Declaration of Caroline Letkeman
antivirus
I, Caroline Letkeman, declare as follows:
1. I am over the age of 18 years.
2. The statements herein are of my own personal knowledge and if
called upon as a witness I can testify competently thereto.
3. In November 2000, I entered the LMT LITERATI 2000 contest and
submitted my essay called Scientology: Soul Hackers under the pseudonym
"antivirus." That essay was awarded second prize in the contest and was
posted on the Lisa McPherson Trust website at the following url:
http://www.lisatrust.net/literaticontest/contest2000/00antivirus.html. The
contest closed on November 30, 2000, and the essay was posted soon after
that date.
4. The entire reason for my posting of the essay under a
pseudonym was to remain anonymous. I carefully refrained from including
personal information in that essay that would allow Scientology to identify
me. Scientology strictly enforces their internal policy that requires their
members to disconnect from critics, regardless of familial connections. My
adult daughter, Ann Reinertsen, is a Scientologist, and I was very concerned
about the steps that Scientology would take to destroy my relationship with
Ann should they became aware of my critical essay.
5. As any Scientologist in good standing, Ann believes
that her spiritual eternity depends upon strict adherence to the policies of
Scientology. Those policies include the purging from their relationships
anyone who is openly critical of their beliefs. Scientology labels their
members "Potential Trouble Source" (PTS) when they have such connections.
The PTS persons are dealt with in Scientology's Ethics department and are
coercively forced to change their relationship and associations in
accordance with Hubbard's policies, before they can continue with their
Scientology training and counseling. No "Potential Trouble Source" can
receive auditing or training in Scientology, except for that which is
designed strictly to alter their PTS situation. In the event that the
member is connected with a critic, the only solution for the member is to
disconnect from them. If the member fails to disconnect, they are refused
Scientology training or auditing. They also run the risk of being labeled a
"suppressive person" themselves by reason of non-compliance with Scientology
's disconnection policy regarding critics. L. Ron Hubbard covers many of
these policies in his book called Introduction to Scientology Ethics.
6. Although we live on opposite sides of the US, Ann and I
enjoyed a loving mother-daughter relationship and communicated regularly by
phone and e-mail up to January 20, 2001. At no time prior to January 20,
2001 did I discuss with Ann my disillusionment with Scientology, because I
feared repercussions with Scientology, and the tremendous pressure they
would bring to bear on Ann to disconnect from me. I specifically did not
mention anything to her about the essay that I had written. I did not speak
with any Scientology member in good standing about the essay; they would
have been forced by policy to alert Scientology officials, which would set
in motion exactly what I was trying to avoid. I also refrained from using
or making known my pseudonym of "antivirus" to any members of Scientology in
good standing.
7. Alt.religion.scientology is an Internet newsgroup
frequented by both specially trained Scientologists and critics of
Scientology. By specially trained Scientologists I wish to point out that
lay Scientologists are enjoined from reading critical material about
Scientology on the Internet. Scientology software exists that filters out
critical Internet content and Scientology management encourages
Scientologists to install this software on their computers.
8. The Scientology personnel that frequent
alt.religion.scientology are to my understanding trained by the Office of
Special Affairs of Scientology to dead agent in various ways the messages
posted by critics. I do not have first hand knowledge of this ongoing OSA
project. However, Tory Bezazian, now a critic, has recently posted to
alt.religion.scientology her account of her experience with that OSA project
while she was still a member. In her statements she recounted that she was
involved in procuring "throwaway" e-mail addresses for use by OSA operatives
on alt.religion.scientology.
9. I had known of alt.religion.scientology prior to
entering the contest and had visited a website a few times to browse some of
the messages being posted there. This is a very active and prolific group,
with many heated arguments going back and forth between critics and
Scientologists. I subscribed to the newsgroup in April 2001.
10. A Scientologist with the e-mail address of "AJ"
<AJ_m...@newsguy.com> posted several messages between November 2000 and
January 12, 2001 with respect to an effort he was making to identify the
person who wrote Scientology: Soul Hackers. On 1/12/2001 "AJ" announced to
alt.religion.scientology, "It took some work to piece together all of the
clues in Anti-Virus' essay but I can confirm that the individual who placed
second in the LMT 2000 Literati Contest is Caroline Reinertsen. That's the
name I knew her by some years ago. Hopefully she will declare this income
on her tax return."
11. I don't know any person with the real name of "AJ", and
the person who posted the message has never identified himself or herself.
"Reinertsen" is my married name. I reverted back to my maiden name when I
divorced Eric Reinertsen. This was shortly after I left the Sea
Organization in 1988.
12. I understand now from reviewing previous
alt.religion.scientology messages, that OSA personnel use word analysis
software to identify anonymous posters. I have seen at least one other OSA
post to alt.religion.scientology that showed the results of the software
they used for identifying another anonymous critic.
13. I do not have first hand knowledge of what other actions
OSA may have taken to confirm my identity.
14. On January 20, 2001, Ann called me and told me that she
was getting handled in the Ethics Office. I immediately realized from her
voice that she was very upset. She said that the Ethics Officer had shown
her a Scientology ethics issue stating that I had written a bad essay about
Scientology and that this was now on the Internet. She also told me that
she knew I had attempted suicide. She asked me if it was true, asking it in
an accusatory way that one would ask someone to admit guilt for a known act.
I did not answer her question at that point but instead told her that I
would call her back in a few minutes, which I did. In the interim few
minutes, I composed myself in the best way I could as now I knew the worst
had happened. I was absolutely shocked that these two accusations would be
connected in any way, and that the ethics issue would include such distorted
and damaging information about my past. I was not going to have the
opportunity to calmly explain to Ann about my disillusionment with
Scientology in my own way and time, and I was also now forced into a
defensive position because of whatever the Ethics officer had announced to
her. I also knew from Ann's statements that Scientology had painted a
picture of me to her that I was currently insane, and that anything I said
to her would be viewed as the words of an insane person. I knew that
anything I said to Ann would be relayed back to the Ethics officer, as she
was calling me as part of her Ethics handling. I also suspected that an
Ethics officer or other Scientology personnel were monitoring my
conversation with Ann as Ann did not want me to call back in a few
minutes-she wanted to have the conversation right then and there.
Regardless, I did call her back in a few minutes. At that time she asked me
again to admit that I had written the essay, which I did. When I told her
that the information she was given by the Ethics officer referred to a
situation that occurred years before I became involved with Scientology.
Ann seemed very surprised to hear that, but she was so upset overall that I
was not able to fully establish and correct the facts that she was given and
shown by the Ethics officer.
15. In January 1975, I became involved in Scientology in
Vancouver, B.C., when I was nineteen years old. My pre-Scientology history
was the subject of a petition that I was required to write to Jane Kember,
head of the Guardian's Office Worldwide in order to continue with the first
Scientology course that I had already purchased and enrolled on. The
purpose of the petition was to allow Scientology's intelligence arm to
consider my history and thereby establish my eligibility for Scientology
services, according to Scientology's policy on these matters. Jane Kember
approved my petition and I was cleared to receive Scientology services.
16. Subsequent to the initial petition, I wrote at least two
other petitions for security clearance per Scientology's policies on
security. For example, I wrote a petition to the Guardian (Jane Kember) for
permission to join the Sea Organization. All petitions were approved, and I
was told that I was not an "illegal preclear" by reason of my
pre-Scientology history. I was given a high security clearance in
Scientology's elite organization, the "Sea Org." I trained in Scientology's
confidential levels and was posted as a New Era Dianetics for OTs (NOTs)
auditor, where I delivered Scientology's confidential levels to paying
Scientologists.
17. I had never before discussed this aspect of my past with
Ann. Nor did I openly discuss with other Scientologists the details of my
past. There are only a couple sources for my complete disclosure to
Scientology organizations of my pre-Scientology history. The first of these
sources would have been my petitions to The Guardian's Office (now known as
Office of Special Affairs). Another source would have been a very detailed
confidential Life History form that upper management ordered all Scientology
staff members to submit to upper Scientology management. I filled out a
Life History form when I was a member of Scientology's Sea Organization
sometime between 1978 and 1983. At that time there was a project to update
files on all staff members' files. All staff members were ordered (under
threat of Ethics penalties for non-compliance) to provide a detailed
disclosure of such matters. That life history form also required that
respondents provide information such as the names and current addresses of
all their family members and extended family members, and the names and
addresses of all past business and social connections. The questions
requiring disclosure are very similar to an OSA form that was posted to
alt.religion.scientology on 4/19/2001. The form is titled "Long Form ODC
Checklist", (ODC means "Overt Data Collection".) A source for fragmented
and second hand information of the details of my past would have been
answers recorded by my Scientology counselors (auditors) during my
confidential counseling in Scientology.
18. Scientology doctrine asserts that psychiatry and
psychiatrists are the source and cause for mankind's degradation-psychiatry
is Scientology's Public Enemy #1. There is tremendous stigma attached in
Scientology to having any history of a mental nature--any minor association
with psychiatry or history of having taken psychiatric drugs is made the
subject of a petition, and interrogations with Scientology's lie detector
(called the e-meter) to verify the details of this involvement. For a
person to become a committed Scientologist and then subsequently denied
Scientology auditing is tantamount to being spiritually doomed. That Ann
was told lies about my history was terribly cruel, in light of the tragic
nature and psychological effect this would have for any Scientologist
learning that her loved one could not go spiritually free. That Ann was
told these lies about me in connection with the writing of my essay was
cruel beyond words.
19. Some time early 1999, I first broke Scientology's rule
about not exposing myself to critical information about Scientology. In the
breaking of Scientology's "critical blackout" rule, I became aware of many
incontrovertible facts about L. Ron Hubbard and of Scientology, facts that
were absolutely appalling to me in a deeply personal way. I was utterly
devastated when I came to realize that my committed contributions to
Scientology were actually contributions to a dangerous and criminal
organization.
20. Nevertheless, learning the truth about Hubbard and
Scientology led me to the inevitable conclusion that I could no longer be
part of Scientology. I agonized silently for months about how to
communicate the truth to my daughter and to others. I felt a personal
obligation to help correct the wrongs that I had done. I also felt a need
to try and uncover the reasons why I had been so completely tricked and
defrauded by Scientology, and why I had spent my entire adult life trapped
in the mind control of Hubbard's organization. Having been an advanced
auditor with a good grasp of Hubbard's technology, I needed to try and more
completely decode the technical basis for the mind control of which I was
both a victim and unwitting perpetrator. I felt that I had to come to a
technical understanding of why the action of leaving Scientology did not
resolve, but amplified the emotional pain I was experiencing. I knew from
reading others stories on the Internet that mine was not a unique situation.
The essay that I submitted to the Literati Contest 2000 was a summary of my
ongoing research to that point.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of
America and the state of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Total pages: _4______
Executed in Sunland, CA this 27th day of April 2001.
Caroline Letkeman
Warrior
This is true. Not only does Scientology encourage members to use the
software filter, but the cult has written policies and programs intended
to prevent its members from subscribing to this newsgroup,
alt.religion.scientology.
>8. The Scientology personnel that frequent
>alt.religion.scientology are to my understanding trained by the Office of
>Special Affairs of Scientology to dead agent in various ways the messages
>posted by critics. I do not have first hand knowledge of this ongoing OSA
>project. However, Tory Bezazian, now a critic, has recently posted to
>alt.religion.scientology her account of her experience with that OSA project
>while she was still a member. In her statements she recounted that she was
>involved in procuring "throwaway" e-mail addresses for use by OSA operatives
>on alt.religion.scientology.
This is true.
>9. I had known of alt.religion.scientology prior to
>entering the contest and had visited a website a few times to browse some of
>the messages being posted there. This is a very active and prolific group,
>with many heated arguments going back and forth between critics and
>Scientologists. I subscribed to the newsgroup in April 2001.
>
>
>
>10. A Scientologist with the e-mail address of "AJ"
><AJ_m...@newsguy.com> posted several messages between November 2000 and
>January 12, 2001 with respect to an effort he was making to identify the
>person who wrote Scientology: Soul Hackers. On 1/12/2001 "AJ" announced to
>alt.religion.scientology, "It took some work to piece together all of the
>clues in Anti-Virus' essay but I can confirm that the individual who placed
>second in the LMT 2000 Literati Contest is Caroline Reinertsen. That's the
>name I knew her by some years ago. Hopefully she will declare this income
>on her tax return."
I recall seeing this posting made by the Scientologist using the user-ID
of "AJ" to post to alt.religion.scientology from a Newsguy account.
>11. I don't know any person with the real name of "AJ", and
>the person who posted the message has never identified himself or herself.
This is similar to the anonymous accusations that have been made against
me by Scientologists using anonymous user-IDs. A few of these anonymous
accounts used have been "Rod Fletcher", "wgert", "rodf" and "justin".
There are many others.
In addition to making accusations against me on the newsgroup known as
alt.religion.scientology, I have had threatening messages sent to me while
I have been logged into the internet relay chat ("irc chat") channel
scientology on undernet.
In fact, a Scientologist using the name "rodf" said through "irc chat"
that he knew me when I was on staff at Scientology's American Saint Hill
Organization ("ASHO") and that he was a "public Scientologist" (a member
who is not staff) on the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course ("SHSBC") at
the time I was in the Sea Organization on staff at ASHO.
I have never known a Scientologist named Rod whose last name begins
with the letter "F".
>"Reinertsen" is my married name. I reverted back to my maiden name when I
>divorced Eric Reinertsen. This was shortly after I left the Sea
>Organization in 1988.
I knew Eric Reinertsen when I was on staff at ASHO Day in Los Angeles.
In postings made to the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology I have
discussed Scientology's Life History Form. One of these postings
is webbed at http://warrior.offlines.org/1997-0820.html I urge
everyone to read my posting so as to learn about the incredible
amount of personal information members of the cult are required
to reveal about themselves.
It is obvious to me that persons working for, or in concert with
Scientology's Office of Special Affairs have access to information
we have given to the organization while members, and that this information
is used to intimidate us, to investigate us and to ruin relationships
and sever connections between our friends and family members.
I have been seeking to share my understanding with those who have never
been in Scientology as well as with former members. We have the right
to communicate, to share experiences and knowledge, to express our opinions
and to seek information that will increase our understanding of the
Scientology cult. It is not right that Scientology seeks to intimidate
us into silence and that they destroy relationships we have with friends
and family, especially under the guise of "practicing a religion".
>I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of
>
>America and the state of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
>
>
>
>Total pages: _4______
>
>
>
>Executed in Sunland, CA this 27th day of April 2001.
>
>
>Caroline Letkeman
Thanks, Caroline.
[posted & mailed]
Warrior - Sunshine disinfects
See http://warrior.offlines.org/
Steve Plakos
antivirus wrote:
> DECLARATION OF CAROLINE LETKEMAN
>
> I, Caroline Letkeman, declare as follows:
>
> (Please forgive the big snip, but I wanted to focus on No. 19 & 20)
>
> 19. Some time early 1999, I first broke Scientology's rule
> about not exposing myself to critical information about Scientology. In the
> breaking of Scientology's "critical blackout" rule, I became aware of many
> incontrovertible facts about L. Ron Hubbard and of Scientology, facts that
> were absolutely appalling to me in a deeply personal way. I was utterly
> devastated when I came to realize that my committed contributions to
> Scientology were actually contributions to a dangerous and criminal
> organization.
This is the reaction of an honest human being who, upon learning the truth about
an organization they have given support and money, feels regret and remorse.
How unlike some of our resident scientology apologists.
>
>
> 20. Nevertheless, learning the truth about Hubbard and
> Scientology led me to the inevitable conclusion that I could no longer be
> part of Scientology. I agonized silently for months about how to
> communicate the truth to my daughter and to others. I felt a personal
> obligation to help correct the wrongs that I had done. I also felt a need
> to try and uncover the reasons why I had been so completely tricked and
> defrauded by Scientology, and why I had spent my entire adult life trapped
> in the mind control of Hubbard's organization. Having been an advanced
> auditor with a good grasp of Hubbard's technology, I needed to try and more
> completely decode the technical basis for the mind control of which I was
> both a victim and unwitting perpetrator. I felt that I had to come to a
> technical understanding of why the action of leaving Scientology did not
> resolve, but amplified the emotional pain I was experiencing. I knew from
> reading others stories on the Internet that mine was not a unique situation.
> The essay that I submitted to the Literati Contest 2000 was a summary of my
> ongoing research to that point.
I am deeply saddened by the price you've been made to pay for simply telling the
truth.
Steve
Greg Barnes
Carolyn,
Great post and thanks for sharing with us some your experiences. It would be
great if you could do a video of your experiences and send it to LMT to be
posted along with the rest of the testimonials of the "survivors". You have
been around for such a time and know so much that would help others to see the
truth of the "most ethical group on the planet".
If each Scientologists who leaves was to tell their story that would be so
helpful in assisting others in leaving and getting free of the cult.
Thanks again for sharing your testimonial and I hope that your daughter will
come to her senses some day, since we have been out more and more of our friends
are leaving and pretty soon all will be out, the more who leave and tell about
it the more it helps to take that leap.
I can only share with you what has worked for us and others and that is to speak
out about what we know and what is true because the more we do that the more we
are free and the more others go free and away we go...............
Hubbard or whom ever was correct about at least one thing...communication is the
universal solvent it washes everything away....and the more we communicate about
the truth about the COS the more it gets washed away.
Love,
Greg
Sincerely,
Greg Barnes
Fluffygirl
"Greg Barnes" <Greg_...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:9cddh...@drn.newsguy.com...
> In article <9ccsm...@drn.newsguy.com>, Warrior says...
> >
> >In article <odjG6.183$gD1.1...@typhoon.we.rr.com>, "antivirus" says...
> >>
>
> Carolyn,
>
> Great post and thanks for sharing with us some your experiences. It would
be
> great if you could do a video of your experiences and send it to LMT to be
> posted along with the rest of the testimonials of the "survivors". You
have
> been around for such a time and know so much that would help others to see
the
> truth of the "most ethical group on the planet".
>
> If each Scientologists who leaves was to tell their story that would be so
> helpful in assisting others in leaving and getting free of the cult.
I would also like to see everyone who's IN Scn post some of their
experiences and I DON'T just mean the positive ones.
There is conditioning extant in CofS which discourages freedom of speech.
That is incredibly ironic in view of the Creed, the ARC triangle, the
concept of Pan determinism, the tone scale, LRH's comment that there's no
liability in talking to anybody.
Mark Twain had commented about Christianity something to the effect that it
would be a good idea if only CHRISTIANS would practice it.
This could and should be said about Scientology/CofS.
>
> Thanks again for sharing your testimonial and I hope that your daughter
will
> come to her senses some day, since we have been out more and more of our
friends
> are leaving and pretty soon all will be out, the more who leave and tell
about
> it the more it helps to take that leap.
No one should EVER feel that they should not or could not speak about their
experiences in CofS. However, to my everlasting heartbreak and regret-
people DO feel that way because they ARE discouraged from saying anything
critical about Scn even if there were three dozen witnesses all signing
affidavits in triplicate and eleven tv cameras recording the whole deal. It
STILL would not be all right with the church for any negativity reflecting
on them to be discussed openly. And even when one discusses such things
within church channels it does not always go well for the person making the
observation.
It's obvious to me that anything that happened is grounds for open
discussion and it's an opinion of mine that it matters how other people feel
about the church and about anything else and that if they want to discuss
those thing, why then, they should.
Discussion of a large organization like CofS can only harm it if negative
allegations are substantiated. And when and if they are substantiated then
the solution becomes obvious. Those things shouldn't have been done in the
first place, and they obviously should not continue.
There now. I've just handed the Church the cure for the entire critic "sit".
Yes, yes, you're welcome.
Claire
antivirus
The Justice Chief in Clearwater (Cara Golasheshky) stated in a recent
letter to me that Flag's Ethics office acted on AJ's
alt. religion.scientology posts that revealed my identity. She enclosed
copies of AJ's posts in her letter.
I have answered that letter and am currently awaiting response from Ms.
Golashesky to some specific requests I made.
Ms. Golasheshky: Your early response to my letter will be appreciated.
antivirus
"antivirus" <uncle...@email.com> wrote in message
news:odjG6.183$gD1.1...@typhoon.we.rr.com...
Tilman Hausherr
wrote in <odjG6.183$gD1.1...@typhoon.we.rr.com>:
>12. I understand now from reviewing previous
>alt.religion.scientology messages, that OSA personnel use word analysis
>software to identify anonymous posters. I have seen at least one other OSA
>post to alt.religion.scientology that showed the results of the software
>they used for identifying another anonymous critic.
I doubt this and I didn't understand it the first time you mentioned it.
If they had such a software and would know how to use it, they would
have to process it against the writings of hundreds of people. (And of
course enter these writings first into a computer). And remember that
scientology is very anti-intellectual. High-tech terrorism is rather the
exception.
What I rather assume is that someone recognised you from the choice of
words (the unabomber was caught not because of FBI skills, but because
his brother found the writings familiar), or that someone stole
information at the LMT (e.g. at the bank).
Tilman
--
Tilman Hausherr [KoX, SP5.55] Entheta * Enturbulation * Entertainment
til...@berlin.snafu.de http://www.xenu.de
Resistance is futile. You will be enturbulated. Xenu always prevails.
Find broken links on your web site: http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/xenulink.html
The Xenu bookstore: http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/bookstore.html
Warrior
>> >
>> >
>> >In article <odjG6.183$gD1.1...@typhoon.we.rr.com>, "antivirus" says...
>> >>
>>
>> Great post and thanks for sharing with us some your experiences. It would
>> be great if you could do a video of your experiences and send it to LMT to
>> be posted along with the rest of the testimonials of the "survivors". You
>> have been around for such a time and know so much that would help others to
>> see the truth of the "most ethical group on the planet".
Yes.
>> If each Scientologists who leaves was to tell their story that would be so
>> helpful in assisting others in leaving and getting free of the cult.
In article <3aea4...@news2.lightlink.com>, "Fluffygirl" says...
>
>I would also like to see everyone who's IN Scn post some of their
>experiences and I DON'T just mean the positive ones.
There are several former high-ranking Scientologists I'd like to hear
from. Boy oh boy I'd sure like for Herbie Parkhouse to write his
memoirs. Why doesn't he say something? Is he gagged?
Heck... I was a guinea pig in the first ever Purification Rundown
pilot in LA, and the man who supervised the "rundown" is a declared
SP and gagged by Scientology. So, I can't even have a conversation
with a man who was a part of and who influenced my life.
>There is conditioning extant in CofS which discourages freedom of speech.
Yes, and isn't this quite odd? I personally find this unconstitutional
and therefor unacceptable.
>That is incredibly ironic in view of the Creed, the ARC triangle, the
>concept of Pan determinism, the tone scale, LRH's comment that there's no
>liability in talking to anybody.
Does not the Scientology Creed say in part,
"We of the church [sic] believe that all men have the inalienable right
... speak freely, to write freely and to counter or utter upon the words
of others" ?
I promise you it does. Scientology pays lip service to this, our right.
I'd like to say clearly, and for the record, that my intent in posting
is to communicate. It's my Constitutional right. And within the cult
my communications were suppressed. Free speech was heavily discouraged.
I post now because I *can* freely exercise my right to speak. And I intend
no one any harm nor ill will.
>Mark Twain had commented about Christianity something to the effect that it
>would be a good idea if only CHRISTIANS would practice it.
>
>This could and should be said about Scientology/CofS.
Agreed. No real church has ever investigated me before for speaking about
my experiences as a member.
>> Thanks again for sharing your testimonial and I hope that your daughter
>> will come to her senses some day, since we have been out more and more
>> of our friends are leaving and pretty soon all will be out, the more who
>> leave and tell about it the more it helps to take that leap.
>No one should EVER feel that they should not or could not speak about their
>experiences in CofS. However, to my everlasting heartbreak and regret-
>people DO feel that way because they ARE discouraged from saying anything
>critical about Scn even if there were three dozen witnesses all signing
>affidavits in triplicate and eleven tv cameras recording the whole deal. It
>STILL would not be all right with the church for any negativity reflecting
>on them to be discussed openly. And even when one discusses such things
>within church channels it does not always go well for the person making the
>observation.
Exactly right!
After sometime in 1979 my complaints to upper cult management were almost
always unacknowledged -- so long as I complied with the "blunt threat of
punishment, alone and unmistakable [to] get stats up!" This was date
coincident with David Miscavige assuming control of Scientology. At least
that's the first time I noticed him issuing orders directly to the "Church
of Scientology The American Saint Hill Organization".
During this time orders were coming from David Miscavige, Lyman Spurlock,
the (anonymous) "Board of Directors", from "WatchDog Committee", etc.
After querying their *squirrel* policies for two years and never receiving
an answer, I left Scientology (temporarily) in disgust.
After almost three years (by late 1982) I was told that the squirrel
policies were largely written by individuals (like Miscavige and Spurlock),
and that I should "come back on staff at ASHO Day because the SPs were
gotten off the lines, the suppressive policies had been cancelled and
things were 'better now'".
Mind you, it was "Hubbard" who said so... in his Finance Series
HCO PL "Changing Workable Finance Systems". Other Scientology
executives told me the same thing to reinforce this deception.
I did briefly go back into the Sea Org...for nine months...
I think the entirety of the Sea Org staff at ASHO Day were in a complete
state of robotic compliance to the Miscavige Regime of Terror.
Things *weren't better. They were more insane.
The "SPs" were not only NOT removed from "the [finance] lines",
but they remain in control of Scientology to this very day.
>It's obvious to me that anything that happened is grounds for open
>discussion and it's an opinion of mine that it matters how other people feel
>about the church and about anything else and that if they want to discuss
>those thing, why then, they should.
They should be able to.
>Discussion of a large organization like CofS can only harm it if negative
>allegations are substantiated. And when and if they are substantiated then
>the solution becomes obvious. Those things shouldn't have been done in the
>first place, and they obviously should not continue.
>
>There now. I've just handed the Church the cure for the entire critic "sit".
>
>Yes, yes, you're welcome.
>
>Claire
Claire, you've demonstrated there's goodness in people, and you've shown
me that free speech is important. I appreciate that!
Tommy
Claire - they don't care. Those at the helm have a fixed course to
follow, and it's leading them straight onto the rocks. Hubbard said to
manufacture evidence and to "ruin them utterly", and ruin them utterly
they shall, oblivious to the damage they are doing to the thing they
profess to love.
It's already too late.
Tommy
--
Church of $cientology's "ecclesiastical leader" David Miscavige on the
death of Lisa McPherson, a church member locked up until she died:
"At the time I don't think it was really thought to be that
significant an issue. She died. People die."
Dave Bird
>On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 18:52:04 GMT, "antivirus" <uncle...@email.com>:
>>
>>12. I understand now from reviewing previous
>>alt.religion.scientology messages, that OSA personnel use word analysis
>>software to identify anonymous posters. I have seen at least one other OSA
>>post to alt.religion.scientology that showed the results of the software
>>they used for identifying another anonymous critic.
>
>I doubt this and I didn't understand it the first time you mentioned it.
>If they had such a software and would know how to use it, they would
>have to process it against the writings of hundreds of people. (And of
>course enter these writings first into a computer). And remember that
>scientology is very anti-intellectual. High-tech terrorism is rather the
>exception.
>What I rather assume is that someone recognised you from the choice of
>words (the unabomber was caught not because of FBI skills, but because
>his brother found the writings familiar), or that someone stole
>information at the LMT (e.g. at the bank).
Tilman is right: I doubt there is any such software. It may be they
did this with very low tech methods i.e. manually searching out uses
of obscure words (they boasted they had identified one contributor as
ptsc by this method).... or this is a cover story, and they got the
name by theft of information.
|~/ |~/
~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~
P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P
O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O
O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O
L |<a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"></a>_____________|/_______| L
www.xemu.demon.co.uk 2B0D 5195 337B A3E6 DDAC BD38 7F2F FD8E 7391 F44F
Tilman Hausherr
wrote in <$5sNryB6...@xemu.demon.co.uk>:
> Tilman is right: I doubt there is any such software. It may be they
> did this with very low tech methods i.e. manually searching out uses
> of obscure words (they boasted they had identified one contributor as
> ptsc by this method).... or this is a cover story, and they got the
> name by theft of information.
They often use cover stories ("shore story"). For example, they claim
that they got the "Kevin Files" mailings because "Kevin Baker" died and
they got his computer. However, one netizen found out that one of the
e-mails was written *after* Kevin was unsubscribed from the list. Me, I
suspect that the list was hacked, and maybe still is.
cerr...@freedom.net
"Tilman Hausherr" <til...@berlin.snafu.de> wrote in message
news:hklketcd0rpmr85pe...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 18:52:04 GMT, "antivirus" <uncle...@email.com>
> wrote in <odjG6.183$gD1.1...@typhoon.we.rr.com>:
>
> >12. I understand now from reviewing previous
> >alt.religion.scientology messages, that OSA personnel use word
analysis
> >software to identify anonymous posters. I have seen at least one
other OSA
> >post to alt.religion.scientology that showed the results of the
software
> >they used for identifying another anonymous critic.
>
> I doubt this and I didn't understand it the first time you mentioned
it.
> If they had such a software and would know how to use it, they would
> have to process it against the writings of hundreds of people. (And
of
> course enter these writings first into a computer). And remember
that
> scientology is very anti-intellectual. High-tech terrorism is rather
the
> exception.
I agree. This software analysis story does not sound at all
plausible. Caroline, I believe you need to re think your outing.
A more likely scenario could be
That some of your Scn friends knew that you were a bit disaffected so
you went on a short list of potential disaffected types to watch. OR
Someone who knows your writing style read the essays and pegged you.
OR
Someone at LMT screwed up somehow and exposed you OR
LMT has a plant and exposed you.
Any one of these is a more likely scenario than this software analysis
program. I wish you would look into this further. You are obviously
a researcher and I think you cut your research off too early on this
one.
>
> What I rather assume is that someone recognised you from the choice
of
> words (the unabomber was caught not because of FBI skills, but
because
> his brother found the writings familiar), or that someone stole
> information at the LMT (e.g. at the bank).
Yes, I believe Tilman has it right.
Cerridwen
________________________________________________________________________
Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net
Feisty
> wrote in <odjG6.183$gD1.1...@typhoon.we.rr.com>:
>
> >12. I understand now from reviewing previous
> >alt.religion.scientology messages, that OSA personnel use word analysis
> >software to identify anonymous posters. I have seen at least one other
OSA
> >post to alt.religion.scientology that showed the results of the software
> >they used for identifying another anonymous critic.
>
> I doubt this and I didn't understand it the first time you mentioned it.
> If they had such a software and would know how to use it, they would
> have to process it against the writings of hundreds of people. (And of
> course enter these writings first into a computer). And remember that
> scientology is very anti-intellectual. High-tech terrorism is rather the
> exception.
>
> What I rather assume is that someone recognised you from the choice of
> words (the unabomber was caught not because of FBI skills, but because
> his brother found the writings familiar), or that someone stole
> information at the LMT (e.g. at the bank).
How about from preclear information? Maybe someone who was auditing, or
knows you also was a regular here on the a.r.s.. Upon reading it here maybe,
they
recognized your particular speech patterns?
Feisty
antivirus
"Feisty" <not@inthislife> wrote in message
news:teoodkb...@corp.supernews.com...
I did not subscribe or post to ARS until April 2001. AJ made posted the ARS
announcement about
my identity in January 2001. Since auditing sessions are recorded in
shorthand by the auditor, I don't think preclear records
could be considered a definitive source for a word usage investigation.
I see "AJ" has not posted to ARS since 4/26. Perhaps "Say what?!"
<Anonymous...@See.Comment.Header> or c...@yeahright.com could call AJ
to the courtesy phone to clarify exactly what steps *were* taken to confirm
my identity.
antivirus
Feisty
Thanks for sharing. It helps to hear your observations, as it teaches others
while they may have a chance to recognize, the policies and unethical things
that happen.
This is awful, the way that AJ openly pursued you in your effort to express
free speech, which seems to be exactly what this church does not believe in.
I now remember seeing it here on the a.r.s. To hear what happens as a result
of this is absolutely wrong. It is sadistic, and has to be illegal, by
standards of our univeral human rights. This proves that there policy is
unethical and contemptuous.
Your daughter has to feel in some way that this forced exchange was not
right.
Like I have heard so many times...People know they feel that something is not
right, they feel uncomfortable, but they are unable to lift themselves out. I
hope she acts on her instincts one day, much like you have done.
Feisty
demy...@freedom.net
OR
LMT's Bank has a plant who got access to the check they paid
for winning the writing contest
Say what?!
|I did not subscribe or post to ARS until April 2001. AJ made posted the
|ARS announcement about my identity in January 2001. Since auditing
|sessions are recorded in shorthand by the auditor, I don't think preclear
|records could be considered a definitive source for a word usage investigation.
|
|I see "AJ" has not posted to ARS since 4/26. Perhaps "Say what?!"
|<Anonymous...@See.Comment.Header> or c...@yeahright.com could call AJ
|to the courtesy phone to clarify exactly what steps *were* taken to
|confirm my identity.
|
|antivirus
After you began to have doubts about Scn, did you speak about these to any
relatives, friends or acquaintances? If you did, one or more of these
people could have written a report about it.
The only information about you in your essay was that you are a highly
trained auditor. This would be enough to narrow the possibilities to a
list. Looking at the files of the names on this list, your name could have
come up as a candidate for further investigation. This would depend on
what was in the report.
Then your relatives or friends or acquaintances could have been contacted
for more info. Perhaps you told someone you had been to critics' sites or
been reading a.r.s., etc.. If enough suspicious information were found by
this investigation, you could have become a candidate for even further
investigation. For example, OSA or their PI's have been known to tap
phones or obtain phone records illegally. Or someone from OSA or an OSA
FSM, possibly someone you know and who has spent time in your home with
you, could have taken a look into your computer when you weren't looking
and found your essay or other writings.
All of this hinges on whether or not you said anything to anyone which
could have ended up as a report in a file. If you did, then the rest is
plausible. First you saying the "wrong thing" to someone. Then a report
ending up in a file. Then enough legal or illegal investigation to
identify you *positively*.
Say what?!
antivirus
news:SXXZ5BO23701...@frog.nyarlatheotep.org...
When a Scientologist has a bad auditing session, sometimes they end up
feeling really
bad, and really introverted. This happens when the person has the types of
questions
that they find impossible to answer, or when the auditor has mistakenly
given them an
answer to the question that is incorrect. So they try and think up a zillion
answers to
the question. Then they get all fouled up, because they can't pick out the
right answer. In
Scientology they call it an "out list." And when people have too many out
lists, they
get the Introspection Rundown, like Lisa McPherson.
And sometimes, if you work in OSA, and you really don't like someone because
they
are telling the truth, you can try and *cause* this condition in the person
you don't like.
All you do is continue to ask them questions for which they and their
friends have no
answer. Because their name is not AJ.
antivirus
Say what?!
I've read this three times and still can't piece it all together. You've
lost me. Maybe I lost you with my post.
The only question I asked is whether you let other Scientologists know that
you had gone sour on Hubbard? That could have been the *beginning* of your
ending up outed *later*. I didn't even ask you to answer the question
because it's your business and not of mine, and because I thought that if
you did, it could be something you wouldn't want to make public anyway.
The rest (legal/illegal investigations) is how I thought things could have
gone from there. It's plausible and OSA-like, which is more than I can say
for anything else I've read about your outing.
Are we back on the same page yet?
Say what?!
antivirus
"Say what?!" <Anonymous...@See.Comment.Header> wrote in message
We haven't been on the same page since the beginning, Say What?!
Let me spell it out for you: Your e-mail address is toast.
antivirus
Michael W Crichton
...From an incredibly kick-ass book by Eric Flint
and David Drake. The book is titled "In the Heart of Darkness", and is the
second in the Belisarius series. Highly recommended for all sci-fi fans,
even if you normally hate Drake, since he's only there to give
name-recognition, the writing is all Flint. Anyhoo, the quote:
"The plans and schemes of tyrants are broken by many things. They shatter
against cliffs of heroic struggle. They rupture on reefs of open resistance.
And they are slowly eroded, bit by little bit, on the very beaches where
they measure triumph, by countless grains of sand. By the stubborn little
decencies of humble little men."
Even if individual battles (like the farcical case against Henson) are lost,
the (purely metaphorical) war can still be won. And it will be won by the
little things, that the would-be tyrants cannot anticipate, and won't even
notice till it's far too late. Sleep well, CoS. :-)
Nevada Smith
There's a Russian saying that goes "To eat an elephant, do so one
fork full at a time."
---
When you pirate MP3s, you're downloading COMMUNISM!
Say what?!
I'm sure you're right, dear. We have not been reading even from the same
book.
Say what?!
cerr...@freedom.net
I'd like to indicate that no one here is trying to give you out lists
or a wrong item.
Some of us are interested in your being outed. The software analysis
program idea has some outpoints in it. Some of us are looking for a
possible why. NOT your personal why as it might effect your case, but
a why as in the correct why found when one uses the data series.
The fact is that the software program idea, while possible, is not
really plausible. I certainty don't want you to name name's nor do I
believe any of the critics here want that. I and I think Say What and
Tilman might be interested in other avenue's of your being outed. If
you don't have any idea how this might have happened, then fine.
Answer accepted.
I don't think we need to beat a dead horse. If you think it's the
software program than that's just fine too. But someone as bright as
you shouldn't assume you have the right why ( as in the data series)
when there are so many glaring outpoints to your theory.
My email address works just fine. If you would like to write to me go
right ahead.
Best wishes
antivirus
<cerr...@freedom.net> wrote in message
news:tesq93...@corp.supernews.com...
You might want to try an entertaining strategy next time around. At least
make me guess a little
before you pull out the correction list.
antivirus