribution.

But while this is an important matter,

it does not involve actual action.

Thus, a contributor of money

or objects to a group is yet

withholding himself and his time.

One should seek contribution of money and things.

But the status granted for this

is that of patron or associate,

not of a true member of the group.

HCOPL 3 December 1968
“Gung-Ho Groups, Policy Letter #2” – OEC Vol. 6

Invalidation are used heavily

on parishioners to shake

their stable data

and to get them to cave in

and give more money,

even if this means going

into further debts

and violating financial policy.

Lets go over few definitions:




1. refuting or degrading or discrediting

or denying something someone else

considers to be fact. (HCOB 2 Jun 71 I)


2. any thought, emotion or effort,

or counter-thought, counter-emotion

or counter-effort which denies

or smothers the thought, emotion

or effort of the individual. (NOM, p. 56)


3. invalidation by words

is the symbolic level of being struck.

(2ACC-19B, 5312CM09)



4. basically, non-attention.

Attention itself is quite important

for attention is necessary before

an effect can be created. (PAB eight)



5. invalidation is force applied.

You apply enough force to anybody

and you’ve invalidated him.

How invalidated can he get? Dead!

(5207CM24B) Abbr. Inval.”


Key Questions and Answers

Question #1:

What really is “using policy to stop”?

I once referred to LRH references when a staff person asked me to do something very odd.  He claimed that I was “using policy to stop.” But, what exactly does LRH mean by using policy to stop?

“If you have hatted according to policy

and not hatted off a lot of squirrel,

offbeat actions;

if you have made sure

that you don’t have using policy to stop;

they can do that by the way

by always applying the wrong policy letter.

All you’ve got to do is take the policy letter

that applies to A and instead of following that,

find another one that really

doesn’t really apply to A

but find something in it that can be construed

as to apply to this and they say,

‘Well, you see we can’t do that.’”’

ESTO Series Lecture – 6 March 1972 – “F/Ning Staff Members”

(This lecture, by the way, discusses production and exchange and is very well worth listening to.  Another great quote from this lecture is

“Regardless of whether

there is money,

there must be exchange.”


Note – This whole reference is vital to read.

“But how about the situation of this junior

who stands up and says,

‘I can’t do it.  It’s against policy,’

or ‘I won’t use that verbal tech

as it’s contrary to HCOB’s’?

In his timid way, he could feel

this was very adventurous.

He could get personally harassed.

The first thing he might hear is,

‘You are using policy to stop!’

Well, if the order he is receiving is off-policy

or out-tech, he very well better stop it!

Otherwise, sooner or later,

his own neck and those of the group

will be in the noose from the pure pressure

of the give and take of life.”

HCOPL 13 January 1979 – “Orders, Illegal and Cross”

– OEC Vol. 0

Question #2:

Does green on white only apply

to an org,

not to an individual?



Someone had told an IAS reg that they couldn’t give more money because it violated LRH finance policy.  The reg said, “Finance policy doesn’t apply to the IAS.”

I once told an IAS reg that they were violating finance policy.  He said, “You can’t quote specific policies on the matter.  You have to look at the tech as a whole.”

“…Primarily intended for Scientology

organization executives, its policy letters

are slanted toward a Scientology org

(short for organization).

However, it covers any organization

and contains fundamentals vital

to any successful or profitable activity.

This course also applies to the individual…

Where any one or more of these is missing

in his conduct of life

he will be to that degree

an unsuccessful individual.”

HCOPL 8 September 1969 –

“The Org Exec Course Introduction” – OEC Vol 0

Question #3

Do we need a beautiful building

to be an “ideal org”?

What exactly is an ideal org?


“What it takes to make a org

go right is the intelligent assessment

of what really needs to be done,

setting these as targets

and then getting them actually fully DONE.

Here’s some MUST targets as examples:

J.  Deliver fantastic service.


K.  Get enough tech people

in training to handle the flows.


L.  Find bigger, poshier quarters

to handle the flow when it occurs.”


HCOPL 14 January 1969 Issue I

Target Series 1 – “OT Orgs” – OEC Vol 0

“The ideal org would be an activity

where people came to achieve freedom

and where they had confidence

they would attain it.

It would have enough space in which to train,

process and administrate without crowding.

It would be located where the public

could identify and find it.

It would be busy looking, with staff

in motion not standing about.

It would be clean and attractive

enough not to repel its public.”

LRH ED 102 INT – 20 May 1970
“The Ideal Org” – OEC Vol 0

Question #4:

Do we need posh space

to project a good image?


A good definition of “quarters” exists in the new OEC Vol. 0, page 123, paragraph 3 .

“In twenty years an enormous amount

of experience has been gained

regarding the quarters

and housing of orgs.

From this experience there are only

a few clear-cut lessons.

These follow:




Example:   Elizabeth , New Jersey 1950…

Nothing was posh.  Everything noisy.

The org was very viable

and had streams of people.

C.  Image is secondary consideration.

Staff pay and food and cheap student

housings do more for an org

than a posh building.”

Question #6:

Isn’t it a good idea

to donate books to VIP’s?

This is great for PR, isn’t it?

Last time I was in Flag it was explained to me that donating books to government officials creates goodwill for the Church and is an effective promotional activity.

“a. Never seek public or group repute

or contest it or get involved in it.

It’s only collective bank.

You do not do ‘goodwill’ advertising

or try to get the name about.

You only accumulate identities as per

(3) Dissemination and use them for

(4) Salesmanship—offering them

something they will buy.

Never seek a subsidy for what

you are doing as at once you

or any subsidized office

will cease to promote to the public individuals.

You throw out anything or anyone

who is working to make you get a subsidy

or who demands a subsidy to operate an office,

as there goes your public contact.

It ceases to have point as there’s

no dependence on the public individual

so he ceases to be served.

Subsidy is a fine way to fail

and always leads to a dead-end.”

subsidy – “> a sum of money granted to support an undertaking held to be in the public interest.  > a grant or contribution of money.”  ( Oxford Concise Dictionary)  “2. Financial assistance given by one person or government to another.” (American Heritage Dictionary)

HCOPL 21 January 1965R Issue I – OEC Vol. 2
“Vital Data on Promotion, The Fundamentals of Promotion”

Question #7:

What is the policy

on donating books to libraries?

I took issue with one staff who was regging me to donate books to a library as a promotional activity.  The cost of the books was at full retail price.  I offered to pay half price (the price her org got the books from Bridge from), but she said she couldn’t do this.

“Books:  Personal contact usually

requires books to back it up.

But books make a personal contact

all by themselves if they can be put

in the right places.

If the library nearest you had some book

about Dianetics and Scientology

granted by you to them

and your name and address

was in the front as donor,

you would get people calling on you.

HCO WW Book Admin recently

made books available for this purpose

at a very reduced cost.

HCOB 15 September 1959 – “Dissemination Tips” – OEC Vol. 2

This was written at a time when people

were auditing in the field,

and putting books in a library

would be a promotional activity

of a field auditor to gain paying pc’s.

There is an exchange to the field auditor

for this promotional activity.

As the reference states, these books

were sold “at a very reduced cost”.

Question #9:

I should give money towards

“planetary clearing” shouldn’t I?

Isn’t sacrifice to the Aims of Scientology

what it is all about?

Recently, a staff person told a friend that he should buy books because the money was going towards future things to come out – the money was being used for further expansion.  This violates the references on product and exchange.

She was also told, at LA Org OT Committee meeting last year, that starts on course did not count as stats for the OT Committee.  Only Books & Lectures packages sold counted towards stats.  Clearly, there is an MU on what the product of Scientology is.



– “a product is a finished high quality service or article, in the hands of the being or group it serves, as an exchange for a valuable.  That’s a product.  It is a finished high quality service or article in the hands of the consumer as an exchange for a valuable.  In other words it isn’t a product at all unless it’s exchanged.  Unless it’s exchangeable it’s not a product at all.  Even the individual has to put his service or article in the hands of some other staff member before it could be called a product.  Product is exchange, exchange is product.” (ESTO 10, 7203C05 SO II – definition of “product” in the Management Dictionary.)

“Scientology should expand solely

on delivery of service.

Money should be made solely

by delivering high-quality service.

What is the product of an org?

HCOPL 17 June 1970R Issue I

“The product of an org is well-taught students and thoroughly audited pcs.  When the product vanishes, so does the org.  The orgs must survive for the sake of this planet.”

KSW Series 5R – “Technical Degrades” – OEC Vol. 0

Note – This entire reference is a must read.

“The weakest motivation is money.

People and businesses that are motivated only

by money are wobbly people.

The primary cause of mission failure is money motivation.

Money is important in the world.

But it is the grease on the machinery, not the motors.

So money is a tool, a gas tank.

It is a MEANS of getting something done.

It is no valid end in itself.

Thus, a mission motivated only by money

will eventually fail.  For it depends more on the goodwill

and personal conviction of Scientologists

and the public more than it does on cash.

Thus, there will come about a ridge between

a money motivated mission and a public motivated

by personal conviction or even personal gain.

The potential agreement between the mission

and the public is therefore a disagreement.

The reality, the R, is out and so the ARC is out

and so there is an interruption of flows.

A mission or an org must flow out service, help,

wisdom, useful data.  These strengthen personal conviction

and result in personal gain for the public.

Processing is a personal gain

that heads to personal conviction.

Money therefore flows back in A


As you will see on the above scale,

money is junior to personal conviction

and personal gain and so is dominated

by them or vanishes when personal conviction

or personal gain are absent.

The public understands that an org

or mission must have money to keep the wheels going.

They look on anyone using such wisdom

and tech only for money with a kind of horror.

They see it as an invalidation

or a declaration that the material is worthless.

The public even understands an org or mission needing

or having a lot of money only so long

as money is used to improve the product,

spread the word, provide facilities

and support the people doing the work.

Therefore, to obtain operating funds

you have to give real service, real training, real wisdom.

You have to lead the field toward personal gain like health,

and personal wisdom.

You have to lead the field toward personal gain like health,

and personal conviction, like a better society.

If you lead very well and actually deliver,

you will be paid proportionately and will have security

and longevity.  You have to be interested

in what the clientele is interested in,

not only in their pocketbooks.”

HCOPL 11 November 1969 Issue II – “Promotion and Motivation” – OEC Vol. 6

Question #10:

Why do we get attacked?

Shouldn’t we go after the psychs,

pharmaceutical companies,

international banks, etc?

“Trouble spots occur only where there are ‘no results’.

Attacks from governments or monopolies

occur only where there are

‘no results’ or ‘bad results’.”


Question #11:

Should I follow anything given to me

because it is from “upper management”

and is “command intention”?

Note – This whole reference is vital to read.








But if one is too timid to outright refuse to comply,

there are other ways.

The easiest is to say ‘yes sir’ and then just don’t do it.

One can’t be hit for NOT doing it.

He can only be hit for doing it.

1.  If it seems kind of stupid it is probably

off-policy or out-tech.

Both tech and policy are anything but stupid.

Most off-policy and out-tech orders

are stupid because they are at a glance


HCOPL 13 January 1979
“Orders, Illegal and Cross” – OEC Vol. 0

Question #12:

It is OK to “break the rules”

to get a product?

This one has been used to coax someone into doing something off policy or countersurvival.

“HCO PLs and HCOB’s are proven by time

and are the senior data on which we operate.”

HCOPL 9 August 1972 – “Seniority of Orders” – OEC Vol. 0

“Your functions will be found in PLs and HCOBs.

If anyone tells you your job is different

than stated in such issues, please realize

that there are no orders senior to such issues

and an ‘illegal order’ is defined as one contrary

to existing issues.  Accepting an illegal order

is actionable.

What one gets comm eved for is

in the PLs and HCOBs.”

HCOPL 12 February 1971 – “Hat Knock Off” – OEC Vol. 1

The watchword is SERVICE.

I don’t care how many rules you break

if they’re broken to give unselfish service

to one another and the public.

We live for service not for rules.

Where there’s a group to be helped

or a preclear to be processed

or a student to be trained, see that it’s done;

and if it gets done,

don’t count the costs in broken rules.

HCOPL 29 October 1959 – “Service” – OEC Vol. 0

Question #12 A:

Is it OK to borrow?


Regges often ask you to borrow someone elses Credit Card or they even have Loans already set up with the bank so you can get $20-$30 and even $50 thousands for IAS donations.

“3. Make it before you have to spend it.


4. Gather bit by bit a cushion of cash

to fall back on and don’t ever fall back on it.


5. Keep your credit excellent as a second cushion.”

HCOPL 28 January 1965
“How to Maintain Credit Standing and Solvency” – OEC Vol. 3

“Bad management is therefore detectable

on these points:


  1. 1) The bills-cash ration will be high

    in bills and low in cash.

  2. 2) There is an effort to borrow money

    rather than earn it.

5.   There will be an effort to be supported.

HCOPL 10 November 1966 – Admin Know-How Series 6
“Good Versus Bad Management” – OEC Vol. 7

“Dishonest regging can cover anything

from crazy loans to telling the pc

he will be able to remove his head

after a two-minute HAS Course

taught be an ex-psychologist.”

HCOPL 26 October 1975 – OEC Vol. 7 –  “Gross Income/Corrected Gross Income Ratio, Failed Cases and Failed Students”


Overloaded by bills.

Question #13:

The able owe everything

to handle the 4th dynamic?

A ‘Scientologist’ once explained me that despite the fact that it was an out Financial Planning to donate a lot of money, he had to do it as it was the least he could do for all of the “overts he had committed on the whole track.”  I believe that this idea was pushed on him by the IAS reg who spoke at an event.  This was very odd.  This guy is now hopelessly stalled on the Bridge nowadays.

“We are not an Earthwide amends project.

No good worker owes his work.

That’s slavery.

We don’t owe because we do better.

One would only owe if one did worse.

Charity is charity.  It benefits the donor,

giving him a sense of superiority and status.

It is a liability to the receiver but

he accepts it as he must and vows

(if he has any pride) to cease being poor

and get to work.

Charity cannot be enforced by law and arrest

for them is extortion.”

HCOPL 6 March 1966 Issue I
“Rewards and Penalties, How to Handle Personnel and Ethics Matter”

“And toward the end of June in 1950,

I first sensed the truth.

And the maxim – bring order to your own house

before you attempt to order next door.

The third and fourth dynamics subdivide.

Any third breaks down into many activities and professions,

a neighborhood, a business concern,

a military group, a city government, etc., etc.

The fourth dynamic breaks down just now

mainly to races and nations.

Now, just suppose a Scientologist

were to consider himself a professional

only for the purposes of treating

and repairing or even starting again these third

and fourth zones?

See this: A housewife, already successfully

employing Scientology in her own home,

trained to professional level,

takes over a woman’s club as secretary

or some key position.

She straightens up the club affairs

by applying comm practice and making peace

and then, incidental to the club’s main function,

pushes Scientology into a zone of special interest

in the club—children, straightening up marriages,

whatever comes to hand

and even taking fees for it—meanwhile,

of course, going on being a successful

and contributing wife.

Or this: A Scientologist, a lesser executive

or even a clerk in a company,

trains as a professional auditor and,

seeing where the company is heading,

begins to pick up its loose ends

by strengthening its comm lines

or its personnel abilities.

Without “selling” anybody Scientology,

just studies out the bogs and remedies them.

If only as “an able person” he would rapidly expand

a zone of control, to say nothing of his personal

standing in the company.

This has been and is being done steadily across the world.

Now that we have presessioning it’s easy

to straighten up other people.

Our unreleased technology on handing third dynamic

business situations is staggeringly large.

And see this:

A race is staggering along making difficulties for itself.

Locate its leaders.  Get a paid post as a secretary

or officer of the staff of the leaders of that race.

And by any means, audit them into ability

and handle their affairs to bring cooperation

not trouble.  Every race that is in turmoil

in a nation has quasi-social groups

around its leaders.”

“The Special Zone Plan” – OEC Vol. 6


we are here to help!!

If you still in the church staff or public and you need help to get out, if you just left and you need help, please call or write to:


Silvia  Kusada  e-mail:


Aida Thomas: e-mail:


contact Aida Thomas in private.



Silvia Kusada


Class VI (SHSBC), Class IV C/S and OT 7.


  1. The security of the materials is also used too control staff and public via the “security force” Cameras every where in the orgs, Staff not allowed too leave the building alone,not allowed too go on the Internet.(Just as the “war on terror” is used too control the public at large..

  2. Now to be totally fair, there is a reference from LRH on the factors to consider in someone’s eligibility for OT levels, including the handling of confidential materials.

    But given the current state of affairs – all of the OT levels and a whole lot more readily available on the Internet – it doesn’t make a lot of sense to heavily enforce this policy.

    As the saying goes, it’s like trying to close the door after the horse is already out of the barn.

  3. Good blogging, Silvia. 🙂

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  • August 2010
    M T W T F S S
    « Jul   Sep »
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 102 other followers