“An Overview of Scientology” banner

Scientology® pages index  |  Contact

Scientology membership: HASI vs IAS - A comparison (2)  or
     Fundraising, how to go about it and how not to go about it
(An insider report; also including the Ideal Orgs initiative, started 2004)
(to other Scientology pages)

>> Do you want to help with preserving the original technology? <<  Consult my want list here!

Please note that words with an asterisk (*) are defined at the bottom of this page! Only first appearances are indicated.

Scientology membership: HASI vs IAS - A comparison  (page 2)

Go to “Scientology membership: HASI vs IAS - A comparison” index page

The ship project (M/V Freewinds) (1985-88)

Back to Main Index Scientology management announces: “Buy us a ship!”

It would almost seem that the establishment of the IAS approach would have given the start signal to call into being more of such initiatives that had their focus on getting in money with no service given in return. In this case here it would be about purchasing a ship. Which the Scientology parishioner was asked to pay for. A prelude one may say to the later Ideal Orgs initiative (2004) in where he was asked to pay for the new buildings.
If we go back a bit in time and regard the vessel the Apollo (late 60's/early 70's), then we don't see anywhere that the Scientology parishioner is asked to purchase that ship for the organization. So, what had actually changed since then?

Go back ‘Flag Ship Donation Project’ (mid-1985)

A Flag Ship Donation Project was announced in June 1985.

         “The dream of new OT states is soon to become a reality!
You can help make this come true. Join in one of the most exciting, far-reaching games ever:
Help to bring into existence the site of the release of New OT VIII and IX!!”
   (from Promo letter Flag Ship Donation Project (dated June 1985))   

It is further informing that “On November 17th, 1984 the goal of OT became closer and more real than ever before for all Scientologists,” which then was the day that it was announced that it “would be released when 700 pre-OTs complete New OT VII Solo NOTs Auditing!!”.
It was actually Ron's Journal 35 (issued as ‘LRH ED 342 Int’, 9 May 82 “From Clear to Eternity”) that had redefined that “the OT levels begin with New OT VIII,” all the earlier one's were now just considered pre-OT levels.

Then something about location:
         “New OT VIII and IX will be released on a
New Sea Org Flag Ship!
It is sort of interesting though that it is not explained anywhere in this promo letter why this needs to be done on a ship. There is just no explanation given. So, why does this need a ship??

Then it runs off various promo about the steps of preparation that were said to have been taken thus far. Such as “determine the type and condition of the ship needed, personnel requirements,” “locating the perfect ship,” “getting the New OT VIII and IX technical delivery crew formed up and trained,” getting “a top notch ship's crew,” and so on.
Then it says that The estimated down payment for the ship has been covered, donated by Scientologists who want to be on the forefront of this historical effort!”.

Next there is asked: “What needs to be done next?”.

Well, can we sense where this is heading to? Let's have it then:
         “Your support is needed right now to make the new Sea Org Flag Ship a reality. Your contributions will help speed the remaining ship purchase and preparation cycles through to fast completion!”         

So, basically the whole project was all about that the Scientology parishioner was going to raise the money for that ship.

Well, pending the level of your donation there were some awards such as “special commemorative brass plaque with your name permanently displayed on the door of one of the cabins,” and/or “your name as a Founding Member on the plaque in the ship's foyer,” if you donated in the order of $50,000-100,000. But every person that donated got “a beautiful Certificate of Recognition.”

Well, it had said in that promo that “The target is: Have the ship all set up and ready in just a matter of months!”  This appeared to have been a bit well optimistic. The ship (to be named Freewinds) was finally acquired on 16 Sept ’86. But it needed a lot of work done on it, which required additional donations to fix it up. So, that Flag Ship Donation Project went on for a while longer. Letters from this initiative thus continued to be send out regularly requesting for more donations. Then some 2 years later on 6 Jun ’88 we had the maiden voyage of the now renovated vessel.

M/V Freewinds

Now we had a ship that the Scientology parishioner actually had paid for, and now that same parishioner had to pay quite a bit of money to be on it pending the service they were taking. You could also take small courses and other things, and all this can be done, as it is promoted in later times, in a disturbance free environment.
So, New OT VIII had indeed been released, and this 3 times actually for which the Scientology parishioner had to pay each time again. See, there had been some corrections ... Lucky you if you did it when it was released for the third time!

Then New OT IX had not been released as was the promise, it still hasn't till this very day. There is no explanation given for this. Is there a correlation with the errors involved with New OT VIII? That may be plausible.
Actually New OT IX is a misnomer, as there was no previous or original OT IX. The original OT VIII was something else that is recorded having been test run in 1971 (more info on that here, separate window).

Go back ‘Majestic Club Membership’ (late 1987)

Then we got this:
         “A new Club is to be formed called the Majestic Club. This will be an exclusive club which provides its members with special privileges aboard the NEW OT® VIII and New IX Ship, the FREEWINDS®.
As an Award for a donation of $10,000.00 to the Ship Trust Fund the person will receive a permanent membership to the Majestic Club.
Help to bring into existence the site of the release of New OT VIII and IX!!”

Benefits listed were (in full):
         “A. A PIN of recognition as a member which has the Majestic Logo.         
  B. Exclusive use of the VIP LOUNGE, the Paloma Blanca Lounge, which is the most luxurious of all the ship's Lounges.  
  C. Name engraved on the CLUB MEMBER PLAQUE situated in the VIP Lounge.  
  D. Having a DINNER at the CAPTAIN'S TABLE when aboard.  
  E. For those who join the Club prior to the Maiden Voyage, special recognition on the plaque in the VIP Lounge as a Founding Member of the Majestic Club.  

         “The Majestic Club will be an elite group aboard the FREEWINDS and its members will be easily identifiable as those who have made a significant contribution to the release and delivery of NEW OT VIII and beyond.
This is your chance to contribute to a history-making event that is going to happen in this universe soon. Be part of the incredible team that makes it possible to release LRH's™ NEW OT VIII on planet Earth and kicks wide open the door to total Freedom!”
  (all quotations from ‘Ship Trust Announcement, 30 Nov 87 “Majestic Club Membership”)  

Here one will seriously start to wonder what all this is actually about. This is pretty much as far away as you can get from the aims for Scientology as L. Ron Hubbard had stated them. A person that came into Scientology for the technical reasons, would not be interested in all this for one little bit. A “PIN,” a “PLAQUE,” now who cares about such things? A Scientology parishioner? Well, if they do, they have to start asking themselves what got them into Scientology. Was it the subject itself, or was it something else, a status may be. If it was for a status, then I fear that they arrived there for all of the wrong reasons. And why is the Scientology organization sending out and promoting these silly offers?
And then this thing about “Having a DINNER at the CAPTAIN'S TABLE when aboard.”. I guess you are really special then! Sitting with the captain, wow! Now, who cares about this? When I think about it, many a person has sat at this table during the past years. But there can only be one that issued and fitted that captain (Mike Napier still I think) for his first uniform prior to that maiden voyage, and that was actually my little person. I wonder what I will get for that ..., ah well.

I don't actually know if this Majestic Club materialized, or if it is still upheld today. If not, it will no doubt have been substituted with another silly name or status. Either way one may be has to contemplate a bit about why L. Ron Hubbard wrote the following lines:  (underlining is mine)

“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 a true member of the group.”          LRH
(from HCO PL 3 Dec 68 “Gung-Ho Groups, Poltr # 2”)

Go to index

‘The Ideal Org’ initiative (2004 to present)

Back to Main Index ‘The Ideal Org’ versus the real estate broker

Ideal Orgs logo

Go back The relation between ‘The Ideal Org’ initiative and the IAS

“Groups customarily answer such emergency situations by instantaneous orders and commands without consideration by the whole group but which are accepted by the whole group as necessary for survival through the emergency.
The clearing of such a moment of turbulence is done simply by exposing all facets of it to the general view of all the individuals who compose the group. ... Should such moments of emergency remain unexplained, they are not analytically understood by other members of the group and so, as engrams, distort the ideals and ethics and rationale of the group.”          LRH
(from ‘Notes on the Lectures’ (1951, 1968 edition), p132-33)
* engram.  A recording which has the sole purpose of steering the individual through supposed but usually nonexistent dangers. (Science of Survival, p. 10).

A new project was launched somewhere mid 2004. It involved creating Ideal Org's around this planet and the reference that was forwarded for it was ‘LRH ED 102 Int’, 20 May 70 “The Ideal Org” (consult here in full, pop-up window).

The Ideal Org initiative pretty much springs forth out of a proposed “emergency situation” that wasn't. It was said that we need ‘perfect buildings’ otherwise we can not expand or succeed. It is incorrect thinking however as one first was to have an already expanding organization creating the situation that larger premises were called for. From the very start when introduced the whole concept of these Ideal Orgs, as presented and promoted, struck me as illogical and odd. Like if everything was taken in reverse...

I recall a senior executive from the AOSH EU that had come over from Denmark that spoke at an event at the local org here claiming that all orgs that got their ‘Ideal Org’ were booming shortly afterwards. It didn't matter how poor that org had been producing before that, as soon as they got their ‘new perfect building’ and voilá they boomed, so he said emphatically and reassuring. And herewith violating a whole array of policy letters of how one is supposed to build up towards that. I was thinking, doesn't anyone here know about the condition formula's in use in Scientology? Has everyone forgotten or have they never really understood them?

It was all originated and promoted by the IAS when it was brought to live back in 2004. It is presented here in a separate chapter as it carries various specifics and consequences that are a bit different than the previous money collecting activities of the IAS. I do recall that the Scientology public at that time had grown a bit tired of the hunting for money of the IAS for these ‘statuses’. It was getting more difficult to get the Scientology public donate money for that. And next we know, we get this Ideal Org initiative being presented, lifting up the whole thing on to a personal level. You see, now you will be donating to your own Ideal Org! Èh, we (the public) first pay for the building and then we have to pay even more money to take services in that building that we paid for? There is also a time convenience factor present here obviously. As why would no one have thought about these references about The Ideal Org references before? Why did it come now?
One should realize here, make no mistake about this, that these organizational matters are the sole responsibility of the staff employed in that organization! Instead that organization is placing that as a burden on the Scientology public! Please look at this carefully! The organization says: “Well good people, we want a bigger building, can you (the public) buy one for us? That would make us so very happy!”. The fact is however that the public already paid for that... through taking services from that organization! They already paid for that the organization takes care of these things like buying premises!

The games that are being played at these events, if it be for ‘statuses’ or Ideal Orgs, they were all just the same. It just seems to be that as soon as some activity doesn't draw in sufficient with donations anymore, that another new project is being invented, introduced and promoted. In essence however it still comes down to the very same strategy and outcome. Money is being asked for that is not being used for taking Scientology services! Now, what was Scientology all about again?

Go back Raising funds for ‘The Ideal Org’ (modus operandi)

Go back Outset

In May 1970 this was issued:

“The ideal organization would be composed of a staff who each one knew all the hats of the group.”          LRH
(from HCO PL 14 May 70 “Hat Checkout Sequence”)

Then just 6 days later we saw the release of ‘LRH ED 102 Int’, 20 May 70 “The Ideal Org”. There is an obvious correlation here. We get a gist here of what an ideal organization would be composed of. Then when we pull out this actual LRH ED and consult it we find it is all about creating a successful well functioning organization with all the necessary conveniences. For example “enough space in which to train, process and administrate without crowding”, “located where the public could identify and find it”, and so on (see LRH ED).
In its application however, according to the plan that was folded out in 2004, it instead meant physically purchasing buildings and then the public was asked raising the funds for these purchases through so-called fundraising happenings. Nonetheless it was this very LRH ED that was being promoted. We find however that the focus in this LRH ED is not particularly on acquiring luxurious perfect or historical sort of buildings with perfect interior and all that. That reference just says “clean and attractive enough to not repel its public”.

In 1975 this abovementioned LRH ED had been reissued into the HCO PL issue-type format which was released as HCO PL 12 Mar 75 II “The Ideal Org”. I personally find it rather odd that the LRH ED version is being promoted and not the HCO PL version. After all the LRH ED has basically only a 12 month validity, whereas an HCO PL has a permanent validity.

An additional characteristic of an Ideal Org is to be the booming effect. Basically it implies that it will be as successful as the Old Saint Hill organization in East Grinstead, England during the 60's. It meant that one needed to achieve a particular percentage of expansion during a particular period of time. Within Scientology this is commonly referred to as 5.4Xing which identifies thus the ratio of expansion required.

Go back Official presentation

On the website we can find:
“L. Ron Hubbard expressed the goal of Scientology to create Churches that reflect physically what they provide spiritually:
‘You are creating an island of friendliness, decency and succor in the sea of a violent world. ... Some time in the future the islands will become the sea.’
To realize this goal, in 2004 Mr. Miscavige launched a program with the stated aim of making every Church of Scientology into an ideal Church of Scientology—ideal in location, design, quality of religious services and social betterment programs.” 
(source, external link) (last checked: 20 Jul 2013)

On this site it doesn't list the source of this citation attributed to L. Ron Hubbard. This source is ‘Ron's Journal 28’, 24 Nov 76 “Forming Orgs”, which was released as a brief lecture.

The cited text in its original context reads:  (the cited text found on that website I underlined)
“An org is actually a religious cooperative. Its staff makes what they actually produce. Staff pay is conditional upon the way a whole org enforces HCO policy, and uses HCOB. It is true, proven time after time, that the only rich orgs and prosperous staffs work directly by HCO PLs for org forms and lines under execs who are insistent upon the purity of org form and lines, and held the form of the orgs in a hatted staff accordingly. There is a safeguard of decency in policy. Standard tech is what an org is supposed to deliver, and if its staff is not insistent upon standard tech straight by the book, it can cease to be a bright and shining place. You are creating an island of friendliness, decency, and succor in a sea of a violent world. You do it by using policy and tech, that had took half a century to find and develop. Sometimes it's tough going. Well it's a tough world, but that is what makes our orgs so valuable. And that is why above all else, we must create these org islands.
Sometime in the future, the islands will become the sea, and it'll happen because you took this advice. These PLs and this tech, and use them purely and as they were intended. To (unintelligible) man from a gathering darkness and decay of this Earth's civilization.”

The website continues:
“Each Church is uniquely configured to accommodate the full array of Scientology services for both parishioners and the surrounding community.  Each houses extensive public information multimedia displays that introduce every facet of Dianetics and Scientology. Additionally, libraries, seminar rooms and chapels serve as places to hold Sunday services and other congregational gatherings.”

And on another page on that website that goes deeper into these Ideal Org's it reads:
“To meet the skyrocketing demand for Dianetics and Scientology services and social betterment programs throughout the world, and utilizing the technological advances of the 21st century, Mr. Miscavige launched the Ideal Org (short for ‘organization’) strategy to transform all Scientology Churches into Ideal Churches and accomplish the goal L. Ron Hubbard set for Scientologists—to one day create Churches that were the physical embodiment of Scientology technology to help all beings attain spiritual freedom.
An Ideal Org is a Church configured to provide the full services of the Scientology religion to its parishioners and to the community. ‘Ideal’ encompasses both the physical facilities and the types of services ministered to parishioners and the community. These Churches house extensive public information multimedia displays describing all aspects of Dianetics and Scientology, Founder L. Ron Hubbard, and the Church's social betterment and community outreach programs.
Religious services are provided in distraction-free and aesthetic course rooms and spiritual counseling rooms. There are also libraries, bookstores, film and seminar rooms and expansive Chapels for Sunday services, weddings, naming ceremonies and other congregational gatherings.”
(source, external link) (last checked: 20 Jul 2013)

Go back So, what has been done? What is the outcome?

Mind for a moment that it said in that ‘Ron's Journal 28’, 24 Nov 76 “Forming Orgs”: “It is true, proven time after time, that the only rich orgs and prosperous staffs work directly by HCO PLs for org forms and lines under execs who are insistent upon the purity of org form and lines, and held the form of the orgs in a hatted staff accordingly.”. It means that any of the actions taken would have have found direct support from the guidelines that we find in these organizational policy letters. We would thus not find contradictions.
One also has to look at who decided whose org needed to acquire their Ideal Org. What was the actual guiding line exercised here? See, if you have a functioning organization, and they have sufficient with space, enough auditing rooms, sufficient with free seats in their course room, and so on. Then would they need to become an Ideal Org? Thus, what criteria are exercised to determine if we had an Ideal Org here already? These are the valid questions to ask!

That what we find is that any organization that had not as yet been run through this whole ordeal of getting a new building since this Ideal Org initiative was first promoted in 2004, they basically were not worthy to be identified as an actual Ideal Org.
A further reality here is that a demand is placed by International Management of Scientology located in Los Angeles. Local orgs were simply told to find some suitable building (preferably for a suitable price) and then that local org needed to get going, find something, and write a full CSW (Completed Staff Work) with full documentation (photographs, technical details) about any and all aspects. It is to be understood here that some people out there in Los Angeles had to approve everything. If they said no, the local org had to go on searching again. The local orgs had no control or say here at all!
The local organization were then also instructed to have their local Ideal Org fundraising event. Sometimes organized by some IAS representative, and sometimes by the local org itself. And then if that building had been purchased, it had to be made ‘perfect’. More fundraising would follow, and cheap labour was acquired. Many such free labour was gotten from the local Scientology parishioner.

Church of Scientology in Boston, MA
Scientology organization in Boston, MA

A problem arises, according to what has been presented ever since via PR outings, IAS organized video plays and magazines, in form of this luxury factor. These were not just some building, frequently these were historical buildings that were all afterwards, obviously at a cost, restored. The matter is that it does not require some luxurious or historical building to have an Ideal Org as it was intended by L. Ron Hubbard. Nonetheless the whole focus per this Ideal Org initiative from 2004 had been predominantly about acquiring such type of buildings, fixing them up and then presenting the nicely looking fully renovated/restored building, table ornamentwith perfect exterior and interior, especially designed details on furniture at the video plays organized by IAS and shown at the local organization. I recall video plays at such gatherings that as many as may be 12-15 new Ideal Orgs were shown one after the other, with their new perfect building, and that they were now booming and so on. Funny thing though, in these presentations, as in the IAS periodicals, they appear always shown without any people on them. Where were the people that were to occupy these empty spaces?

  Church os Scientology in Los Gatos - Reception Church os Scientology in Los Gatos - Academy
Church of Scientology in Los Gatos (July 2012) - Reception and Academy

Who cares about the building, it's people you want to see! Scientology is not about the building it is about people! And if insisting on making a comparison to the Old Saint Hill from the 60's. If you look for example at the photograph input in the brochure ‘How Big Was the Old Saint Hill?’ (issued 1985), then we are not looking at any empty chairs or quarters, we see a thriving of busy people all around. There is no particular focus there on some building or interior.

Go back Building up the Ideal Org

When this Ideal Org train finally hits your town and your org, then a whole variety of things will be happening. Besides the ever ongoing fundraising for this building and its renovations, the Scientology parishioner will be asked to personally get involved. If you have particular building or other skills then you are asked to volunteer and help out with the renovations. There is a persistent asking of any which way you can serve your organization.

This new usually huge building of course needs to be staffed. The Scientology parishioner will repeatedly be asked and persuaded to join staff there. Not seldom people are recruited from far off locations, forcing them to actually move. Many things I was able to observe very closely when the Ideal Org train had hit Malmö org in Sweden. People that already had staff positions in the organizations located in Stockholm and Gothenburg were persuaded to join staff in the Ideal Org in Malmö and many did.

We thus see here an enormous focus and effort to make it appear as if the 4.5Xing of that newly established Ideal Org is really occurring. Considering the excessive attention and promotion it has been given, for a while you may very well succeed with that. For starters the current Scientology public will be interested taking some services there. However what you need more than anything else is creating a continuous flow of new public coming in. So, a lasting success will entirely depend on how well you can accomplish that!

Go back Who actually owns these new buildings?

See, we had these orgs that were not actually succeeding very well, and thus did not require any bigger space at all (90% empty chairs in course room and such), nonetheless they were lined up to get their Ideal Org, meaning getting another building this time a ‘perfect building’! It is another way of saying that they were ordered to get some sort of preferably historical nice building that represents a good value on the real estate market, and then some entity (located in Los Angeles something) would actually own it. It would appear here that we find adjusted criteria as to what an Ideal Org actually constitutes of! Would something be your own org if that particular org does not own itself? What if that identity decides to kick everybody out and sell the building?

It does not appear that there is any information released of how the actual ownership of these buildings is set up. The Scientology parishioner simply receives no information about that. And if one asks the question (as I did various times), these representatives can not give you any clear answer. It is however a rather important issue. You just can not assume that everything is taking care of properly. The simple observation and fact that nothing appears to have been set up for this is hugely suspect. If the local organization and their Ideal Org is their org and the Scientology parishioners have actually raised the money for it, then some sort of cooperation should accordingly have been set up, you do this to protect and respect all interests! The paperwork for these matters should be in order. Purpose and use of the building, independence of the local organization, should all be covered in that paperwork. Then probably the generous donators should own some percentage of that building.

The funny thing here is also that the local Scientology parishioner is being told, that it is YOUR local new org the money is going to. Well, that local org is not owned by that Scientology parishioner, now is it, not even in part! And as soon as that new org building is standing tall, be assured that the Scientology parishioner will have to pay the dues prior to getting services delivered. So, the rather frequently used PR phrase that “It is YOUR org!,” in order to get people to give money for it is spurious. All what that org is, is a place where the local Scientology parishioner can take his services. It would be more than obvious that he has no obligation whatsoever to pay in money directly for the purpose that the organization can have that building.

Go back Arguments and conflicts

Go back (a) A matter of ‘real estate’?

Mind that the whole Ideal Org initiative as it is promoted, presented and endorsed at the various Scientology events constitutes a display of an image picturing a nice luxury exterior/interior, architectural highlights, and so on. However at the same time the association is being forwarded that if some organization had acquired their ‘perfect building’, that then suddenly that particular organization would start booming, flourish and prosper, getting in lots of publics, and so on ... Please realize that beautifully looking premises will not necessarily attract people to come into that building and get interested in the topic matter of Scientology. According to my knowledge there is no reference anywhere within Scientology written by L. Ron Hubbard that would imply such a thing either. That what we find is printed here below:

“We own a tremendous amount of property. We own a tremendous amount of material, and so forth. And it keeps growing. But that's not important.
When buildings get important to us, for God's sake, some of you born revolutionists, will you please blow up central headquarters. If someone had put some H.E. [high explosives] under the Vatican long ago, Catholicism might still be going.
Don't get interested in real estate. Don't get interested in the masses of buildings, because that's not important.”          LRH
(from Anatomy of the Human Mind Congress lecture #2 “The Genus of Scientology”, given on 31 Dec 60)

The odd idea is also being spread and the assumption being made that an organization will not be able to expand because there would exist technology of some sort that large premises must be acquired first, thus prior to actual expansion. I recall a variety of Scientology parishioners telling me this and believing that. I find this a rather strange and highly illogical concept. The question is why we fail to find or why one fails to present any actual policy letters that would support such a concept. Within the organization it is deemed not true if it can not be shown in such a writing as they are collected in ‘The Organization Executive Course’ volumes.

Awkward is as well the supposition that tells that those people that are involved with, promote and patch up such organizations into Ideal Orgs, that they would possess knowledge that we would not have. I have had a variety of persons telling me that and believing it. We can see that the common Scientology parishioner submit to such ideas and place their trust there. Again, we are not to assume or make-believe anything! See, that is just not Scientology. If a support for these brain waves are not found in ‘The Organization Executive Course’ volumes, you basically should disregard it. It just doesn't get more complicated than that! In fact, if some planned action is actually counteracted by the information found in these volumes, then you actually have to effectively query and take a stand against it!

Does one has to be reminded what policy letters were all about?

“This is a permanently valid issue of all third dynamic, org and administrative technology. These regardless of date or age, from the know-how in running an org or group or company.”          LRH
(from HCO PL 24 Sept 70 “Issues – Types of”)

“HCO PLs and HCOBs are proven by time and are the senior data on which we operate.”          LRH
(from HCO PL 9 Aug 72 “Seniority of Orders”)

Thus, when you as a person are active within that Scientology organization, then anything what some person is telling you to do or submit to, accordingly you are required to ask what reference they are actually operating on. This is the first step to do, then what follows is the application of the steps as found in HCO PL 9 Feb 79 “How to Defeat Verbal Tech Checklist”.

Further examined criteria

The year 1970 saw the release of HCO PL 23 Sept 70 “Quarters, Policy Regarding; Historical”. It says in its introduction:
“In 20 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.”          LRH
It then goes into detail of various of these “lessons”. The policy letter lays out 9 different criteria (indicated as ‘A’ to ‘I’). Each of the 9 criteria are then followed with some examples, which in turn is followed with a conclusion. Here under I quote some of the criteria and its conclusions that you can compare with the Ideal Org initiative as we have seen it presented and endorsed since 2004.

“A.VIABILITY of the org (its economic survival including its security from political enemy motivated attack) is the first and foremost consideration. In terms of quarters an org can afford just so much expense. Therefore Viability is the first consideration – not how posh or what repute or what image. Thus we have the policy that THE FIRST CONSIDERATION IN PROCURING QUARTERS IS THE VIABILITY OF THE ORG. ...
CONCLUSION:Viability of economics must not exceed the income of the org. The SAFE figure for rent and mortgage payments must not exceed 15% to 17% of the gross income of the org. ...”
“B.Quarters must be close to ample and cheap student and pc housing, restaurants and transport. ...
CONCLUSION:The presence of ample cheap housing and restaurants and general and local transport is a main factor in the viability of an org.”
“C.Image is a secondary consideration.
CONCLUSION:One does all he can by staff work to improve the image. If image is the reason why one must move from an area where the org was viable or had student housing, forget it. Polish up what you have already. Image is gratifying. If A and B exist, one can think about image. Image of the outer building does not much affect A and B. Cleanliness and order of what you have is the image to concentrate upon. Staff pay and food and cheap student housing do more for an org than a posh building.”
“E.Expensive office equipment is not a first priority.
CONCLUSION:Enough desks and chairs and furnishings is far superior to top grade office furniture. Reserves tied up in furniture are never recoverable. Furniture quality does not influence production. Furniture lack does reduce production.”
“F.Renovations are destructive if extensive.
CONCLUSION:Don't renovate at vast expense. Use and make it better as you can with your own people.”          LRH

Go back (b) “Building Fund Account”

It probably would be important here to realize that there was already a plan of handling in place that would prepare an organization for the situation that they would require more space. A simple fund would take care of the required finances. HCO PL 18 Jan 65 “Financial Management, Building Fund Account” says: “The weekly proportion of income owing to the Building Fund Account must be paid into it weekly and may not be withheld.”  LRH.  This actually means that a certain percentage of the ordinary income through delivering services, selling books and son, is to be placed into this fund. See, it says nowhere that the public is to raise to funds for property for the local (or other) organization through fundraising. See, it just does not say that! Of course, in the final end, it is the public paying for it, but... he only pays for services, it's the organization's Treasury Division that allocates a small part of these payments into that fund.

This HCO PL lists 5 purposes for this fund:
“The purpose of this account is to provide a cushion by which an organization which is becoming insolvent may be salvaged.”
“The secondary purpose of the Building Fund is to purchase property, but when this is done, the purchase must be for cash or, if any mortgage is involved, all further payments than the initial payment must be made from the Expense Sum.”
“Building Fund monies, being under the control of only the International Board, may also be used for other Board purposes without local consultation. These include research projects or experimental dissemination projects in the local area, or research on an international basis.”
“The repayment of loans made by the International Board to an area may be repaid to the International Board from the Building Fund, but only on arrangements originated by the International Board.”
“Finance of International Board projects may be obtained by the international Board by simple withdrawal of funds from the local Building Fund Accounts without permission or consultation with area or national officers or their accounts units; these, however, must be informed of the withdrawals.”
And of course the one here particularly worthy of notice is number 2.

So ..., when we have all this. Then ..., what is all that about fundraising happenings? Now, is it going to be about doing Scientology or not doing Scientology? The present scene is that the local orgs are asking its parishioners to buy an building for them.

As the lines were already firmly established about how to actually go about this thing. This thus had now turned into a matter of resorting to unusual solutions. The Building Fund Account is simply by-passed!

Go back (c) Applying the correct condition

In Scientology there is this thing that is addressed as applying conditions. At any time one is in a certain condition in regards to production, expansion and all that. It is the actual products that determine how well one is doing, the better the products the higher the condition that would be assigned. With this condition assigned one will then follow some steps that firstly aim to maintain this achieved production, and secondly to add to and do even more well. These steps are simple and based on actual praxis. This means that if you do assign the proper condition formula's, and just follow these steps, that it will result in to you doing even better in continuation.

An interesting summary of this is found in ‘Orders of the Day’, 4 Jan 70:
“(1) observe, question, and draw up a list of what was previously successful in your area or zone of control.  (2) observe and draw up a list of all those things that were unsuccessful in your area in the past.  (3) get the successful action in.  (4) throw the unsuccessful action out.  (5) knock off frantically trying to cope or defend.  (6) sensibly get back in a working structure.”
(see ‘Modern Management Technology Defined’ (released 1976), page 401)

These conditions, their characteristics and the steps taken are laid out and explained in HCO PL 23 Sept 67 “New Post Formula, The Conditions Formulas”. It will list the conditions (from highest to lower):
“Power Change
  Normal Operation  

These conditions are usually measured by the statistics of that week compared with the previous week. This will give you the condition steps to apply for the following week. For example if you have been in “Normal Operation” you will then apply the steps of that condition that if properly executed will get you into “Affluence”. If something goes off the rails for some reason and you end up with lower statistics (production) for the week you will go down a step which will get you at “Emergency”, then you will follow the steps of that new condition. Simple, effective and it does actually work.

As you go up on these conditions you actually will be expanding, and at some time you may require additional space to deliver more product or service to an increase of customers. Here then it may require you to acquire a larger building. Obviously at this time you will be in “Power” and you will be needing a “Power Change”. With being in “Power” also comes that you, your business or your organization will have the funds to purchase this larger building. After all it has been saved in that building fund. It is utterly unheard of that when some company is needing or wanting bigger space that they are going to ask their customers to buy it for them! Nonetheless this is EXACTLY what the present approach of the Church of Scientology is all about. The problem is that even if some organization is not in need of physically more space, because their present space is adequate to deliver service. Then obviously one is not in need of a new building. It would either way be applying the wrong condition. It is not so surprising then that donations are asked from the public for buying some building, as the funds may not have been earned by that particular organization through the delivery of services to the public.
It thus comes down to that the public is purchasing and actually paying for the new building of the organization. And then as a reward they will get their name added on some plaque.

In regards to the old Saint-Hill organization in England, here we were facing an expansion prior to getting larger premises. I spoke with people who were there at the time during the 60's. They tell that at a time even toilets were used to set up auditing sessions, as there was no place elsewhere left.

It is just oddbal reasoning that goes around within the organization that: “If we just would have that perfect building, the space, and all that, we would get in lots of people. All our problems would be solved!”. And this would just happen, just like that without applying the right condition? It doesn't work like that in the real world in any business anywhere. It is not Scientology either! Nevertheless there is this present push from the Scientology Management to get in money for new buildings, to get them somehow, it being the right condition for that particular organization or not. Understand this well, this is not doing Scientology!! The business of Scientology is doing Scientology, it is to deliver services to the Scientology parishioner, and just place a small amount of the donations received into this building fund account.

Do mind “SOLVE IT WITH SCIENTOLOGY”:  “Don't engage in ‘fund raising’ or ‘selling postcards’ or borrowing money. Just make more income with Scientology.”. It is made quite clear that “It's a sign of very poor management to seek extraordinary solutions for finance outside Scientology.”  LRH  (from HCO PL 24 Feb 64 “Org Programming”).

Go back (d) ‘Hats, Not Wearing’

‘Hats’ developed in 1950 for use in Dianetic orgs as a special technology. The term and idea of ‘a hat’ comes from conductors or locomotive engineers, etc each of whom wears a distinctive and different type of headgear. A ‘hat’ therefore designates particular status and duties in an organization.
A ‘hat’ is a specialty. It handles or controls certain particles in various actions and receives, changes and routes them.
A ‘hat’ designates what terminal in the organization is represented and what the terminal handles and what flows the terminal directs.
Every hat has a product.
The product can be represented as a statistic.
Any job or position in the world could have its own hat. The reason things do not run well in a life, an org, a group, nation or the world is an absence of hats.
The reason why an org runs well when it does is hats.
Any protest of anyone against things not running right can be traced to lack of hats.
Any slump an org goes through can be traced directly and at once to an absence of one or more hats being worn.”          LRH
(from HCO PL 22 Sept 70 “Hats”)

The purpose of the Scientology organization as laid out in its many policy letters is offering and for all delivering Scientology services to its parishioners. Instead funds are continuously being asked for some building to be purchased, some book donation to libraries or other projects. These funds are thus not being used by that Scientology parishioner for his or her benefit. In fact the pressure exercised on persons for giving donations at every turn is extreme, there are almost weekly organized “fund raising Barbecues” and sorts, they are calling you at home. Particularly those that already have donated a lot, easy targets it is then though. I know about people that don't even pick up the phone at home anymore.

It has been observed that also the staff in the various organizations appear rather coercive and persistent in getting public to donate for various of these projects. The question to ask then if this is part of their responsibility according to their post duties? Well, I really don't think so. This is rather effectively covered in a whole series of policy letters. See, it is simply not part of their actual hat. It is their hat to keep the organization running, to get in public to buying and receiving Dianetics and Scientology services. Asking the public for donations that create no effect on keeping their local organization solvent is not their hat!  (see also ref.: HCO PL 20 Apr 69 II “Hats, Not Wearing”)

(from HCO PL 31 Jan 83 “The Reason for Orgs”)

Go back (e) Exchange and “What Your Donations Buy”

Another problem that arises is the matter of exchange. The single purpose of the organization is factually making available and deliver actual services to the Scientology public, which are auditing, training and selling books/tapes. This is the actual exchange that the organization has with its parishioners. Now, if donations are being asked for other purposes and aims then what sort of exchange will we end up with? We should also consider that this is affecting the individual staff member. See, if he/she is asking for donations that will not profit the local organization, then it will also not result in proper pay for the staff member. There is an interesting policy letter that actually addresses this and in addition lays out the various gradations of exchange:

“There is a term used in business called ‘fair exchange.’
Let us apply this to an activity engaged in servicing the public.
We can isolate four conditions of exchange.
1.First consider a group which takes in money but does not deliver anything in exchange. This is called rip-off. It is the ‘exchange’ condition of robbers, tax men, governments and other criminal elements.
2.Second is the condition of partial exchange. The group takes in orders or money for goods and then delivers part of it or a corrupted version of what was ordered. This is called short-changing or ‘running into debt’ in that more and more is owed, in service or goods by the group.
3.The third condition is the exchange known, legally and in business practice, as ‘fair exchange.’ One takes in orders and money and delivers exactly what has been ordered. Most successful businesses and activities work on the basis of ‘fair exchange.’
4.The fourth condition of exchange is not common but could be called exchange in abundance. Here one does not give two for one or free service but gives something more valuable than money was received for. Example: The group has diamonds for sale; an average diamond is ordered; the group delivers a blue-white diamond above average. Also it delivers it promptly and with courtesy.
Now, believe it or not, org income and staff pay depend upon which of the above four exchanges is in practice by (a) the org or group; or (b) the staff member in the group.”          LRH
(from HCO PL 10 Sept 82 “Exchange, Org Income and Staff Pay”)

And then we have:

“But the biggest part of your donation stays right in your area. It is used to make training and processing and data available to the next fellow first by keeping the church there and second by letting him know about it and third by making as sure as possible that the training and processing he gets is standard and effective.”          LRH
(from ‘The Auditor 55’, 1970 “What Your Donations Buy”)

Go to index

Back to Main Index Ideal Orgs knocking out original old Qual Libraries

This is as it appears another consequence. Qual Libraries that are set up as per the original guidelines as laid out by L. Ron Hubbard are effectively being knocked out as soon as some org gets their Ideal Org. As already made clear it is the International Management of the Church of Scientology that very closely follows up and controls all the steps of how matters are set up in that new building. And there is simply no place for an original Qual Library. It is considered that old materials are incorrect materials, or that they are squirrel. I have had a variety of people on the phone from AOSH's telling me this and I have personally repeatedly clashed with missionaries that said that all old materials need to be shredded. One of them said to me: “There is a reason why older references are cancelled.”. Where I replied: “And there is a reason why L. Ron Hubbard set up the rules for Qual Libraries ensuring availability and accessibility to previously in use references!”. This particular person promised to leave references for me with Executive Director of the local org that would support her stance. She however failed to leave anything to me!

The whole matter is that if such an org in fact had old materials, and the Ideal Org train comes along, then rest assured that the original set up Qual Library will be unmocked and disappear. Not a very good thing at all, and it is not per L. Ron Hubbard guidelines either.

Read more at below link:  (separate window)
    “The disappearance of information (1):  The importance of the ‘Qual Library’”

Go to index

Back to Main Index Final countdown: ‘Ideal Orgs’ or ‘Idle Orgs’?
(Includes:  Scientology management says: “Only listen to us!” and further means of control)

Such an Ideal Org could be seen as a symbol for a very well functioning and successful organization. The whole set up however gives more an impression of it building castles in the air. We can already identify various modus operandi in the set up that are unrealistic and defy logic.
You simply can not base achievement of success on various unproven assumptions. You have to base it on past recorded experiences. Within Scientology it is a rule that one has to base these things on the information that is found in policy letters. It is just information that has proven to have been successful in the past, this is the way these policy letters come about, it's all they are. Thus within Scientology you can not just ignore that information. The problem comes in the form that it is being ignored or misunderstood.
If you are intelligent and perceptive enough you can figure out the whole thing rather easily. However if you are an uncritical good believer you are bound to be fooled. Mind that this is why advertizing works, it is tricking you to believe something in order to get you to purchase some product (that you often don't need). Propaganda works in exactly the same way, as does formal education. You make believe...

What are some of these after-symptoms? Well, for example these Ideal Org presentations that we find at these Scientology video plays just show the newly established Ideal Orgs. They do not present revisitations of these same organizations some years later. It is somehow figured that; once an Ideal Org is always and Ideal Org; it is just all assumed that it will remain being that. Of course this is just wishful thinking. You have to do follow ups. Not doing so makes it automatically suspect.
I recall this guy that is going to schools to lecture about street drugs (in fact an IAS Freedom Medal Winner). The last time I heard him speaking at a local Scientology organization he expressed surprise about that Malmö org in Sweden, established as an Ideal org just a few years earlier, wasn't flooded with people, he thought it being rather empty. He shared his feelings about it with his listeners and said he couldn't understand why Malmö org wasn't succeeding better. His listeners, some 40 Scientology parishioners, were all silent. From the various facial expressions I could easily infer that they too had seen that. And I was thinking, it's all explained in these policy letters, simply start reading.
More people have been making these observations, since years I received a whole variety of similar reports from Scientologists of patched up orgs all around this planet, that at present were Ideal Orgs, that just weren't doing too well. What can I say? It really isn't so difficult to figure it out! Some people out there have satirically started to refer to them as ‘Idle Orgs’ or even ‘Idle Morgues’. Well, even the official photographic presentation from the Scientology organization of these acquired premises and their renovated interior give that impression. Just pictures without people.

Scientology management says: “Only listen to us!” and further means of control

It must be said though that the PR that the Church of Scientology is giving out is rather astounding. But it appears all to be a make-believe action. The Scientology parishioner is fed persistently and repeatedly, time after time, at lengthy almost weekly events (commonly 2-3 hours long each), and through a variety of freely distributed magazines and folders, that are all telling how grand all things are. Almost daily one could receive 2 or 3 mailings in the mail.

One may as well take note here that the Scientology parishioner is encouraged not to read any information in the media that could be seen as critical, this on the Internet or newspapers. The Church of Scientology even provides for a Net Nanny filter software for Scientologists, so that you could avoid anything that was “improper or discreditable to the Scientology religion” while surfing on the Internet. And additional software “which blocks entheta email messages, if any were to be sent to you by the few 2.5% lingering on the Internet” (details here, separate window).

So, the information taken in by the common Church of Scientology parishioner is particularly one-sided. Nonetheless he adopts it (blindly), lives by it, and put all his faith in that. This until a rude awakening will come to pass.

Go to index


Back to Main Index HAS, HASI, SEF, IAS ... – What's the verdict?

Go back In restrospect

HAS/HASI:  Original outset of the Scientology membership:
“The purpose of the organization was simply to
have a central point of dissemination, where the materials of Dianetics and Scientology could be put out without any great turmoil, turbulence, vias, and
to train people in the subject who wanted training, and
to give people help and information, who wanted help and information.
That is what the HAS was formed to do.”          LRH
(from London Public Lecture Series #1 “Goals of Dianetics and Scientology”, given on 8 Oct 55)

SEF:  It was the SEF that firstly introduced the practice in where funds were asked for no service in return. This SEF was initially instigated to financially support these 11 Guardian Office members that were tried in a court of law. It had thus nothing outstanding do with these purely organizational coordination matters that facilitated things for the Scientology parishioner in getting information, auditing and training. Strictly taken here this was simply a fund, collecting in money for other things. It says it was a Safe Environment Fund. It was not a Scientology membership per sé.
In its promotion it said: “The SAFE ENVIRONMENT FUND is to be permanent, its scope almost unlimited.” (from ‘Co-Motion’, [late 1979]). But this was not to be, it went out of sight already during the early 80's. Why? And if it was dissolved, what happened with the funds already collected? We are not given an answer here!

IAS:  Then in 1984 we had a similar initiative but it being launched under a new name. It's stated aims were indeed very similar to what the SEF said it would do. It would seem obvious that indications are found here that the success of the SEF collecting funds, for no service in return, could have inspired some people to include it in the new initiative. Considering:  (underlining is mine)
         “Already Scientologists around the world have donated hundreds of thousands of pounds to assist the Fund with its first project of assisting eleven Scientologists defend themselves from persecution by agencies of the United States Government.”         
            (from SEF promotional letter, England, ca 1980)   
They named this new initiative the International Association of Scientologists (IAS). This however was presented as “THE official Church membership” (from IAS magazine ‘Impact - Introductory Issue’, early 1985).
We could say: HASI + SEF = IAS. The reality though as we have seen is that the SEF purpose became the dominating influence or ruling factor in this membership.

Mind that there never were any explanations of the disappearance of the HASI organization. It had been in existence and was the official Scientology membership organization during at least as long as 25 years (1952-77). One should have thought that some explanation would be in place, but we don't get that explanation. All Scientology magazines mention nothing of it. Basically the HASI pretty much silently went under. The name was still (sort of) in use after the HASI went defunct in 1977, mostly only referred to as Scientology membership, until it was finally replaced by the IAS in 1984. But no one made any mention that it was replacing the HASI as the official Scientology membership. Not to mention the disappearance of the mention of Hubbard (‘H’) in its name. Why is that anyway? What conclusion can we draw from that?

So, what does it all amount to here? We got a new Scientology membership organization that, as it became rather clear as time passed on, was more interested in collecting money from Scientology parishioners for no service given in return, then serving that Scientology parishioner.
Mind though that the IAS has no business in asking the Scientology parishioner to pay for their new building. As the Scientology parishioner has already made his contribution by buying for and taking services. A percentage of that money is then set aside by the organization in a building fund account.

Go back The HASI unburdened, the IAS burdened ...

The HASI unburdened the Scientology parishioner, it coordinated, it was facilitating matters. The IAS instead burdened the Scientology parishioner, here he persistently finds himself at a crossroad and has to make a decision to get trained and audited himself, or instead give the money for claimed humanitarian projects. He will be patted on the shoulder, and they will let him be (for a while), if he chooses for the latter. If he instead chooses to get trained and receive auditing he will be met with a displeased looking IAS representative. In ways he is made to feel, that now he is not with the group, he only thinks about himself. You see, this IAS representative is just not interested to get you moving on that Bridge, he is not interested in that you get trained and/or audited. Now, isn't that a bit well strange for an official Scientology membership organization? (remember what the HASI was about!)

I recall a guy (a public) in a local Scientology organization, very active in the org, volunteering to manage this Purification Rundown (a sauna program) for the local org and other things. At a time when we had excessive money-asking activities for Ideal Orgs, this person was persuaded to donate a lot of money. Money he didn't actually have. Next day at the org I witnessed he was commended by fellow Scientologists, staff and public. “That was a very responsible and good deed, well done!,” they said. He said wondering: “Was it really...?,” his face had a sad expression and one of regret. Some of the persons that had just commended him, now did not appear comfortable, judging from their facial expressions. In the end he had to take on extra work in the evenings to pay off that ‘donation’, making it also impossible for him money-wise and time-wise to get trained and receive auditing, or manage some Purification Rundown. It wasn't for long that we did not see him at all anymore in the org. He simply had disappeared and no person in the org seemed to know (or wanted to say) where he had gone or why he wasn't there anymore. But I guess we can figure this one out all by ourselves ...

Go back The stated aims of Scientology

Now, if we regard this a bit more closely, then the actual stated purpose of Scientology was to change man from within (making man more sane), and through that way aiming to permanently change the outer conditions. The HAS/HASI was all about achieving that. The IAS although it did represent the official Scientology membership, it did draw away really a lot of (if not all) money to projects that had their focus on handling situations and problems from the outside (change systems). These changes made however will never be permanent as you did not change man from within! In time all the changes you implemented will revert back to what they were before that. We have some 3,000 years of recorded history of mankind that shows incontestably this being the case! The only way to maintain permanent changes is through addressing and curing the cause of the problem. Man is the problem, not the system. Man makes the system.
The HASI was all about to support and service the Scientology parishioner in his progress in Scientology (getting better and more able). The IAS instead doesn't support or urge him in any way to take services and get trained in Scientology, it was instead asking the Scientology parishioner to spend their money on other things. Very different purposes and painting a very different situation!

Sure enough it is good thing to collect funds that attempt to make a difference in outer conditions, there is just no question about that! But behold, it was not what Scientology or the HASI originally set out to do! And if collecting funds for these things becomes the primary or main focus, and is interfering in Scientology parishioners getting trained and audited, then we surely do know something is very wrong here indeed!

“War is the spectacular and bloody projection of our everyday life, is it not? War is merely an outward expression of our inward state, an enlargement of our daily action. It is more spectacular, more bloody, more destructive, but it is the collective result of our individual activities. So, you and I are responsible for war, and what can we do to stop it? Obviously the impending war cannot be stopped by you and me, because it is already in movement; it is already taking place though still chiefly on the psychological level. It has already begun in the world of ideas, though it may take a little longer for our bodies to be destroyed. As it is already in movement, it cannot be stopped—the issues are too many, too great, and are already committed. But you and I, seeing that the house is on fire, can understand the causes of that fire, can go away from it and build in a new place with different materials that are not combustible, that will not produce other wars. That is all that we can do. You and I can see what creates wars, and if we are interested in stopping wars, then we can begin to transform ourselves, who are the causes of war.”         J. Krishnamurti

(from ‘Krishnamurti's talks in India 1948, Series II Bangalore’: “2nd talk, given 11 Jul ’48”)

Go to index

Back to Main Index Buying indulgences
The collector...
The collector...

A correlation can be made with a particular practice of the Catholic Church. The one of acquiring or buying indulgences (a remission of temporal punishment). It doesn't necessarily had to be done through money though. Indulgences could be granted if for example one decided at the time of the crusades to simply join the fight to free the Holy Land. It is basically about doing or giving out favours, money-wise or other-wise. If agreeable to the receiver (Catholic Church representative) an indulgence was granted. A particular misuse in the early 16th century caused Martin Luther to author his 95 theses.

Still to this day it seems that the voice of the Catholics are sort of in denial about some aspects. We find for example on an article called “Myths about Indulgences”, here we see listed 7 myths. At ‘Myth 7’ we read this: “The financial scandal surrounding indulgences, the scandal that gave Martin Luther an excuse for his heterodoxy, involved alms—indulgences in which the giving of alms to some charitable fund or foundation was used as the occasion to grant the indulgence. There was no outright selling of indulgences.” (external link) (last checked: 4 Mar 2015).
That what particularly bothers here is the referral to Martin Luther's “heterodoxy”. All he did was making a factual observation and he took action against it through making people aware of a situation.

Without any doubt, as Martin Luther still this day on this Catholic website is regarded as a heretic, I will be regarded a heretic by representatives of the Church of Scientology. And still, all that I do is only sharing my observations and being honest about it. I even provide for exact referencing that shows where and how one has gone awry. Nonetheless an act thus of heresy.

Well, it may be time for people to finally wake up and see things for what they are and factually represent. After all what is the difference between a letter of indulgence or a plaque or your name listed on some cornerstone of some building? The matter of the recorded business in indulgences is a factual occurrence, it doesn't particular matter how you phrase it, present it or try to diminish that occurrence. People gave money, gave a ‘donation’ so to say, and they got something in exchange that they thought was good for them. In the same way that Scientologists also need to start to have a look at things for what they really are.

Now, let me ask you! Why are we having all these “fund raising Barbecues”? Why are Scientology parishioners being asked to pay for the new building of their organization? Why are they made to feel bad when they don't want to do that? Why is a whole array of original and today valid LRH policy letters persistently being violated? (as if all churchgoing Scientology parishioners would be illiterates) Why are these finances not being spend on the progress of the Scientology parishioner? One should ask oneself how well one progresses in that organization. Does one actually move on that Bridge? I see quite a few persons not moving at all. Is your moving on that Bridge tempered with by your ‘donations’ for which you don't get a service in return? If the answer is yes on this last question, then start looking.
I even have seen people leaving the orgs and Scientology after getting themselves seriously into debt because of these ‘donations’.

Is for some reason the policy letter that tells about these “fund raising Barbecues” not clear-cut enough? It really makes you wonder! So, then why is the Church of Scientology having them? Not once, but repeatedly, and again, and again, and again...

So, what was Scientology all about again?

Go to index

Back to Main Index A broken promise?

Remember this one?

“The IAS was formed to guarantee that Scientologists will always be free to practice their religion and assists Churches of Scientology and Scientologists subjected to religious persecution. The IAS works further to guarantee religious freedom for all.”. (source) (last checked: 10 Mar 2015)

It thus says “free to practice their religion” and “assists ... Scientologists subjected to religious persecution”. The question to ask here is according to whose rules? See, the Church of Scientology considers that only a particular version of these religious practices are falling into this category. And they will dictate to you which that is. If one instead chooses to practice a different version, and it doesn't matter if this is pure unaltered technology developed by L. Ron Hubbard previously in use. Then rest assured these Scientologists will not enjoy being “free to practice their religion” and if they persist rest assured that Church of Scientology representatives will actively “assist” in having these “Scientologists subjected to religious persecution”!

Another angle here that defies freedom in practice is an indeed very confused idea about copyrights. Scientology representatives are of the opinion that only those persons that are officially licensed by the Church of Scientology (and thus pay a fee) can practice Dianetics and/or Scientology procedures. It is however a false idea, as a copyright can not be taken on a practice. This is very clear unrevocable US law! (see here), and at that L. Ron Hubbard does not agree with legislation either (see here, separate windows).

A broken promise? Most definitely!

“Any process ever taught on the SHSBC or ever released in ANY book can be audited and be Standard Tech.”          LRH
(from HCOB 26 Feb 70 “Standard Tech and Invalidation”)

Go to index

Back to Main Index How to encourage voluntary philanthropic donations the right way ...
(Includes:  When HASI moved from one place to another during mid-50's, a ‘building fund inaugurated’)

Are there ways to request for voluntary philanthropic or benevolent donations? May be not if they are to be entirely voluntarily? There are many gradients that can be found here. It also depends largely upon where you find yourself.
If you find yourself in an organization that on one side offers particular services (for which you have to pay), and on the other side asks for benevolent or charitable donations (also taking your money), then these 2 should not interfere with each other. Offer your help if you can or want (your choice), but remain being able to fully take services that you planned to receive for your own benefit. This should all be pretty straight forward, simple common sense basically.

In such an organization an asking for a voluntary donation should then not be exerted with (much) force, it just wouldn't be voluntarily then. It can also not be done in a way that you are made to feel bad or uncomfortable or that you are being frowned upon by the asker if you did not donate. You can not run a scenario for example on premises like “Do you want to help? If you don't give money, it is because you don't want to help!”.
There are of course benevolent objectives that always can be found. Although donations for such benevolent or philanthropic purposes should come foremost from those individuals that actually can afford it. Essentially it wouldn't be wrong to ask for donations for altruistic-like purposes. But you may just want to announce it, and then you let it be. You don't hunt down people for it. You just don't pound on it at every turn. As soon this is being done, you know something is wrong there. See, it wouldn't be voluntarily anymore.

The Scientology parishioner though will recognize the above scenario.

When HASI moved from one place to another during mid-50's, a ‘building fund inaugurated’

Things used to be quite different. Prior to so about 1980 we don't particular find any such scenario's taking place within the Scientology organization. There is though a single occurrence that is recorded in Scientology publications and it dates back to the years 1955-57.
It was at a time when the HASI premises were located at 163, Holland Park Avenue, London. It was found that its activities could not be housed properly anymore at this location due to amongst other lack of space. Therefore other premises were searched for.

We find in ‘Certainty Vol 2, No 7’, [Jul 55]:

Many of our well-wishers, upon reading of our plans for new premises, promptly wrote to us in a very enthusiastic manner. A number of these letters contained cheques and postal orders and suggestions for starting a building fund.
In response to these requests a fund has been started and subscription so far amount to £157. 14. 6.  Our subscribers have been thanked individually and next month a subscribers list will be published. Is it possible that your name will be on it ?”

We find no further such notices about this in this periodical. New premises were later found at 37 Fitzroy Street, London. A new announcement we find in ‘Certainty Vol 4, No 1’, [Jan 57]:

  WELL, the migration is over. We are all now properly installed at the new headquarters at 37 Fitzroy Street, London, W.1, and even the Post Office has co-operated to the extent of supplying us with telephones after only twenty-four hours in place of the standard three months’ communication lag on obtaining new ’phones. Our new number is LANgham 3601. We hope you will give us a ring some time. Our cable address remains unchanged: “SCIENTOLOGY LONDON.”
The new building is in process of being given a face-lift by staff and student volunteers in their spare time. Already it is looking quite attractive. By the time we have finished it will be quite a show piece.
The Auditing rooms are painted in two shades of pink and look very attractive indeed. The hallways and stairs are being painted in blush ivory and mushroom, a pleasing combination which has the added advantage of being very serviceable. Soon it is intended that the front of the building will be completely redecorated.
Dr. Jean Thomason, Head of the HASI Clinic, is already thinking about a nice big country house for her Processing Department. With the speed that Scientology is going forward in this country the Processing Department has already outgrown the space allocated to it at the new building.
Even so, here at 37 Fitzroy Street we have a great deal more space than we had previously, even the members of the Stenographic Department now have room for their elbows. Little things like that help when running a rapidly expanding organisation.
Situated very centrally in London we are now very easy to reach. There are Underground and many bus services within very short distance.”

Hubbard House plaqueAnd 7 months following that we find the photograph of a plaque published in ‘Certainty Vol 4, No 8’, [Aug 57] at page 11 (see illustration on the right). These messages as published in the Certainty periodical should pretty much speak for themselves. There is no hunting down of people here for acquiring funds. If manual labour or financial help was offered by the Scientology parishioner then it was accepted, and that is about it.

We also face the situation here that larger premises were factually required! There was thus a real situation here. Not some imaginary tale about that prior to be able to extend we need larger premises, and all that jazz. For which the Scientology parishioner then was hunted down.

Well, the times indeed have been a-changin’. So, let's start to change it back again towards an increase of taking matters in perspective and appropriateness, shall we not ...



     AOSH EU (or AOSH EU & AF):
Advanced Organization Saint Hill Europe (& Africa)’: A Scientology organization which services higher level auditing & training, located in Copenhagen, Denmark.
Completed Staff Work’. An assembled package of information on any given situation, plan or emergency forwarded to me sufficiently complete to require from me only an “approved” or “disapproved.”It (1) states the situation, (2) gives all the data necessary to its solution, (3) advices a solution, and (4) contains a line for approval or disapproval.
    HCO PL:
Hubbard Communication Office Policy Letter’. Color flash–green ink on white paper. Written by LRH only, but only so starting from January 1974. These are the organizational and administrative issue line. For more information go here (separate window).
An usual abbreviation for ‘L. Ron Hubbard’.
     ‘Modern Management Technology Defined’ (released 1976):
This is within the Scientology organization commonly referred to as simply ‘Admin Dictionary’. Presently used editions of this book are identical to this first edition.
     ‘The Organization Executive Course’:
Subtitled in the 1970-74 release: ‘An Encyclopedia of Scientology Policy’. This is a series of books that contain the HCO PL's, and any references that are primarily dealing with administrative matters. They are divided up division wise. The HCO PL's are printed in green ink on white paper, and the volumes themselves come in green bindings. These books may also be referred to as the ‘green volumes’ or even ‘OEC volumes’. The ‘old green volumes’ then would refer to the 1970-74 release, the ‘new green volumes’ instead to the 1991 release. See a listing of published volumes here (pop-up window).
     Operating Thetan (OT):
1. Willing and knowing cause over life, thought, matter, energy, space and time. And that would of course be mind and that would of course be universe. (SH Spec 80, 6609C08)  2. An individual who could operate totally independently of his body whether he had one or didn't have one. He's now himself, he's not dependent on the universe around him. (SH Spec 66, 6509C09)  3. A being at cause over matter, energy, space, time, form and life. Operating comes from “able to operate without dependency on things” and thetan is the Greek letter theta (θ), which the Greeks used to represent “thought” or perhaps “spirit” to which an “n” is added to make a new noun in the modern style used to create words in engineering. (Book of Case Remedies, p. 10)
Short for ‘organization(s)’.
Short for ‘Operating Thetan’. See at that entry in vocabulary.
     Qual Library:
Qualifications Library’. Located in Division 5 (Qualifications Division), Department 14 (Dept. of Correction).  1. There is a Qual Librarian, whose duties are essentially those of a librarian, collecting up the materials, logging and storing them safely, making up cross reference files so that the material can be easily located. (BPL 21 Jan 73R, Use the Library to Restore Lost Technology)  2. Now that takes an interesting librarian because he's the Technical Information Center. (7109C05 SO, A Talk on a Basic Qual)  3. Qual is in the business of finding and restoring lost tech. (BPL 22 Nov 71R, Qual Org Officer/Esto)
     third dynamic:
There could be said to be eight urges (drives, impulses) in life. These we call dynamics. These are motives or motivations. The ‘third dynamic’ is the urge towards existence in groups or individuals. Also referred to as the ‘group dynamic’.

Go to top of this page