Subject: Re: What is Scientology?
From: [email-masked] (Martin G. V. Hunt)
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 1995 06:34:39 GMT
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology

In a previous posting, Anonymous User ([email-masked]) writes:
> In the light of recent events, a group of us are discussing Scientology.
> Could someone from the Church post a short summary of what it is?
> 
> Perhaps there is a FAQ for this group?
> 
> TIA
> 
> 

--------------------------- What is Scientology ---------------------------

   Scientology is a dangerous, mindbending cult that was established in the 
1950's by Lafayette Ronald Hubbard and presents a grave threat to the concepts
and tenets of freedom and democracy.  Scientology has, as its basic purpose, 
the destruction of freedom and the erosion of human rights on the way to
making money; it uses any means possible to achieve this end, including legal 
harassment, verbal and physical threats, hiding under the cover of "religion",
and thought reform so complete that to talk to anyone brainwashed by the cult 
is to talk to little more than the mouthed platitudes of mechanical zombies.  

   Scientology has evolved its own language that is little more than 
meaningless, incomprehensible ravings to rational, educated minds.  This
newspeak is a form of semantic control, used by the church to extract profit, 
either in money or personnel resources from its hapless, brainwashed victims 
and to serve PR functions to fool the public.  Scientology is a totalitarian 
and fascist system that sees freedom of speech as an arch enemy, and freedom 
of thought as a personal attack, deserving of every means to stop it dead, 
sometimes literally.  An example of this newspeak is the unfounded claim by 
the cult to be a "church"; Scientology is a cult, not a church.   

   Based on science fiction and fantasy, the cult's teachings are little more 
than a thinly concealed attempt at making huge sums of money for the people at
the top of the cult.  Near the end of his life, Ronald  Hubbard was reported 
to be making as much as one million dollars per week.  Hubbard is documented 
as having said that the best way to make a lot of money is to invent a
religion, and that is exactly what he did with the cult of Scientology.      

   A mainstay of the cult's writings are based upon a kind of pseudo-science 
that gives one the clear impression that it is the 1930's.  Many of these 
writings talk down to their audience as if they were wholly ignorant of basic 
facts about geology, biology, medicine, and other branches of general knowledge
and science.  The lamentable truth is that the cult's brainwashed victims are 
actually willing to defend these bits of fantasy as established scientific 
fact, against all reason and logic; one such delusion is "auditing".

   In "auditing", Scientology charges huge amounts of money to hook the
indoctrinees up to a crude resistor-based bridge ohmmeter and ask bizarre 
questions about what supposedly happened to them millions, billions or even 
trillions of years ago on this and other planets.  This "treatment" (also
called "metering" by the cult) is supposed to cure all manner of ailments, 
both physical and psychological, for astronomical prices. The total cost of 
going from "raw meat", as the cult disparagingly calls the public, to "OT-8" 
is estimated to cost over 250,000.00$ US.  The cult also uses another form of 
this "auditing" process, called "security-checking" to obtain very personal 
information about the follower's sex lives and criminal history (if any), 
which is then used for security purposes as potential blackmail to keep people
quiet about the illegal activities of the cult should they ever escape its 
semantic entrapment long enough to resume their former lives.

   The litigious nature of the controversial cult of Scientology is well 
known and reported in the literature on this dangerous cultic phenomenon.  
Scientologists have, as one of their basic policies, the destruction of anyone 
who is perceived by this paranoid schizophrenic organization as being an 
"enemy", and baseless lawsuits, sometimes involving frames, are used for this 
purpose.  An enemy is anyone who, in the eyes of the cult, denigrates the cult
in any way; thus critics are subject to multitudes of frivolous lawsuits, 
threats, strong-arm tactics, and outright physical attacks.  For this reason, 
suggestions have been put forward to ban Scientology from the courts for 
barratrous abuses.

   Scientology, while trying desperately to maintain a PR facade of sweetness 
and light, in reality call their public by such derogatory names as "raw meat",
"bodies", and "WOGs"; these same people are thought to be so inconsequential 
to the cult that they are "body routed" into the organization, as they are 
thought to have no self determination or free will whatsoever, and thus no 
rights.  The "raw meat" are fit for little more than indoctrination using 
simple hand motions like the children's game of pat-a-cake, according to the 
cult, as they are too far down the cult's "tone scale", a list of all the 
emotional states a person is capable of, to be treated as human beings.  
Interestingly, this "tone scale" of all human states and emotions fails to 
contain either happiness or freedom --- the stated goals of Hubbard's so-called
"religion".  

   The charade of hiding behind a religious cover even goes as far as 
installing pews and an altar in most of its buildings; however, these are 
seldom actually used until an investigation by a taxation branch brings down 
the order from above to "make this place look churchy" by using the pews and 
dressing up a cult indoctrinator as a "minister".  Pretending to be a religion
serves two purposes within the cult; escaping the charge of medical malpractice
and avoiding legitimate taxation within the host country the cult has 
infiltrated. The hope for the future is that more countries will stand up to 
this tactic with protective legislation.

   Scientology hides behind the facade of a "religion", yet to the cult 
indoctrinees and those "in the know", this is merely seen as a  way to avoid 
taxation and hassles over using the "auditing" techniques for stated medical 
purposes.  The medical community has long been trying to  curtail this cult's 
dangerous pseudo-medical practices, such as the "purification rundown" and the
use of the "e-meter" for healing everything from backaches to bad eyesight.  
For this reason, the cult perceives a need to hide under the cover of religion,
while at the same time calling itself a "science of mind" to gain credence on
the the coattails of legitimate medicine.  In addition, the cult has a policy 
of discrediting, attacking, and suing the medical and psychiatric communities,
as they were perceived as enemies by the paranoid Hubbard; he was at one time 
diagnosed as being mentally unstable by a psychiatrist, and thus he conceived 
a hatred for the healing professions. 

   Although the cult of Scientology often makes irrational and unscientific 
claims for medical treatment and healing, the reality is that these "effects" 
can all be easily explained by the placebo effect and by the crushing effects 
of complete thought reform, sleep deprivation, dietary control, semantic 
disturbances, and milieu control exacted by the cult on its victims.  These 
brainwashing techniques lead the victim to "attest" to all forms of miraculous
"cures"; if written "attests" are not made, then the poor "preclear" is sent 
off to "ethics" --- an action that every Scientologist fears.  In fact, 
Scientology has a specific policy on people who do not "improve".  They are 
seen as being evil, suppressive, or a source of trouble; thus if the cult's 
efforts fail, the "preclear" is held entirely responsible in a kind of catch-22
situation, and made even more of a victim.   

   There are two faces to Scientology; one for public consumption, and an 
entirely different one, hidden from public view, for those "in the know".  The
public is told that Hubbard is "just a human", and that the cult does not treat
of religion; but the fact is that Hubbard is known to be God once one has been
brainwashed into the "upper levels".  The public is given a PR story that the 
cult is a "religion", all the teaching are "belief", and all gains are 
"spiritual" in nature.  Nevertheless, the indoctrinated know, or rather are 
brainwashed into believing, that Scientology is a workable method for treating
human ailments, both medical and psychiatric, and every word of Hubbard's 
science-fictionlike scribblings, no matter how ludicrous, are "scientifically 
proven facts" referred to as "source" or, more significantly, "Source", and 
thoroughly researched.  This "research" in fact involved Hubbard sitting down 
at a typewriter and writing whatever came to mind, a skill he developed while 
writing pulp science fiction. 

   Scientology is well known for publishing various "codes" and "creeds" of a 
lofty and humanitarian nature, but the cult does not adhere to these altruistic
statements in the smallest degree; they are just more PR material to make the 
cult look good in the eyes of a sceptical and increasingly hostile public.

   As time goes on, and more people lose their children, relatives, and friends
to this dangerous, lawless, immoral, and litigious cult, legislation will 
surely be enacted in the free democratic countries of the world to limit its 
pernicious effect upon our society.  Every time a brainwashed cultist wakes up
to wonder what happened to the last few years of his or her life, and steps out
of the shadows into the bracing sunlight of freedom of speech and thought, 
another nail is hammered into the coffin of this ugly phenomenon.  The 
Scientology cult itself admits this; it says it has a problem with its 
"field" (the public) being "muddy" (hard to expand into).  One can only hope 
that as time goes by, the cult will grow more distant from the paranoid and 
schizophrenic man who created it; already the cult has gone through its 
reformation, of sorts, as slightly more liberal minded groups have split off 
from the cult and set up their own operations.

   Former members of this cult are requested to speak out against it; tell the
world the dark secrets of the "SO" and the "RPF".  The SO is the Sea Org; a
heavily controlled slave-like segment of the cult that signs billion year 
service contracts for wages lower than the average income of third-world 
countries.  The RPF is the deceptively named Rehabilitation Project Force, a 
dark, secret, and hidden section of the cult used for punishing "downstat" 
members.  Every recruit is irrationally expected to increase their production 
every week or they become "downstat", having falling statistics for production.
The RPF is similar to a concentration camp; some of the unfortunate wights who
end up here do not see the light of day for years.  The RPFers for the Los 
Angeles Cedars of Lebanon Centre are imprisoned in cavern-like tunnels 
extending under the streets of Los Angeles, fed on a starvation diet of beans 
and rice, forced to work up to 125 hours a week, are not allowed to speak, and
are dressed in filthy grey rags.  There is an even darker and more secret 
organization for punishing "downstat" members called the "RRPF", or Ron's RPF;
if anyone out there has experiences to relate of this cruel section of the 
cult, they are encouraged to speak out against this flagrant abuse of basic 
human rights. 

   If you, the gentle reader have information of torture, inhumane treatment, 
murder, or other nefarious behavior or human rights abuses by this cult, then
let the world know --- don't let what happened to you or people who were in 
the cult with you happen to another person out of ignorance of just how evil 
this cult really is.  Fear not reprisals; people who have escaped the cult 
number in the hundreds of thousands!  It has been estimated that there are 
several times more "disaffected" Scientologists than there are people
trapped in the cult at present.  
   
   The author of this FAQ shall, in all likelihood, be attacked by the cult 
for writing this, but this tactic will not serve.  For the author believes so 
strongly in the truth that nothing shall swerve him from this path.  In this 
world, we must fight for what we believe in; for if we turn a blind eye to 
the dictator or to those who would limit our freedoms, then we shall be 
forever on the retreat, and we shall end up having a life not worth living.  
Let this be a call to arms, "for we have nothing to fear but fear itself".

--
Cogito, ergo sum.  Martin Hunt, [email-masked]  &
[email-masked]  &  [email-masked]

Xref: utcsri alt.religion.scientology:33091
Path: utcsri!newsflash.concordia.ca!uunet!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!cass.ma02.bull.com!fim.uni-erlangen.DE!ba170
From: [email-masked] (Koos Nolst Trenite)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: RI-ACT-58  Erlich and Hacker ('Speaker'), Suppressives to Mankind
Date: 22 Feb 1995 22:01:43 -0000
Organization: Bull Worldwide Information Systems.
Lines: 461
Sender: [email-masked]
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cass.ma02.bull.com

                                                22 February 1995

        RI-ACT-58  'Erlich and Hacker ('Speaker'),
                     Suppressives to Mankind'

Message #58 for Alt.Clearing.Technology on Internet

from Ron's Inspector

The former Las Vegas Scientology Staff Allen Hacker,
 calling himself the "Speaker" for
 his one-man Acceptance Services Mission "Group", - it
  consists only of one person, himself, and zero assets -
 has already been declared Suppressive
 due to his public support of
 the known anti-social-personality Dennis Erlich.
  (see RI-ACT-57, enclosed)

As Allen Hacker continues to publicly
 support Dennis Erlich's known intentions to destroy Mankind,
 Allen is further restricted in the rights
 that are granted persons
 who have been officially declared Suppressive:

1. Allen may never be admitted to the Upper Levels of Scientology
 because of Allen's intentions to destroy Mankind.

2. Allen may never hold any position in any Church or Branch
 or Mission of Scientology
 due to his present public intention to destroy the Church,
 combined with his present campaign to
 strongly support the intentions of Dennis Erlich
 towards destroying Mankind.

3. Any person who actively supports Allen's current activities
 towards the destruction of Mankind,
 are to be officially declared Suppressive as well
 for that reason.

The evidence for this Suppressive Person-declare, and
 consequent Suppressive Person-declares of Allen's "friends",
 is sufficiently abundant in
 the Archives of the Internet-Usenet newsgroups.

These ex-Scientologists, like Allen Hacker,
 know very well what they are destroying,
 and they know very well
 why they are now trying to destroy Scientology and Mankind.

The reason for Allen Hacker in particular,
 now trying to destroy Scientology and Mankind,
 is very well known to him,
 and it becomes now apparent through his actions of
  supporting the anti-social Dennis Erlich,
 that the evil of Allen is much bigger than
 he pretended it to be to me and others.

Through Scientology truthfinding rites and practises,
 and through his contact with decent people in Scientology,
 Allen became more and more aware of himself, of
 his past as a spiritual being before this life,
  meaning earlier lives.

When he then became aware of
 a most atrocious act he once committed
 with very dire consequences for a very large portion of Mankind
   [Mankind: ALL of the being that exist - not
    only the few billion on this small planet.],
 which HE brought about through his own stupidity,
 he decided,
 like the true psychologist he his:
  "If I believe that there are no evil people really,
   then I still can live and not die of shame."

And he suddenly went out to preach that gospel,
 solely to not have to face his past evil to Mankind.

Allen can now not stand the company of decent people anymore,
 and that's why he now supports the very ugly,
 the very evil, the very degraded.

And that is why Allen Hacker ran away from Scientology,
 and why he is now so loudly defending
 the very anti-social-personality called Dennis Erlich,
 and why Allen is now calling that 'fighting for Freedom'.

Allen is fighting for the 'freedom'
 to call his own destructive acts against Mankind,
 and to call Dennis Erlich's destructive acts against Mankind,
 to call these very evil acts a 'constitutional right',
 a 'freedom'.

But sane people know that evil is NOT freedom at all.
Sane people know that evil is nothing but slavery,
 no matter what fancy names and descriptions it is given
 by some very intelligent, but very insane
 computer-freaks on the Internet.

The situation shown by Hacker and Erlich
 is the risk one runs in helping such psychotic people.

They are intelligent, and they are very evil.
 (See RI-61i 'The Right to be Evil' of 16 Dec 1994)

In the process of helping them,
 only then they become aware of their evil, of their insanity.
And they start to fight, as institutional cases would do,
 against anyone who helped them.

In such a way, in the process of helping one psychotic
 up to some level of awareness,
 you will find yourself suddenly faced with the problem of
 having now to fight this psychotic
 because he will mobilize whole armies
 such as 'FACTnet' and 'CAN' to stop you,
 not only to stop you from helping him,
 but ALSO to stop you from helping others who
  are not psychotic at all.

The Church of Scientology is correctly using the law
 to prevent any possibility of
 evil use of its rites and practises by Hacker and by Erlich,
 and by others who fight for that evil 'freedom'.

This is the responsibility of anyone who possesses knowledge,
 and that responsibility is,
 to prevent destructive use of one's knowledge.

It has always been a purpose
 and function of laws and regulations
 to prevent the suppressive use of knowledge.

This function was currently exerted on Dennis Erlich, who,
 per RI-59Ri 'How the SP Dennis Erlich believes to destroy You'
  of 1 Jan 1995 (enclosed),
 wanted to use knowledge obtained by him
 in order to destroy his fellow Man.

Koos Nolst Trenite - Ron's Inspector

Copyright 1994 by Koos Nolst Trenite

 reference:
  RI-50R-Ei 'Archives of RI-xxi and RI-ACT-xx series'
             of 28 Dec 1994, Revised and Replaced 13 Feb 1995

Enclosures:
 RI-ACT-57 'To all supporters and ... of Erlich' of 17 Feb 1995
 RI-59Ri 'How the SP Erlich believes to destroy You' of 1 Jan 95

                                                17 February 1995

   RI-ACT-57  'To all supporters and friends of Dennis Erlich'

Message #57 for Alt.Clearing.Technology on Internet

from Ron's Inspector

As Dennis Erlich is an anti-social personality,
 who wishes himself and all his friends only harm
 and nothing but harm,
 therefore
 all those who support him,
 are supporting an anti-social personality
 despite having been informed
 and warned extensively about Dennis Erlich's intentions.

Therefore all these supporters are declared officially
 to be Suppressive Persons.

The evidence of their support of Dennis Erlich
 is available from the Internet Usenet archives.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with Scientology
 or no Scientology or a Church or no Church.

It is the very simple ethics
 of labelling and treating
 the supporters and helpers of a mafia-boss
 as criminals.

Koos Nolst Trenite - Ron's Inspector

Copyright 1994 by Koos Nolst Trenite

 Enclosure:
 RI-59Ri 'How the SP Erlich believes to destroy You' of 1 Jan 95
                                                  1 January 1995

                                              revised 8 Jan 1995

    RI-59Ri  'How the SP Dennis Erlich believes to destroy You'

from Ron's Inspector

Message # RI-59Ri for Internet

(Revised to add 'the SP' into the title,
 and to shorten the data about E-meter-reactions.)

This is describing the actual intention
 of "Reverend" of no church 'Dennis Erlich'
  (on the Internet Newsgroup);
 the intention behind his postings to you,
 of scraps of the OT-materials he stole,
 as described BY HIMSELF to an OT,
 today in an auditing session,
 given to you here verbatim from the worksheets.

(The data revealed in HCO Security Checks are not confidential.
 They are used to detect hidden crimes, and the data is used by
 the group to stop the crimes and to apply group-justice to the
 criminal, based on what he actually did, rather than on what
 others believe or are led to believe he did.
The purpose is to have real justice both for the criminal and
 for the groupmembers that have been affected by his crimes.)

(The abbreviations LFBD and F/N designate reactions
 on the E-meter, indicating mental charge (LFBD) and
 release of charge completed (F/N).
 A fixed non-survival solution is called a SERVICE FACsimile.)

----------------------------------------------------------------

   OT HCO SEC CHECK ON  DENNIS ERLICH             1 January 1995

(Reported per HCOPL 'CONFESSIONALS - ETHICS REPORTS REQUIRED')

                                                      1 Jan 1995
                                           Total hours: 1:13 min

1 January 1995...................................hours: 1:13 min

[Dennis Erlich] with an evil degrader-snide 'smile' LFBD:
"You are only waiting for me
 to divulge [to you the] secrets of the OT-levels!

"Everybody does [wait for me]!

"Admit it!

"I am going to thwart your sense of ethics!

"This is the dope I am 'getting you' with!

"You are curious, you want to know what's in it! Confess!

"You want to know what you will find on the OT-levels!

"I want to make you reach for the dope I have.

"That's how I dominate you as well as everybody else.

"I make you reach and what you reached for and get,
 shall be so repulsive to you
 that you wished you had never reached!
 But now as you have reached and did read the contents [of
  a tiny bit of the confidential material
  which I posted on the Internet].
 I got you!

"You will ramble on with it [keep thinking of it],
 [you will] try to run it.
 It will keep you occupied and reeling for quite some time,
 I can restimulate you with it,
 I can control you with it
 [I can] keep you reeling by [you reading] it,
 restimulate [you]
 without running out what is restimulated.

"I can create confusion for you by it, as well as for others.

"It's not only for YOU [to restimulate YOU]! LFBD

"I CAN PIN PEOPLE DOWN BY IT,
 WITHOUT OFFERING THEM RELIEF.
 And I can make them REJECT Scientology,
 when they found it repulsive and confusing enough
 what I restimulated through posting OT confidential material.

"So I can destroy beings and I can destroy Scientology,
 [I can] make Scientology a repulsive subject.

"AND THAT's HOW I CONTROL PEOPLE OR BEINGS OR SOULS.
 THAT's MY GAME!

"A few stolen pages of otherwise strictly confidential material,
 and it gives me power!

"I can create quite some effects by [you reading] it!

"I want to make you reeling.
 I want to put pressure on you.
 And the trick is,
 I do not even have to do very much of innovation myself:
 what can be restimulated [in people] is all there
 already [in their reactive mind
 when they are not yet Clear or OT themselves]!

"Good to know!

"[WHEN] YOU ARE REELING, THINK-THINK-THINK, NO SOLUTION AHEAD,
 AND WITH OTHERS THE SAME,
 THAT's WHAT I WANT!

"Everybody getting crazy, running around wild,
 not knowing what to do with a Dennis Erlich,
 that's really being in control!  LFBD F/Nind

"They can't get me!" F/Nind

[Auditor:] F/N on the item (on the item dramatized here).

(End of this HCO Sec Check Session)

Total TA-Motion 4.2 in 1 hr and 13 min.

Now I, Koos, can tell you this about it:

As you can see from the above account from Dennis Erlich,
 he has, as David Miscavige and Napoleon and Hitler
 and any other SP,
 exactly the opposite intentions
 towards you and towards Mankind
 from those which he STATES in his postings.

He says he brings 'freedom' to the Free Zone,
 whereas in actual fact he knowingly intends slavery
 and restimulation and confusion
 to anyone not in the Church of Scientology.

If you want to make a study
 of a very standard anti-social Suppressive Person,
 then study Dennis Erlich.

He is a brilliant example, as we all know,
 of the rule that the more abusive of LRH someone is,
 the more suppressive and anti-social that person is.
 Very simple rule, proven over and over to be correct.

Dennis Erlich has very correctly
 been thrown out of the Church of Scientology,
 (thrown out by Ray Mithoff, I believe).

You are lucky enough
 that there IS spiritual repair from the damage done
 or intended to you by Dennis Erlich
 available to you from Advanced Organisations of Scientology,
 though I would personally
 not like to give such repair to those who
 keep any ties of friendship to the SP Dennis Erlich
 (other than by the FRIENDLY act of treating him as an enemy,
  as Fair Game,  per RI-58i
  'Fair Game Series - Treatment of Enemies' of 1 Jan 1995,
  which is attached).

I also would not like to give such repair
 to FACTNET-people or others, like Deirdre,
 unless they stop their pretense of bringing Freedom,
 a pretense which is the same as Dennis Erlich's pretense -
 which is solely to cover up
 the actual true intentions he himself stated now
 about himself,
 in the same way as the late Miscavige
 stated his actual intentions to me
 which I published in these RI-series, earlier.

SP's are SP's - they aren't very much different from SP to SP.

Koos Nolst Trenite - Ron's Inspector

Copyright 1995 by Koos Nolst Trenite

Xref: utcsri alt.religion.scientology:33182
Path: utcsri!utnut!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!peernews.demon.co.uk!replay.com!nobody
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: [email-masked] (Name withheld by request)
Organization: Replay and Company UnLimited.
X-Warning: This message was forwarded by an Anonymous Remailer.
X-Comment: Replay does not necessarily approve of the contents of this posting.
X-Comment: Please report inappropriate use to <[email-masked]>
Subject: A Scientific Scrutiny of OT3
X-Posting-Host: xs1.xs4all.nl
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 1995 01:57:16 +0000
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Lines: 326

2.3  Other Information given
2.3.1  The search for explosion traces
  
It happens that earth scientists are interested in and searching
for locations and sizes of asteroid impacts in the geological record.
Interest is fuelled partly by a conjecture that asteroid impacts can
cause continent-splitting and affect the pattern of mantle 
convection, partly by the effort to establish causes of mass extinctions at 
various times.
  
Impact traces and craters are located in several ways: visible signs
of cratering: satellite and other remote sensing [15]: shocked quartz
grains and impact ejecta [16]:  gravimetric surveys [17]: electric
resistivity [18].
  
There has been little cratering evidence found for around 75 M.y.
ago, the closest being the Iowa crater (35 Km across), recently 
redated at 73.8 M.y. [20], 2 others listed for 74-78 M.y. are Eagle Butte (10
km) and Dumas (2 km).
  
It is estimated that there should have been approximately 350 impacts
over the past 100 m.y. with sufficient kinetic energy to produce
craters greater than 10 km in diameter, however only a few dozen are
currently known [21].  This gives some indication of the difficulty 
in locating explosion traces.  The picture may soon change if extensive
gravimetric mapping gets under way, since craters buried by up to a
kilometre of sediments can be detected by that means.
  
Considering Hubbard's claim of widespread H-bombing at many more
volcanoes than the ones he lists, the search for but lack of 
explosion evidence for the time of interest indicates either that they didn't
happen at all, or were concealed - perhaps through being exploded by
near-to-erupting volcanoes.  Since most of the sites he names for H
bombing didn't exist at the time,  any claim that volcanism masked 
the effects is in any case, untenable.

2.3.2  Human and other life 75M.y. ago

In his OT3 statement Hubbard listed earth as one of the 76 or so
planets ruled by Xenu that were suffering human overpopulation

11th November 1994              - 10 -
A Scientific scrutiny of OT3                      Peter Forde B.Sc.

Earth's population in the 1990s is about 5<< billions, so that if
there were an average population of 178 billions 75 M.y. ago, then
population density would have been about 30 times greater than now.
  
Let us now make a thought experiment:  Here was a massive human
population on earth, and scientists of today very eager to trace the
earliest possible signs for past human existence.  Why then do we 
hear no reports of finding rubbish dumps, roads, houses, or other human
remains or traces of any sort whatsoever?  Why on the contrary do we
find evidence of dinosaurs, whose remains and prints are regularly
found in rock strata dated to the end of the Cretaceous, and whose
existence was incompatible with such a massive human population?  Why
do we not see mass extinctions of species happening at 75 M.y. ago 
due to human foraging, pollution and warfare, when evidence is that 
species persisted or gradually declined through that time and only suffered
mass extinctions at 65 M.y. ago? (and also in the 20th Century, 
alas).

The oldest trace of human existence or remains found so far are Homo
Habilis, Malawi, dated at 2.5 M.y. [22].  It is thought that humans,
chimpanzees and gorillas may have evolved from a single ancestor 
about 9 M.y. ago [23].
  
Although mass extinctions did happen at 65 M.y. ago, the iridium
layer together with soot present in the rock 'K-T' layer 
corresponding to the time are not pointers to H-bombings.  Iridium is a common
element found in asteroids, also present in the Earth's mantle.  It 
is not a byproduct of atomic fission or fusion.

11th November 1994              - 11 -
A Scientific scrutiny of OT3                      Peter Forde B.Sc.

3  Summary and interpretation of findings
3.1  Summary of findings
  
Referring to the veracity of the volcano list for 75 M.y. :-

Asia and Pacific
  North Japan       false     did not exist as separate island(s)
  South Japan       false     did not exist as separate island(s)
  Krakajawia        false     did not exist
  Mount Washington  false     volcanism too old
  Mount Ranier      false     did not exist
  Mount Hood        false     did not exist
  Mt. Shasta        false     did not exist
  San Gorgonio      false     underwater
  Indonesia         true?     but only for a little of the area
  Philippines       true?     not fully checked
  Himalayas         false     did not exist
  (Hawaii)          false     did not exist, nor any substitute
  Andes             true?     different geography, over-broad desc.

Atlantic
  Tangier           false     no volcanism for any locations
  St. Helena        false     did not exist
  Kolomonjero       false     did not exist
  (Las Palmas)      false     did not exist
  Canada            true      over-broad description.

I have tried to be unbiased, informative and accurate, but don't care
if the above table should prove incorrect in places since the 
evidence overwhelmingly supports a conclusion that the OT3 statement describes 
a non-existent geographic scenario for 75 M.y. ago.
  
There is no evidence to support Hubbard's assertion of widespread
H-bombing, notwithstanding an ongoing scientific search for explosion
traces.
 
Palaeontological evidence contradicts Hubbard's claims of human
population 75 M.y. ago.
  
My conclusion is that the Incident II of OT3 was impossible, viewed
against objective scientific evidence.
  
Incident 1, preposterous as an event anyway, is dated ten thousand
times older than science dates the universe, (going by "Big Bang"
theory).  I suggest that the "boobytrap" in disbelieving this 
incident is of Hubbard's making, where both timing and content of the 
"incident" deny reason.  The scientific "criterion of falsifiability" by which
scientists insist that statements be testable such as to conceivably 
be shown false, cannot be applied to the story, thus it cannot class as 
a scientific statement.  The combination of "Incident I" and
"boobytrapped" concepts can be described as a 'double bind'..  i.e.
"Heads I win, tails you lose!"

11th November 1994              - 12 -
A Scientific scrutiny of OT3                      Peter Forde B.Sc.
  
Hubbard has stated in higher courses than OT3 that there are parallel
universes, and runs Scientologists on spiritual "fleas" in these
parallel universes.  There is no objective scientific evidence for
parallel universes, and such notions class only within the realm of
conjecture, imagination or Science Fiction.

3.2  Interpretation of findings
  
Since the use of psychogalvanometers and other techniques of
Dianetics are being applied to the provenly non-existent events of 
OT3, and good results claimed, Dianetics must be doing something other 
than is claimed for it.  It is noteworthy that Dianetics is derived from
Freud's Clark Lectures, where Freud later on said that the technique
failed to uncover "key repressions" and so was therapeutically
insignificant.
  
I would assert that getting Dianetics results from running impossible
incidents is evidence that Scientologists are being pushed towards
controlling psychogalvanometer behaviour, get results to order, and 
to regularly deceive others as well as themselves about the truth.  If
they dont get results, they are deemed to have lied on earlier 
courses and punished by being either sent back to beginning Scientologist
status, or thrown out of Scientology. Scientologists take the OT3
materials home with them, and over the many months they are doing 
this course, would quite possibly attempt to locate the volcanoes in books
and find out more about them.  I have witnessed the pathetic 
spectacle of Scientologists saying Hubbard was wrong about the volcano list, 
and then go running Edinburgh and other volcanics that they have found to
be valid for the time, or for 65 M.y. ago, in an attempt to be less
unreal.  By Dianetics theory, to make a trauma vanish the exact time,
place, form and event must be located, and Hubbard is here 
unequivocal about 75 m.y., with a specific but impossible volcano list for
locations [26].   To run anything else is still faking it.
  
I conclude in general that OT3 Dianetics, being impossible to run
as factual trauma therapy since there was no such trauma, functions
instead as a cognitive behavioural training action coercing
Scientologists to manufacture falsehoods to order, or be punished for
"lying".
  
The effect of OT3 is to train the Scientologist to project intention
to control others through many-times-repeated practice in 
communicating to imaginary souls within their bodies.  More sinister is how the OT3
story has a ready explanation in terms of implant conditioning at
Hawaii or Las Palmas for any one of feeling dizzy, not wanting to
continue, blankness, sensations of pressure, rough or careless
communicating to others, impacts, finding nothing, effort to stop,
effort to withdraw, rush, protest, suppress, or the setting up of
automatic mental machinery to run the process.  Such reactions are
ascribed to spiritual "flea" reactions that the Scientologist has
"mistaken" as his own thoughts.  The Scientologist's own reaction is
not allowed as part of the OT3 activity! In this manner the
Scientologist's

11th November 1994              - 13 -
A Scientific scrutiny of OT3                      Peter Forde B.Sc.

independent thinking and reactions to the story get regularly 
confused and re-directed into the nonsense of the OT3 "incidents". The result 
is a person who in a sense is "free from overwhelm" since he is beaming
narrowly focussed intentions to control others, is blinkered and
interpreting reason and objections in terms of others trauma, and is
not in control of his own reasoning but is controlled by Hubbard. I
suggest that this represents debilitation of the mental independence
and cognitive function of the participant.  This is opposite to what 
is claimed for OT3.

3.3  Credits 

[1]  S Uyeda, A Miashiro, (1974), Geol Soc Amer Bull, v85,p1159 -
1170, "Plate tectonics and the Japanese Islands: A Synthesis."

[2]  S Maruyama, T Seno, (1986), Tectonophysics 127, p305-329,
"Orogeny and relative plate motions: example of the Japanese
islands."

[3]  WB Hamilton (1988), Geol Soc Amer Bull, v100, p1503-1527,
"Plate tectonics and island arcs."

[4]  BD Johnson, C McA Powell, JJ Veevers, (1976), Geol Soc Amer
Bull, v87, p1560-1566 "Spreading history of the eastern Indian Ocean
and Greater India's northward flight from Antarctica and Australia."
D Schelling, (1992), Tectonics, v11, n5, p925-943, "The
tectonostratigraphy and structure of the eastern Nepal Himalaya."

[5]  DA Clague, RD Jarrard, (1973a), Geol Soc Amer Bull, v84,
p1135-1154, "Tertiary Pacific plate motion deduced from the Hawaiian
Emperor Chain".

[6]  DSDP 192  Deep Sea Drilling Project report for hole 192 and
192a.

[7] Physiography of the United States (1967)

[8]  WF Barbat, (1971), Geol Soc Amer Bull, v82, p1541-1562,
"Megatectonics of the Coast Ranges, California."

[9]  I Baker, (1967), Nature, v215, p1451-1456, "Geocronology of
the St. Helena volcanoes."  (1969), Geol Soc Amer Bull, p1454
"Petrology of the volcanic rocks of St. Helena Island."

[10]  BH Baker, LAJ Williams, JA Miller, FJ Fitch, (1971),
Tectonophysics, v11, p191-215, "Sequence and chronology of the Kenya
Rift Volcanics."

[11]  SJ Gaciri, (1991), Tectonophysics v209, p139-142, "Lineament
map of Kenya: correlations of lineaments to known geological data."

[13]  X Le Pichon, PJ Fox, (1971),J Geophy. Res. v76, p6294-6308,
"Marginal offsets, fracture zones and the early opening of the North
Atlantic."

[14]  Rothe, Schminke (1968), Nature, v218, n5147, p1152-1154,
"Contrasting origins of the eastern and western islands of the 
Canarian
Archipelago."

[15]  JB Garvin, CS Schnetzler, RAF Grieve, (1992), Tectonophysics,
v216, p45-52, "Characteristics of large terrestrial impact structures
as revealed by remote sensing studies."

11th November 1994              - 14 -
A Scientific scrutiny of OT3                      Peter Forde B.Sc.
    
[16]  Geol Mag v131 (3), (1994), p361-367.

[17]  J Kakkuri, (1991), Tectonophysics v216, p41-44. "Traces of
impact craters in the geoid"

[18]  H Henkel (1992), Tectonophysics v216, p63-89. "Geophysica
aspects of meteorite impact craters in eroded shield environment, 
with special emphasis on electric resistivity."

[20]  New Scientist 13 Nov 1993, p17 "Ancient asteroid not guilty
of murdering dinosaurs."

[21]  RAF Grieve, (1987), Annu. Rev. Earth Planet Sci, 15, p245-
270. RAF Grieve, (1984), J Geophy. Res. v89, B403-408, "The impact
cratering rate in recent time."

[22]  Nature 1993, p833:  New Scientist 30 Oct 1993, p15., "Human
jaw hints at Africa Trek"

[23]  Journal of Human Evolution, v25, p201 : New Scientist 30
Oct 1993, "Three way split for our ape ancestors."

[24]  New Scientist, 30 Oct 1993, p14, "Thumbs up for an older
universe."

[25]  Hans Burgl, (1967), Tectonophysics, v4, p429-443, "The
Orogenesis in the Andean system of Colombia."

[26]  HCOB 15 November 1978 "Dating and Locating".

  Recommended reading:

  Jon Atack, (1990), "A Piece of Blue Sky,  Scientology,
Dianetics and L. Ron Hubbard Exposed", a Lyle Stuart book published 
by Carol Publishing Group, ISBN 0-8184-0499-X Hardback.  A masterfully
researched expose of the abuses, contradictions, falsehoods, paranoia
and greed of Hubbard and some of his pseudo military Scientologist
henchmen.

Available from Jon Atack at Theta Communications Ltd. "Avalon",
Cranston Road, East Grinstead Sussex, RH19 3HQ.
Price 15 British pounds including postage.

  Jon Atack (1992) The Total Freedom Trap, available from J Atack
(Theta Communications Ltd.) or Peter Forde, 2 British pounds 
including postage.

  Steven Hassan  "Combatting Cult Mind Control", Aquarian
ISBN 0-89281-243-5

  "Cults: What Parents Should Know" Longone & Ross, Lyle Stuart,
ISBN 0-8184-0511-2.

  Thomas and Jaqueline Keiser "The Anatomy of Illusion"
ISBN 0-398-05295-6

  "Captive Hearts, Captive Minds" Lalich & Tobias, Hunter House,
ISBN 0-89793-144-0.

  Margery Wakefield "The Road to Zenu" is an excellent first-hand
account of membership, and includes Bob Penney's thought provoking
"Social Control In Scientology".  "The Road To Zenu" is available via
P.O. Box 290402, Tampa, Florida  US 33687.

11th November 1994              - 15 -

Xref: utcsri alt.religion.scientology:33189
Path: utcsri!utnut!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!peernews.demon.co.uk!replay.com!nobody
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: [email-masked] (Name withheld by request)
Organization: Replay and Company UnLimited.
X-Warning: This message was forwarded by an Anonymous Remailer.
X-Comment: Replay does not necessarily approve of the contents of this posting.
X-Comment: Please report inappropriate use to <[email-masked]>
Subject: A Scientific Scrutiny of OT3
X-Posting-Host: xs1.xs4all.nl
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 1995 02:17:29 +0000
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Lines: 524

A Scientific scrutiny of OT3                      Peter Forde B.Sc.

1  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    1
   1.1  Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    1
   1.2  Why check Hubbard's OT-III statement?  . . . . . . . .    1
   1.3  "Section III OT" summarised  . . . . . . . . . . . . .    2
   1.4  General notes on modern geology  . . . . . . . . . . .    3
2  The "Section III OT" information as checked.. . . . . . . .    4
   2.1  Volcano list - Asia and Pacific  . . . . . . . . . . .    4
      2.1.1   North Japan, South Japan . . . . . . . . . . . .    4
      2.1.2   Krakajawia      (Krakatau) . . . . . . . . . . .    4
      2.1.3   Indonesia  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    5
      2.1.4   Philippines  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    5
      2.1.5   Himalayas  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    6
      2.1.6   Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    6
      2.1.7   Andes  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    7
      2.1.8   Mount Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    7
      2.1.9   Mount Ranier, Mount Hood, Mount Shasta . . . . .    7
      2.1.10  San Gorgonio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    8
   2.2  Volcano list - Atlantic  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    8
      2.2.1  Tangier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    8
      2.2.2  St. Helena  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    9
      2.2.3  Kolomonjero   (Kilimanjaro) . . . . . . . . . . .    9
      2.2.4  Las Palmas    (Canary Islands)  . . . . . . . . .    9
      2.2.5  Canada  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   10
   2.3  Other Information given  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   10
      2.3.1  The search for explosion traces . . . . . . . . .   10
      2.3.2  Human and other life 75M.y. ago . . . . . . . . .   10
3  Summary and interpretation of findings  . . . . . . . . . .   12
   3.1  Summary of findings  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   12
   3.2  Interpretation of findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   13
   3.3  Credits  (including some recommended reading titles) .   14

  Written by Peter Forde B.Sc.
  54 Underwood Court, Hyde,  CHESHIRE   UK SK14 3HX

  Copyright (C) 1994, Peter Forde.  This document may be freely
reproduced on a not-for-profits basis.  For other uses you are
requested to obtain prior permission from the author.
  Note that "Section III OT", "OT3", "Scientology", "L.Ron Hubbard",
"Dianetics", "E-meter" and other scientology words are trademark and
belong to COSRECI.

11th November 1994
A Scientific scrutiny of OT3                      Peter Forde B.Sc.

1  Introduction 
1.1  Abstract 

The "Section III OT"  materials as written by L. Ron Hubbard in late
1966 remain in use to-date by Scientology as a heavily promoted and
very expensive course (over 3k British pounds).  The materials mostly
revolve around a statement of events "recalled" by Hubbard that
supposedly occurred on earth 75 million years ago.  Section III OT
then applies "Dianetics", which is claimed to be a science of mental
health, using the events as essential information.  My paper checks
Hubbard's statement against the known geological record for the time,
finding that nearly all of the listed locations didn't exist then and
that other available evidence contradicts the general story. 

With the events demonstrated to be fictional incidents the
implications for the action and efficacy of Section III OT and of
Dianetics in general are then considered.  The conclusion is drawn
that "Section III OT" is not an improvement activity but a disguised
training action with debilitating effects on the mental independence
and cognitive function of the participant.  Dianetics is also
functioning as a hidden training action, structured to accustom
participants to fake results to order, or else be heavily punished
for "lying".

1.2  Why check Hubbard's OT-III statement? 

Scientology claims to be both a science and a religion at once, and
the description used depends whether trying to impress people or hide
behind some divine right of religions to do and say whatever they
please with nobody having the right to criticize them. Since
Scientology and its substudy Dianetics both claim to be sciences, I
can legitimately scrutinise them as a scientist.. 

I see good reasons why this scrutiny should be made: 

-  An objective check of Hubbard's memories of past
lives. One of Hubbard's publications, "Mission Into Time", describes
an experiment to prove his ability to recall information from past
lives.  The experiment was carried out under his close direction and
control, concerned his own recollections and not another person, was
published only by his Scientology organisation, and as is normal for
Scientology, debarred independent scrutiny for veracity by any
agency. By checking Hubbard's claimed "past-life" memories for
"Section III OT" (OT3 for short) against the geological record,this
represents a much fairer test of any "past-life" memories he might
have had. 

-  A challenge to superstition..  "Section III OT" is secret, and
those who would look ahead to see what it contains are frightened
off with menaces of catching pneumonia and dying, and of having to
pay far more for their already very expensive training and
counselling: 200 - 400 British pounds per HOUR.  The net effect is
that Scientologists are afraid to look for themselves.  Those few who

11th November 1994               - 1 -
A Scientific scrutiny of OT3                      Peter Forde B.Sc.

do look ahead of being prepared, don't believe it, and other
Scientologists then say sagely how this proves that the traumas were
boobytrapped to make them look unbelievable!  This paper by checking
the details directly against scientific evidence drawn from a wide
range of sources, objectively judges whether true-butboobytrapped or
whether the story is fiction.

  -  An adventure into paleogeography..  Most people will find
my evenhandedness in dealing with this fairy tale bizarre, but apart
from trying to reassure Scientologists that there is intelligent life
outside the sect, I have a strong personal interest in Geology.
Compiling this paper represents an exploration into the amount of
detail currently available for reconstructing ancient landforms.

1.3  "Section III OT" summarised

"Section III OT" or OT3 is a high up level within Scientology that
can only be done after many other courses, by which time the client
is well prepared, well behaved and ready to believe just about
anything Hubbard says.  People are not suckers to have been
conditioned in this way, but have been ushered through many
successive plausible small steps and changes, each one acceptable by
itself, but progressing towards a shut-down of critical thoughts,
alienation from outside opinion and a turning-towards and eventual
unquestioning acceptance of Hubbard's imposed belief system. 

OT stands for "Operating Thetan" where "thetan" is Scientology jargon
for "soul", and "Operating" is supposed to mean "At cause over life,
thought, matter, energy, space and time".  The 3 means that this is
the third in the series of courses. 

OT3 mainly concerns a supposed "Incident II" happening 75 Million
years ago, when Xenu an officer in charge of the 76 local planets of
the "Galactic Confederation", solved overpopulation by mass
exterminations, mostly by shootings. The souls of those killed were
collected together using super cold, transported to volcanoes on
earth (he gives a list of these and they are checked out in this
paper), H- bombed at the volcanoes, collected up again using
electronic ribbons and transported to Hawaii or Las Palmas. They were
thereupon subjected to 36 days of hypnotic "implants" using films and
simple apparatus, which in their already shocked state was supposedly
very effective and kept them clustered together and trapped on earth.

We are each supposed to contain large numbers of these traumatised
and grouped souls stuck around our bodies like some sort of spiritual
"fleas" (Hubbard's term).  The OT3 processing consists of beaming a
narrowly focussed attention onto clusters of souls to communicate
with and separate them, then get individual souls to recall the
volcano they were blown up at etc. which by Dianetics theory releases
them from the trauma.  If the souls resist recalling the "Incident
II" killings, bombings and hypnosis, then "Incident 1" is supposed to
be offered for recall instead..

11th November 1994               - 2 -
A Scientific scrutiny of OT3                      Peter Forde B.Sc.

"Incident 1" is time-stamped at 4 quadrillion years ago, and here I
quote in full: " LOUD SNAP   WAVES OF LIGHT   CHARIOT COMES OUT,
TURNS RIGHT AND LEFT    CHERUB COMES OUT   BLOWS HORN, COMES CLOSE
SHATTERING SERIES OF SNAPS   CHERUB FADES BACK (RETREATS) BLACKNESS
DUMPED ON THETAN"  (Thetan = soul = spiritual "flea") 

If even "Incident 1" wont work, then the Scientologist is doing
something wrong and his Dianetics procedures are checked-over. If
even then the Scientologist fails to get results, then he is adjudged
to have made false attest of completion of previous courses and is
required to do the entire series of over 20 courses and counselling
from beginning Scientologist onwards all over again. 

The end result of OT3 is declared to be "freedom from overwhelm",
also "exterior with full perception", also the ability to dismiss
illness or mental ill-health in others at will.

1.4  General notes on modern geology

Geologists express time in Mega-years (M.y.) and don't usually refer
to time numerically, but classify into a framework of global events,
using stages of increasing detail.  Thus the "Incident II" given
unequivocally by Hubbard at 75 M.y. ago, sits within the Mesozoic
Era (251 to 65 M.y. ago), Late Cretaceous Period (97 M.y. to 65 M.y.
ago), Maestrichtian Epoch (circa 70 M.y. ago).  Incident 1 sits long
before the beginning of time at the Big Bang and thus has no
geological classification. 

In late 1966 when Hubbard wrote "Section III OT" (OT3 for short), the
scientific community was working to Static Crust theory.  This held
that the earth was slowly cooling, and as it did so it contracted and
wrinkled up like a dried prune, thus evolving mountains and seas.
Mountains and locations by this theory were essentially old, static
and unmoving, and thus it would seem valid to project existing
mountains and volcanoes back as existing even 75 M.y. ago. 

Hubbard was not to know that Plate Tectonics theory, being proved
valid just 2 years later and explaining and predicting hitherto
unexplainable phenomena, would prompt an explosion of renewed
confidence, interest and research in geology, and its this knowledge
which is drawn upon here. 

Plate Tectonics holds that the earth's crust comprises a set of
plates floating on a mobile Mantle.  Its at the margins of these
plates that we get earthquake activity and frequently volcanism or
mountains. Oceanic crust emanates at (usually undersea) spreading
ridges and disappears into the Mantle again at deep ocean trenches,
and the continents move about in the process.  The cause of plate
movements and volcanism is a complex thermal - chemical gravitational
engine, but some conceptual grasp can be obtained by picturing
convection cells within the earth's mantle. 

There are several strands of evidence that work together to date
rocks with good confidence..  Radiometric dating uses carbon isotopes
for a few tens of thousands of years, then Potassium/Argon (K-Ar) up
to a few hundred million years, other elements for yet longer time
spans. Radiocarbon dating has been accurately

11th November 1994               - 3 -
A Scientific scrutiny of OT3                      Peter Forde B.Sc.

calibrated via known artefacts and such as tree rings.  K-Ar
measures relative proportions of several isotopes and is self
-checking since relative proportions must be consistent.  There is
also palaeomagnetism which records the shifting patterns of the
earth's magnetic field and is very useful of itself for dating rocks
and tracking the movements of continents, especially when linked to
known rates of sea-floor spreading. Then there are fossil and rock
strata matching.  The 'lifespan' of many species is typically about 3
million years, after which the descendents become noticeably
different, a phenomenon which assists use of fossils for dating
rocks.

2  The "Section III OT" information as checked..
2.1  Volcano list - Asia and Pacific

This is the volcano list contained within the OT3 statement. I have
done a little rearranging and grouping of list items for clarity of
presentation, original sequence restored in the summary.

2.1.1   North Japan, South Japan

North Japan, meaning Hokkaido.  South Japan, meaning the Japanese
mainland of Honshu, and the smaller islands of Shikoku and Kyushu.

Around the time of interest, the Kula ridge subducted under the
mainland, resulting in an unusually widespread zone of volcanism. The
zone eventually extended to 3,000 km in width, and ranged from the
Ryoke metamorphic belt in Japan to Lake Baikal, and along the east
coast of Asia from the Bering Strait to South China. [1]

S. Maruyama, T. Seno [2] show how at 85 M.y. the Japanese islands
were no more than a narrow continental east-facing fore-arc ridge
which extended from Korea north into China.  It wasn't until about
30-12 M.y. ago that intra-arc rifting separated and rotated the
Japanese islands from mainland Asia to form the Sea of Japan,
possibly by action of the submerged Kula Ridge.  Most of the Japanese
land mass has formed in postMesozoic times, and is the result of
island collisions, fore-arc accretion and volcanism. 

In summary Hubbard has distinguished North Japan and South Japan as
volcano ranges when at the time they were indistinguishable from each
other or the South-East Asian mainland, with volcanism ranging much
further afield than proto-Japan.  Thus these are very inept
descriptions for volcanoes in the area 75 M.y. ago.

2.1.2   Krakajawia      (Krakatau)

Krakatau, misspelled Krakajawia by Hubbard, is situated between
Sumatra and Java in Indonesia, and forms part of the volcanic arc of
a subduction zone as the Indian Plate, carrying Australia and India,
moves towards the northeast.

It is part of the Indonesian island arc system, where zones of
volcanism can be shown to have formed and moved gradually southward
much more recently than 75 M.y. ago following the standard pattern

11th November 1994               - 4 -
A Scientific scrutiny of OT3                      Peter Forde B.Sc.

of migrating and growing island arc systems [3].

Krakatau exploded towards the end of last century, with such
violence and amount of debris that it caused bad weather globally for
several years afterwards.

This volcano is new, and Hubbard was mistaken to name it as existing
75M.y. ago.  Its mention hints at imagination at work. (My
proof-reader wanted to replace the last sentence with "Its mention
supports the evidence that OT3 was the consequence of drugged
hallucination.", but I'll leave my text unaltered!)

2.1.3   Indonesia

The Indonesian Island Arc is a subduction-related island arc
system [3].

Part of Sumatra is thought to have rifted from New Guinea in
Jurassic times.  There was a collision between an island arc system
and mainland Sumatra 30-50 M.y. ago.  The Sunda subduction zone with
its concomitant volcanism, running from Sumatra through to Sumbawa,
has been active only since this time. 

The subduction system in Java arose no earlier than 30 M.y. ago, and
if I read correctly the sediments that form it were underwater until
a northward migrating island arc collided with and subducted under it
about that time, causing uplift.

Eastern Java, Bali, Lombok, Sumbawa and Flores expose only island
arc rocks of less than 23.5 M.y. age.

The island of Timor comprises an accretionary wedge accumulating
on continental crust and experienced uplift in Quaternary times, less
than 2 M.y. ago.

Sunda also experienced uplift from the sea in Quaternary or later
times, possibly due to a crustal fragment in front of Australia
subducted beneath the fore-arc basin.

I conclude that Celebes and part of Sumatra existed 75 Ma ago, along
with other islands that have since accreted to continental mainlands.
(Borneo dealt with as part of Philippines)  Java, Sumbawa, Sumba,
Bali, Lombok, Flores and Timor arose much more recently, and these
form most of the present-day volcanic arc. Thus Hubbard was passably
correct to name "Indonesia" as a source of volcanoes although only a
minority of the islands still exist from the time.

2.1.4   Philippines

The Philippines Trench is new and the subducting Philippines oceanic
plate hasn't travelled far, and shows no volcanism south of Leyte
[3].

Halmahera is a far-travelled Pacific island, now colliding with the
Sangihe island arc as the Molucca plate sinks from between. The
suture between these arcs is visible in Mindanao.  Oldest dates for
Southern Phillipines formations give Cretaceous.

The South China Sea is an area of high heat flow, as is the Japan
Sea, and it is fair to speculate that this is a rift basin where

11th November 1994               - 5 -
A Scientific scrutiny of OT3                      Peter Forde B.Sc.

Luzon and Borneo rifted away from the mainland in relatively recent
times.  Alas most of the published papers for the area that will give
me more detail are in Chinese..

In the absence of more definite information on palaeogeographical
features of the Philippines, I'll allow that they were distinct from
the mainland and contained volcanism, and thus that Hubbard's naming
them was possibly valid.

2.1.5   Himalayas

The Himalayas are a young mountain range resulting from crustal
shortening and thickening due to continuing northward movement of the
Indian Plate, after its collision 40-55 M.y. ago with the Eurasian
Plate [4].

Logically there was strong volcanism at island arcs and continental
subduction zones during the Late Cretaceous as the Tethys Ocean
closed rapidly, but these volcanoes were not situate at anything
resembling the present site of the Himalayas, which is the result of
shortening of hundreds of kilometres of continental crust, and
includes substantial island material [4]. Mention of the Himalayas is
far too inept a description for the area for 75 M.y. ago, and Hubbard
was mistaken to use this name to locate either volcanoes or a
mountain chain.   Before Plate Tectonic theory emerged, and not
knowing the detailed geology of the Himalayas, it would have seemed
fair to mention them.

2.1.6   Hawaii

Hawaii located in the Central North Pacific, is a key location for
Hubbard's OTIII statement as this was where the souls H-bombed at
the Pacific Ring of Fire volcanoes were supposedly taken to be
hypnotically "implanted".

Hawaii is the latest in a long line of seamounts thrown up as the
Pacific Plate passed over a mantle plume or hot spot [5].  The
Hawaiian Islands were thrown up in succession, with Hawaii (and Loihi
seamount) the latest and still erupting.  The nearest inactive
volcanic island is Maui, 230 km from Loihi, which is dated at 1.63 +-
0.03 M.y., and it is fair to conclude that the Hawaiian volcanic pile
has arisen since this time.

If there had been an island at the present site of Hawaii 75 M.y.
ago, it might have been Meiji Guyot, now situate at the northern end
of the Emperor chain 164.42E 53N, and aged by K-Ar dating at 74+-3
M.y.. [6].   Study of the deep sea drilling core samples from Meiji's
summit indicates that this seamount never reached anywhere near the
surface to become an island.

  I conclude that there was nothing but ocean at the present site of
Hawaii 75 M.y. ago, and Hubbard was mistaken to name this place as a
supposed centre for distribution and "implanting" of souls.

11th November 1994               - 6 -
A Scientific scrutiny of OT3                      Peter Forde B.Sc.

2.1.7   Andes

The Andes on the Western edge of South America are at a subduction
zone for the Nazca oceanic plate as it moves Eastwards, and the
South American plate moves westwards carried with opening of the
South Atlantic.  It was and remains a major part of the Pacific Ring
of Fire, and was probably volcanic at the time of interest 75 M.y.
ago. The geology of the Andes demands involved study to get any sort
of detailed picture, but broadly speaking was not so much in the form
of high mountains then but more as cordillera or archipelagos of
islands, much as we see in the southern part of South America now
[25].  The volcanoes would also have been located slightly further to
the East than they are now, and often erupting underwater.   Whether
there were any mountains is not certain. 

In the Western zones we tend to find Cretaceous sediments laid in
deep water, with lavas showing a pillow structure, indicating that
they erupted underwater.  Since the Cretaceous these have been folded
and uplifted to form the present mountains, perhaps after Terranes
accreted to the continental land mass, perhaps through underplating
by the downgoing slab with concomitant isostatic uplift. 

The Eastern zone represents a gravity-thrust zone as continuing
underplating and uplift is compensated by slumping. Continuing
erosion has exhumed Paleozoic and older rock formations. By naming
the 7000 km long Andes, and not being more specific, Hubbard was not
entirely wrong.  Whether traumatised souls would have recognised any
modern-day Andean volcano or geography is quite another matter.

2.1.8   Mount Washington

There are two Mount Washingtons in the United States, one is in New
Hampshire at  44.17N 71.19W in the Appalachian mountain range. This
range formed during the late Palaeozoic era, the Alleghenian orogeny
of middle Permian, circa 270 M.y. ago.  Activity, including volcanism
in that area had long ceased by the time of interest [7]. 

The other Mount Washington is in Massachusets USA at 42.07N, 73.28W,
in the Berkshire Hills.  This also is a stable cratonic area free
from volcanism since the Palaeozoic ended 251 M.y. ago. 

>From the information available to me, there was no volcanism at a
Mount Washington 75 M.y. ago, and Hubbard was therefore mistaken. A
possible explanation for this strange name could be imagination, as
Washington was the first president of the United States..

2.1.9   Mount Ranier, Mount Hood, Mount Shasta
  
Mount Ranier is situate in Washington State, USA,46.8N 122.25W ,
14,400 ft high, and forms part of the Middle Cascade Mountains [7].
Mount Hood is situate in Oregon, USA 45.24N 121.41W, is 11,250 ft

11th November 1994               - 7 -
A Scientific scrutiny of OT3                      Peter Forde B.Sc.

high and also forms part of the Middle Cascade Mountains. Both of
these volcanoes are currently active.  None of the lava in the
anticline that these volcanoes sit on is more than 65 M.y. in age,
and the volcano cones themselves are Quaternary, less than 1.6 M.y.
in age at oldest.  Underneath the lava anticline is about a 3 miles
deep thickness of Cretaceous marine-deposited sediments intruded by
Cretaceous granitic plutons.  In short at the time of interest this
site had none of the present volcanoes nor mountains, but was sea,
with a few islands in places.  Mount Shasta, California USA, 41.25N
122.12W, peaks above 14,000 feet and is situated in the Southern
Cascades.  I don't have so much information about its the structure,
but it is also classed as a Quaternary volcano, less than 2 M.y.
old.

Hubbard was completely mistaken to name these 3 particular volcanoes
as existing 75 M.y. ago.

2.1.10  San Gorgonio

This mountain is also located in California at 34.05N 116.50W, and
stands 11,485 feets high, forming part of the Transverse Ranges [7].

W.F. Barbat [8] informs us that the area in question mostly
comprises precambrian rocks of all types, with some granitic rocks
chiefly of mesozoic age.  It sits on the San Andreas Fault.

These look to me like basement rocks that have surfaced after a very
great deal of uplift and erosion.  The general area is of Mesozoic
sediments that suffered crustal shortening.

The present San Andreas Fault, on which the mountain lies, is
thought to be a consequence of the considerable gravitational load
the uplifted sedimentary formations placed on the continental plate. 
Plate movement has been slow, thus no volcanism.

I conclude that at 75 M.y. the area was underwater and probably
experiencing no volcanism.  Thus Hubbard was mistaken for this
mountain.

2.2  Volcano list - Atlantic
2.2.1  Tangier

There are several "Tangier" to be found around the Atlantic Ocean:
Tangier, Morocco, at the southern edge of the Straits of Gibraltar.
I see no evidence of volcanism or mountains at this site for the time
of interest, it doesn't form part of the Atlas mountains which are
further South. Tangier, Nova Scotia.  This was a stable cratonic area
for the time of interest.

Tangier Island at 73.84N, 76W in Chesapeake Bay, USA is also a
stable cratonic area with no sign of volcanism later than about 100
M.y. ago, when the North Atlantic started to open.

 

Xref: utcsri alt.religion.scientology:33529
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Path: utcsri!newsflash.concordia.ca!uunet!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcomsv!lavc!dennis.l.erlich
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Copyright everything!
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150
X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.25/PRIMP 1.56p
Distribution: world
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 95 08:24:23 -0800
Lines: 21

Jeff Jacobsen <[email-masked]> wrote:

>"When in doubt about copyrighting it, copyright it.  Copyright and
>Trademark anything and everything." [HCOPL 20 January 1959]
>
>   The above is the entire HCOPL.  If I was to apply the fair use
>doctrine here, maybe I'd have to only quote "When in" :-)

The Pope:

>Hot damn!  Dennis, grab this and read to Judge Whyte!
>Hyuk!
 
    Pop that deal into my keep file.
    
           +---------------------------------------+
          Rev. Dennis L Erlich   * * the inFormer * *
                 <[email-masked]>
                        that person (tm)

Xref: utcsri alt.religion.scientology:33390
Path: utcsri!utnut!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!cass.ma02.bull.com!fim.uni-erlangen.DE!ba170
From: [email-masked] (Koos Nolst Trenite)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: RI-3i  SEC CHECK on Marc Yager
Date: 23 Feb 1995 12:15:43 -0000
Organization: Bull Worldwide Information Systems.
Lines: 179
Sender: [email-masked]
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cass.ma02.bull.com

                                               14 September 1994

           RI-3i 'HCO  SECURITY  CHECK  ON  MARC  YAGER
        (pretending to be RTC-Inspector for Administration)

from Ron's Inspector

Message # RI-3i for Internet

I am sending the following data on Marc Yager up from a Security
 Check I ordered on him, (in August 1994) as it is now also
 confirmed by Ron, on 13 Sept 1994, 21:45pm GMT, to me that
 Marc Yager is a Suppressive and wants to continue to dominate
 people.

(The data revealed in HCO Security Checks are not confidential.
 They are used to detect hidden crimes, and the data is used by
 the group to stop the crimes and to apply group-justice to the
 criminal, based on what he actually did, rather than on what
 others believe or are led to believe he did.
The purpose is to have real justice both for the criminal and
 for the groupmembers that have been affected by his crimes.)

(The abbreviations F, LF, LFBD and F/N designate reactions on
 the E-meter, indicating mental charge (F, LF, LFBD) and release
 of charge completed (F/N)).

----------------------------------------------------------------

HCO SEC CHECK DATA ON MARC YAGER                     31 Aug 1994

 Reported per HCOPL 'CONFESSIONALS - ETHICS REPORTS REQUIRED'

                                              29 Aug-31 Aug 1994
                                           Total hours: 3:26 min

29 Aug 1994......................................hours: 1:28 min

Marc Yager: "I have accepted David Miscavige. F I have
 contributed to the powergame of David Miscavige."

RTC wants to take over International Management, make it
 entirely dependent on RTC and dictate operating schemes F and
 policy and prices, and licenses given and licenses withdrawn
 when certain conditions are not fullfilled. F

Marc Yager has advised David Miscavige on some of the actions or
 actions planned still.
RTC wants to get International Management under RTC Direction,
 make Guillaume Lesevre or any later ED INT into a pawn.

Marc Yager: "I had a different viewpoint on David Miscavige LF
 but I am playing his game, LF a power game, LFBD and not a game
 of caring for the beings involved in it.
"I have assisted David Miscavige in his plotting. Continuous
 overt since 1982." LF (Overt = non-survival act)

Koos should consider that Marc Yager doesn't know anything about
 David Miscavige's evil intentions. LFBD
Some time ago he was a friend and then betrayed Koos in Plato
 time, Greek time. LF
He was one of those that brought Socrates into jail and
 to death. F
Marc Yager: "There was a time before that, when I still was
 a friend. LF Then I got evil and wanted to break the
 'supremacy' of Plato." 'Supremacy' = Ethics-presense, force,
 ARC.
He intended to destroy Plato (Koos). LF
to F/N

30 Aug 1994......................................hours: 0:56 min

Marc Yager communicating to Auditor: "I wanted to blindfold you
 [Auditor] (see how much I can pretend to you) about my actual
 intentions within RTC at the first Sec Check where I said:
 'I am a friend of Koos.'
"Which is a pretense. I wanted that he doesn't look at me
 further, and I wanted that he accepts the image of me I put out
 to everyone else:
 that of a well-meaning friend who has everything well under
 control and who cares and is willing to help.

"I did it, so that you [Auditor] would stop looking further at
 me, so that Koos would stop looking further at me. Koos looked
 through it."
to F/N

31 Aug 1994......................................hours: 0:29 min

 result:
Marc Yager: "I have made people that loved Ron, to be treated as
 criminals, that means I have attacked them for using Ron's
 material and dragged them to court, subjected them to police
 violence and invalidation, made them pay heavy fines, expelled
 them from the Church and cut their comm lines and discredited
 them towards their friends and neighbours and at their
 workplace."

"I have used police and courts to stop Scientologists from using
 and applying Scientology, under the pretense that those
 Scientologists committed crimes and that they were squirrels."

"I have ARC-broken people with Ron that loved him." LFBD

"I have barred the road for them to communicate to Ron's
 material, and with Ron."

"And I have tolerated and agreed with other crimes and
 injustices done to people who wanted auditing and training but
 were refused auditing and training as they were not as
 controllable as others."

"I have created a lot of enemies for Ron in this way."

"I had PLEASURE in legally invalidating people, in operating
 without ARC, in refusing to understand what was there." LFBD F/N

Auditor: The natter (natter = negative chatter, indicating you
 almost found out something about a person, something he would
 prefer you don't know about him) stopped, he is calm.
to F/N

31 Aug 1994......................................hours: 0:33 min

Marc Yager: "I made Ron's companion and friend Pat Broeker blow
 (to blow = to leave in an irresponsible way) and his wife
 deciding to be a victim (to be victim = to be intentionally
 effect of another's crimes)."

"Ron became less real to me than David Miscavige.
I forgot about possible communication to Ron, I gave my
 admiration to David Miscavige instead."

"I have withheld my communication from Ron, on David Miscavige's
 internal order. 'I didn't even try [try to communicate to Ron]'.
David Miscavige gave an order to not attempt any communications
 to Ron. LFBD's
And I heeded that! Because it was coming from David Miscavige!"
 LFBD

"That was a suppressive order!" LFBD's F/Nind VGI's
Auditor: Space wider, cleaner.

(END)

(Note: Marc Yager still refuses to communicate to Ron, though)

from
Koos Nolst Trenite - Ron's Inspector.

Copyright 1994 by Koos Nolst Trenite

 reference:
  RI-0i 'Current Ethics' of 30 June 1994
  RI-1i 'Ron is Back!' of 7 Sept 1994
  RI-2i 'CORRECT PTS-item is David Miscavige' of 10 Sept 1994
  RI-3i 'SEC CHECK Marc Yager RTC' of 14 Sept 1994
  RI-4i 'LRH validates Free Zone' of 16 Sept 1994
  RI-5i 'Who can be trusted in CoS' of 18 Sept 1994
  RI-6i 'The PT Overts on David Miscavige' of 20 Sept 1994
  RI-7i 'RTC Missions' of 21 Sept 1994
  RI-8i 'SEC CHECK Intl Justice Chief' of 28 Sept 1994

Xref: utcsri alt.religion.scientology:33405
Path: utcsri!utnut!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!auvm!nova.novanet.org!harringtonj-smtc
Comments: Gated by [email-masked]
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 95 10:08:00 EST
Reply-To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Affidavit of former CofS Exec
X-PH: [email-masked] (Cornell Modified)
X-Listprocessor-Version: 7.1 -- ListProcessor by CREN
Lines: 304

         AFFIDAVIT OF FORMER TOP SCIENTOLOGY EXECUTIVE
                           **********

 This affidavit was originally submitted in the USA v Fishman
case on 18 Jul 1990 and again on 24 Jun 93 in the Church of
Scientology of Calfornia v Larry Wollersheim.

 Just a few days ago, information was received that the Church of
Scientology  may have been involved in an illegal wiretap of the
residence of Vicki Aznaran, thru the use of private
investigators in Los Angeles, CA and Dallas, TX shortly after
she filed this affidavit in 1990. See "CofS wiretap" that was
posted several days ago.

  The President of the Church of Scientology International, a 20+
year veteran of the Guardian Office/Office of Special Affairs,
Heber Jentzch, is currently under criminal indictment in Spain
and the trial may commence this year. Whether he will voluntarily
return to face trial is unknown and the Church has gone to
EXTREME lengths to conceal the criminal case in Spain.

  The current attack on Rev. Dennis Erlich and the
oppressive litigation against Erlich, the sysops at
Support.Com, and Netcom is just part of the
long-established pattern of the paranoid Hubbardian Empire
reigned over by David Miscavige and his thugs at the RTC.
The CofS reportedly spends $300,00-$700,000 MONTHLY to
maintain its teams of lawyers and contract private
investigators.

  Several government agencies may have been compromised and
perhaps a petition to our elected officials for a
congressional inquiries into the blatant attacks on the
Bills of Rights may be in order.

 If anyone has any additional information on this, please contact
me via e-mail.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

  United States District Court Northern District of California

                    Case No. Cr-88-0616-DLJ8

             UNITED STATES OF AMERICA    Plaintiff

                  STEVEN FISHMAN     Defendant

   I, VICKI AZNARAN declare as follows under penalty of perjury:
I joined the Church of Scientology in 1972.  In 1978 after
approximately four years as staff members, my husband and I
joined the Sea Organization. From 1978 to early 1987, my husband
and I worked most of our waking hours, with very few days off, at
our various assignments within Scientology. I eventually became
President of Religious Technology Center and, supposedly, the top
"ecclesiastical" authority within Scientology.  Richard was a
high-level security officer. During this period my husband and I
became intimately familiar with the structure and activities of
various Scientology organizations.  Among other things, I was
briefed on and was sometimes a participant in meetings involving
litigation tactics and various means used to attack and fight
"enemies" of Scientology.  In numerous instances I was in the
chain of command for approval for such activities.

    From 1984 to 1987, I held the office of Inspector General;
the highest worldwide office in the organization and so was privy
to the most arcane practices of the group.  The legal strategy of
Scientology and the existence of numerous legal problems, some of
which are set forth below, were known to me when I was a staff
member in Scientology.  Enemies of Scientology are deemed to be
"suppressive persons" ("SPs"). One becomes a "suppressive person"
by doing a suppressive act, such as suing Scientology as a
litigant. In the jargon of Scientology, when one is "declared"
this means that one has been declared a "suppressive person" and,
therefore may be harassed, hurt, damaged or destroyed without
regard to truth, honesty or legal rights.  It is considered
acceptable within Scientology to lie, cheat, steal and commit
illegal acts in the name of dealing with a "suppressive person".

   This practice or policy is sometimes referred to as the policy
of "fair game." In the jargon of Scientology a person who is
"declared" is understood to be a suppressive person. This means
that the person is "fair game." The fair game policy was issued
in the 1960's. It was never cancelled. A document was issued for
public relations reasons that purportedly cancelled "fair game";
however, that document stated that it did not change the manner
of handling persons declared "SP".  In reality, the purported
cancellation of fair game is at most a matter of semantics.
Enemies of Scientology are treated as "fair game".

  David Miscavige was the Chairman of the Board of Author
Services Inc., ("ASI") in 1984 and 1985. ASI was incorporated to
be the funnel through which profits from Scientology were
channeled to L. Ron Hubbard and, therefore, it was very important
within Scientology. Miscavige represented Hubbard in all aspects
of controlling Scientology.  He attended regular meetings with
myself and other top officials of Scientology organizations to
review the status of all Scientology's activities, including its
litigation and dirty tricks campaigns against Scientology's
enemies.

  Because of my position and the regular reports that came across
my desk I know that throughout my presidency of RTC that fair
game actions were commonplace.  In addition to the litigation
tactics described below, fair game activities included
burglaries, assualts, harassive investigations, abuse of
confidential communications in parishioner files and so on.  I
specifically recall seeing one report regarding attacks against
Bent Corydon after Scientology became aware that the was writing
a book against Hubbard.

  Other Hubbard writings encourage Scientologists to pursue
litigation purely for harassment without regard to the merits of
a claim to cause enemies to fold. Hubbard's writings state:

 "The purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage rather than
to win...The law can be used very easily to harass, and...will
generally be sufficient to cause [the enemy's] professional
decease, If possible, of course ruin him utterly."  Hubbard,
"Magazine on Level 0 Checksheet" American Saint Hill Organization
1968.

  As President of RTC and a Sea Organization member, I attended
meetings concerning the numerous legal actions involving
Scientology organizations.  During this time period, I had
personal access to all legal documents having to do with RTC. I
received a report every day on my computer that included a
synopsis of each ongoing legal cases involving Scientology. I
received, or so I was told, copies of every major motion filed in
cases involving Scientology.  I was on the "approval lines" for
legal documents dealing with RTC. During this time period, I had
the option of attending legal meetings, although some were
mandatory.  I attended many litigation meetings and became
generally aware of Scientology's dirty tricks and legal
maneuvers. On specifics, I frequently deferred to in-house and
outside counsel; however, at least in theory, I was the head of
RTC and had access to any business of litigation "secrets" of
Scientology.

  It is the stated policy of Scientology to use the legal system
to abuse and harass its enemies.  This crude, fundamental
directive of Scientology is no secret.  The policy is to do
anything and everything possible to harass the opposing litigant
without regard to whether any particular motion or maneuver is
appropiate or warranted by the facts of applicable law.  That
policy was followed in every legal case I was involved with or
learned about while a member of the Sea Organization.  The
management of Scientology consistently expressed and demonstrated
a complete disdain for the court system, viewing it as nothing
more than a method to harass enemies. Some examples of this are
set forth below.

  During litigation between Gerald Armstrong and Scientology,
which was before Judge Breckenridge of Superior Court for Los
Angeles County, the court ordered the production of Armstrong's
pre-clear ("PC") folders.  These are files maintained by
Scientology or those who submit to interrogation sessions in a
processing called auditing. during the course of that litigation
I was ordered to go through Armstrong's folder and destroy or
conceal anything that might support Armstrong's claims against
Scientology.  This practice is known within Scientology as
"culling PC folders" and is a common litigation tactic employed
by Scientology.

   during other litigation in Los Angeles known to me as the
Wollersheim case, I was told that the judge had ordered the
production of Wollersheim's folder. As ordered, I "culled" these
files.  In other words, I removed contents that might have been
damaging to Scientology or might have supported Wollersheim's
claim against Scientology.  For example, I removed evidence of
events involving his family, the anguish this caused him,
evidence of disconnection from family and evidence of fair game.
I was involved in numerous meetings concerning what is known to
me as the Christofferson case in Portland, Oregon.

  This case was tried twice. In the first case, a Scientology
witness by the name of Martin Samuels was coached and drilled for
hours on how to lie convincingly or avoid telling the truth.
Before or during the second trial he admitted to this course of
conduct.  In this litigation, a Scientologist by the name of Joan
Shriver produced responsive documents that may have been
incriminating.  This was a serious breach of policy for which she
was punished. These documents were ordered produced on such short
notice that apparently files were not thoroughly "culled". In
another case, an attorney was severley criticized and almost
fired for failing to properly coach and feed the desired answers
to Heber Jentzsch.  Mr.  Jentzsch was, for public relations
reasons, the purported head of the Church of Scientology
International. During his deposition, Mr. Jentzsch was unable to
answer fundamental questions concerning the management of Church
of Scientology International.

   In later 1979 and early 1980, there was a massive document
destruction program undertaken to destroy any evidence showing
that L.  Ron Hubbard ("LRH") controlled Scientology.  I
participated in this activity in Clearwater, Florida and am
informed that there was also intensive document destruction at
facilities in Gilman Hot Springs, California. From at least that
point onward there was a continuous effort to hide or destroy any
evidence of Hubbard's control.  For example, during an IRS
investigation in 1984 and 1985, while in bed with pneumonia, I
was ordered out of bed by Norman Starkey, who told me that they
had received a tip from a Los Angeles police officer advising
them of a pending IRS raid in Los Angeles. Mr. Starkey ordered me
to go to a computer facility and insure that all information on
the computers in Los Angeles that might show Hubbard's
involvement and control of Scientology's money was destroyed
except for one copy of each document. These copies were to be
saved on computer disks which were to be hidden in secure storage
places.  At the time I was also instructed to destory anything
that would show the control of Mr. Starky or Mr.  Miscavige over
Scientology.

  While involved in Scientology I became aware of various
operations directed against an author who had written a negative
book about Scientology.  The author, Paulette Cooper, was
subjected to various forms of harassment.  One operation included
an attempt to frame her.  A false bomb threat was written.
Scientology agents lifted a fingerprint from Cooper's apartment.
These fingerprints were then transferred to the bomb threat
letter.  Ms. Cooper was subjected to an investigation and was not
cleared until a FBI raid resulted in the seizure of Scientology
documents that exposed the operation as a frame-up.  There was at
least one other operation against Ms. Cooper. The substance of it
was to plant a boyfriend to reinforce and play upon her suicidal
tendencies in the hopes that she would commit suicide.

  In 1976 and 1977, the then-Mayor of Clearwater, Florida, Gabe
Cazares, was involved with litigation against Scientology.
Arrangements were made to have an attorney by the name of Merril
Vanniere, a Scientologist, represent Mr. Cazares and sabotage his
case. This plot was also exposed by documents obtained in an FBI
raid of a Scientology facility. Also, in response to Mr. Cazares'
litigation against Scientology, an attempt was made to implicate
Mr. Cazares in a staged hit-and-run accident.

   During an IRS criminal investigation in the 1984 to 1985 time
period, the IRS ordered production of various communications
between Hubbard and Author Services, Inc. (ASI). The ASI staff
worked literally day and night for several days reviewing
documents so that unfavorable documents could be destroyed or
otherwise concealed from the IRS. Lyman Spurlock and Marion M.
Dendue, Scientologists involved in this operation, informed me of
this operation. Also during this IRS investigation, my husband,
Rick Aznaran, was ordered to remove and conceal any incriminating
documents from certain locations. He was also directed to make
the computer network "raid proof."  This involved creating a
system where incriminating documents could be deleted from
computer storage rapidly and before the IRS could obtain control
over the computers.

  I have examined certain documents regarding Steven Fishman's
experience with Scientology, have had conversations with Mr.
Fishman's counsel, and have reviewed the 1151-page
autobiographical account of Mr.  Fishman's experience entitled
"The Lonesome Squirrel." Based upon my 15 years of experience in
Scientology and my review of the Fishman materials, I offer the
following conclusions:

  1. I believe Mr. Fishman's assertions that he was a member
since 1979 and that he was as actively involved as he states.
This belief is based on my experience that only a committed
member of long standing would know the details of the inner
working of the group; Mr. Fishman had such awareness. Involvement
in a group that thrives on secrecy and excludes most members from
participation in high-level projects means that any member who
exceeds a certain level of involvement enjoys the trust of the
leadership; such trust would be earned only by extended
membership.  Mr.  Fishman enjoyed that trust.  His accounts of
meetings with high-level officials and his knowledge of the
operations and functions of the hierarchy are so detailed and
accurate that they couldn't have been gained except through
direct personal experience.

   2.  Refutation by Scientology officials of Mr.  Fishman's
membership prior to Feb 8, 1986, and their disclaimer of his
involvement and their lack of records pertaining to such
membership is perfectly consistent with their standard procedure
in protecting themselves.  As noted above, I was personally
involved in the destruction of records when it suited their
purpose.

  Scientology propounds the belief that any action whatsoever
taken to protect the organization is justified, as the group
takes precedence over the individual.  Any member performing
criminal acts for the benefit of the group was kept at arm's
length; if apprehended, the member was disavowed by Scientology.
this procedure was used even on the wife of the founder of
Scientology. Gven the serious potential threat that Mr. Fishman's
defense posed to the group, I find Mr.  Fishman's account of
certain members of Scientology's involvement in the plan to
fabricate the threats against Mr. Fishman and his counsel and to
thereby undermine Mr.  Fishman's credibility and render him
useless as a witness against Scientology to be consistent with
their Modus operandi.

  I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State
of Texas that the foregoing is true and correct.  Executed this
18th day of July 1990, in Dallas, VICKI AZNARAN.

____________________________________________________________

Xref: utcsri alt.religion.scientology:33534
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Path: utcsri!newsflash.concordia.ca!uunet!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcomsv!lavc!dennis.l.erlich
From: [email-masked]
Subject: German news: sect to  1/2
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150
X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.25/PRIMP 1.56p
Distribution: world
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 95 08:24:24 -0800
Lines: 98

I knew Julia Lewis.  She was the matriarch of LA Org when I first
got in.  Married to Ken Salman - Exec. Dir of the org.  The OCA
belonged to her.  So did LA Org when she founded it.  Phatman stole 
both from her.

           +---------------------------------------+
          Rev. Dennis L Erlich   * * the inFormer * *
                 <[email-masked]>
                        that person (tm)

>DER SPIEGEL 28/1994
>GERMANY
>Sects 
>FOUNDATION GONE 
>
>An Ex-Scientologist is contesting the rights of the Sect to use a 
>Psycho Test. Millions are at stake. 
>
>In "scientologese" the story would sound like this: he is a 
>"suppressive person" and has enjoyed the blessings of Dianetics for 
>years through the enlightenments of the genius and founder of the sect, L. 
>Ron Hubbard, and then he commits "treason".  
>
>The traitor's name is Tom Voltz, 39, he lives in Zurich and according 
>to his own statements he was a member of the sect for 23 years. As a business 
>consultant, he "missioned" numerous companies with the simple insights of the 
>self-proclaimed church, with the help of a Personality Test, which is an 
>important tool of the Scientology ideology. 
>
>Scientology has been using  the so-called Oxford Capacity Analysis test (OCA)  
>in its modified form also known as U Test for many years: at street stalls, 
>in so-called Missions and Orgs, but also during Recruitment Tests in companies 
>which are close to Scientology, the persons to be tested have to answer 200 
>intimate questions concerning the state of affairs of their own soul. For 
>example: "Do you often ponder about your own inferiority?" This 
>examination allegedly gives revealing information about important character 
>traits of the person tested.  
>
>There could soon be an end to all this. Voltz the renegade is contesting the 
>rights of the sect to use the dubious test. Together with the Zurich lawyer 
>Wolfgang Larese, who has specialized in Copyright, Voltz wants to force 
>Scientology to cease their "commercial violation of Copyright".
>
>The business sect would be hard hit, if Voltz and Larese were ruled to be
>right. 
>Because the OCA Test, which is really free of charge, helps the Scientologists
>to get new victims and therefore to expand their multi-million dollar 
>empire.  
>
>"The OCA helps", it says in one sect publication, "to find hidden aberrations."
>
>To improve their test results, members submit to so called auditing therapies 
>for hours and days, with the assurance that the alleged character defects 
>are going "to be addressed and erased". Total costs of the courses: up to
>several 
>tens of thousands of Deutsch Mark.   
>
>Voltz and Larese are claiming to have the rights to the OCA Test 
>producing a certificate, among other things, dating from the year 1956, which 
>Voltz discovered in the US Bureau/office/department for Copyrights in 
>Washington. The paper identifies the psychologist Julia Lewis as the author of
>a 
>test with the name "American Personality Analysis". 
>
>Lawyer Larese explains that Julia Lewis, as a Scientologist, had been 
>working together with L. Ron Hubbard on several occasions. Later Hubbard 
>started to employ the test with insignificant modifications and under a
>different 
>name for his sect purposes.
>
>Scientology followers up to now had imagined that their Psycho Guru 
>Hubbard invented the test himself. But a glossary of the sect dating from the 
>year 1957 names the Lewis Test as the original version of the subsequent OCA 
>questionnaire of the Scientologists, says Larese.  
>
>The psychologist had enforced her rights by writting to the sect pointing out
>her 
>copyright. In a letter of 25th April 1978, which carries the signature of Julia
>
>Lewis, she demanded compensation for the utilization of her questionnaire, 
>without success.  
>
>In March 1990 Voltz, still a member of the sect at that time, bought 
>the Copyrights from the widower of Julia Lewis, who had died in 1979. But the 
>Scientologists refused to pay him Licence fees for his copyright, says Voltz. 
>Because of his monetary claims he was slandered as an extortionist, and in 
>November 1993 he left the sect. Before doing so, he transferred the utilization
>
>rights to a company managed by lawyer Larese, which has now brought a criminal 
>charge against Scientology.  
>
>Should Voltz and his lawyer be successful in Switzerland with the sentence
>demanded 
>by the public prosecutor, the sect will have to fear for its lucrative busines
úÿ [ Continued In Next Message... ]

Xref: utcsri alt.religion.scientology:33587
Path: utcsri!newsflash.concordia.ca!uunet!news.tek.com!gv-gate.gvg.tek.com!faceplant!shaunc
From: [email-masked] (Math Hoodlum)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: REPOST: Why Scientology Qualifies as a Cult
Date: 24 Feb 1995 23:55:55 GMT
Organization: International Internet Administration
Lines: 337
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked] (Math Hoodlum)
NNTP-Posting-Host: faceplant.gvg.tek.com

Recently I posted that Scientology is definitely deserving of being
called a cult rather than a true religion.  I finally located the 
backing information I mentioned; here it is again for those who have
just tuned in recently.

-- @Man

~Subject: Scientology is NOT a cult!?
~From: [email-masked]
~Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 17:11:00 -0500

          SCIENTOLOGY, A COERCIVE PSYCHOLOGICAL SYSTEM

                  Criteria for determining if
          a group is a dangerous and destructive cult

  I have been associated with the subject matter of Scientology
and its many organizations for twenty nine years. In this time, I
have had extensive administrative and technical training and
worked at various organizations in addition to doing some of its
more advanced "Upper" levels.  In this essay I have made liberal,
and sometimes verbatim, use of the materials that FACTNET has
developed in its research of coercive psychological systems.

 This essay is limited to an analysis of Scientology as an
coercive psychological system, its policies and procedures, and
does NOT include independent groups or individuals using
scientological materials, in whatever form, outside of the
ORGANIZATION.

  Anybody can unfairly accuse or attack an organization or group
they disagree with or dislike by calling it a "cult" or saying
that they are using coercive mind control or coercive
psychological systems as you call it.  FACTNET uses specific
criteria to determine if a coercive psychological system has been
used. It does not imply organizations or individuals are using
coercive pyschological systems or are destructive or dangerous
cults without careful research and determination that the
evidence fits definite criteria.

  The FIRST set of criteria comes from the description of "A
technical overview of Psychological Coercion" derived from a
report by Singer and Ofshe, Apr 1990. A summary of this report
was presented to the U.S.  Supreme Court as an educational
Appendix on coercive psychological systems in the case of
Wollersheim vs Church of Scientology 89-1367 and 89-1361.  The
Wollersheim case was being considered related to issues involving
abuse in this area.

  The  SECOND  set  of  criteria  have to do with defining common
elements of destructive and dangerous cults.

                       COMMON PROPERITIES
         OF POTENTIALLY DESTRUCTIVE AND DANGEROUS CULTS

 * The cult is authoritarian in its power structure. The leader
is regarded as the supreme authority. He or she may delegate
certain power to a few subordinates for the purpose of seeing
that members adhere to the leader's wishes and roles. There is no
appeal outside of his or her system to greater systems of
justice.  For example, if a school teacher feels unjustly treated
by a principal, appeals can be made. In a cult, the leader claims
to have the only and final ruling on all matters.

 L.  Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology, was considered the
"Source" of all materials published by the organization.  He
personally approved the appointment of all key leaders and they
served at his pleasure.  He hand-picked and indoctrinated his
present successor, Captain David Miscavige, when Miscavige was 22
years old. Church members seeking a redress of grievances outside
of the Scientology "Justice" system are automatically expelled
from the organization and declared "Suppressive persons". Hubbard
was the final authority on all petitions on grievances.

*  The cult's leaders tend to be charismatic, determined and
domineering. They persuade followers to drop their families,
jobs, and careers, and friends to follow them. They (not the
individual)  take over control of their follower's possessions,
money, and lives.

*  The cult's leaders are self-appointed, messianic persons who
claim to have a special mission in life.

  Hubbard was a prolific writer of science fiction. In his many
lectures he spoke of his adventures in para-military space
organizations prior to his coming to Earth. He claimed to be
Guatama Siddharta, the founder of Buddhism, in a previous life. He
stated his mission was to create a New Civilization by the
Scientologization of the Earth.

 * The cult's leaders center the veneration of members upon
themselves.  Priests, rabbis, ministers, democratic leaders, and
leader of genuinely altruistic movements keep the veneration of
adherents focused on God, abstract principles, and group
purposes. Cult leaders, in contrast, keep the focus of love,
devotion and allegiance on themselves.

  In compliance with Hubbard's directive, pictures or busts of
Hubbard are in almost every room in the organizations. At the end
of every staff meeting, members face an oversized picture of
Hubbard and give a three-cheers chant and a rousing round of
applauses to the icon. The organization built a multi-million
dollar museum/shrine in memory of Hubbard after his death in
1986. All organizations maintain a unused office space for
Hubbard, in anticipation of his future return.

 * The cult tends to be totalitarian in its control of the
behaviour of its members. Cults are likely to dictate in great
detail what members wear, eat, when and where they work, sleep,
and bathe - as well as what to believe, think, and say.

*  The cult tends to have a double set of ethics. Members are
urged to be open and honest within the group, and confess all to
the leaders. On the other hand, they are encouraged to deceive
and manipulate outsiders or nonmembers. Established religions teach
members to be honest and truthful to all, and to abide by one set
of ethics.

 Organization staff members are compelled to submit to
interrogations called "security checks" and to write statements
detailing their transgressions against the organization and its
leaders, called "Overts/Witholds Writeups".  Critics of the
organization and dissident former members are considered
"Suppressives" and a policy called "Fair Game" exempts Church
members from dealing fairly and ethically with them.
"Suppressive" can be lied to, cheated, tricked, sued, or
destroyed, without any consequences from the organization.

*  the cult has basically only two purposes, recruiting new
members and fund-raising. Established religions and altruistic
movements may also recruit and raise funds. However, their sole
purpose is not to grow larger; such groups have the goals to
better the lives of their members and mankind in general. The
cults may claim to make social contributions, but in actuality
these remain claims, or gestures. Their focus is always dominated
by recruiting new members and fund-raising.

 The Scientology organization has developed sophisticated
techniques for gaining new members.  "Personality" testing and
"dissemination" drills and high-pressure sales techniques are
used extensively. Field Staff Members (FSMs) earn 15% commissions
for new members they sign up for Church services. The weekly
gross income of the organization is considered its highest
priority and the organization reported a yearly worldwide annual
income of about 300 million dollars in the early 1990's. The cost
for members to achieve its full services and highest "Upper
Levels" is over $250,000.  The organization has incorporated
numerous shell organization that maintain a facade of social
reform groups, but they are merely a vehicle for Public Relations
ploys and rabble rousing against groups the organization
considers antipathetic to its activities.

 * The cult appears to be innovative and exclusive. The leader
claims to be breaking with tradition, offering something novel,
and instituting the only viable system for change that will solve
life's problems or the world's ills. While claiming this, the
cult then surreptitiously uses systems of psychological coercion
on its members to inhibit their ability to examine the actual
validity of the claims of the leader and the cult.

  Scientology calls itself a "Religion" and a "Science  of  Life"
and  states  as  its  goals the creation of a "World without War,
Crime, or Insanity".

                   THE THIRD SET OF CRITERIA

  The third set of criteria has to do with defining other common
elements of coercive psychological systems. If most of Robert
Jay Lifton's eight point model of thought reform ("Thought Reform
and the Psychology of Totalism" by R. Lifton, W.W. Norton & Co.,
1963) is being used in a cultic organization, it is most likely a
dangerous and destructive cult. These eight points are:

1. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL*

*  Limitations of many/all forms of communication with those
outside the group. Books, magazines, letters and visits with
friends and family are taboo. "Come out and be separate".

  At the Scientology "Flag Land Base" married staff members are
only allowed one hour a day with their children. Visits or
personal calls from "non-Scientologist" family members are
strongly frowned on.  Dependents do not attend public schools.
Staff members are forbidden to have TVs in their living quarters.
Private mail for staff members was frequently opened by senior
staff members to check for disturbing news about the organization
from friends or relatives.  .  Reading of newspapers or
non-Scientology materials is strongly frowned on.  Staff members
are forbidden from reading or discussing any material critical of
the organization or its leaders.  Members are forbidden
communication with disaffected members.

2. MYSTICAL MANIPULATION*

*  The potential convert to the group becomes convinced of the
higher purpose and special calling of the group through a
profound encounter/experience, for example, through an alleged
miracle or prophetic word of those in the group.

  In 1968, Hubbard announced to all the organizations that he had
traversed the "Wall of Fire" and discovered the long buried
secret reasons for the degradation of the Earth and 76 nearby
planets.  This discovery is commonly called the "OT3" materials.
Hubbard claimed the mystery had been buried for 76 million years
and he was the first to discover the secret without dying.
Hubbard developed a methodology which he claimed would liberate
the planet and create a New Civilization.  He formed a elite
organization of devoted members called the "Sea Organization" to
carry out this personal mission. He bought a fleet of ships and
called himself the "Commodore" of the flotilla and Sea
Organization members dressed in naval uniforms and formed a
para-military, quasi-religious organization and started a massive
world-wide recruitment effort to build the group that would
"Clear" the planet.

3. DEMAND FOR PURITY*

*  An explicit goal of the group is to bring about some kind of
change, whether it be on a global, social, or personal level.
"Perfection is possible if one stays with the group and is committed."

  Hubbard claimed that "Total Freedom" was only possible within
Scientology and Sea Organization members sign ONE BILLION year
contracts as a symbol of their committment to Hubbard's mission.

4. CULT OF CONFESSION*

*  The unhealthy practice of self disclosure to members in the
group, often in the context of a public gathering in the group,
admitting past sins and imperfections, even doubts about the group
and critical thoughts about the integrity of the leaders.

  Electronic interrogations, called "Security Checking" are used
extensively within the organization to assure group conformity
and to detect and stifle dissenting members. Members are required
to write detailed descriptions of their shortcomings and
dissident thoughts about the organization's leaders or policies.
These writeups and security check session reports are maintained
and are used by the organization to compel silence if the member
becomes disaffected and leaves. "Ethics" conditions are assigned
to deal with non-productive members, or members manifesting
indications of disloyalty or disaffection. It is a Hubbardian
maxim that members expressing criticism of the organization,
leaving the organization, or failing to make "spiritual" progress
are manifesting undisclosed transgressions against the
organization.  This insidious manipulative device remains intact
in the minds of many former members and serves as a constant
reminder of their "undisclosed" trangressions against the
organization and their "real reason" for leaving it.

  5. SACRED SCIENCE*

 * The group's perspective is absolutely true and completly
 adequate to explain EVERYTHING. The doctrine is not subject to
 amendments or question. ABSOLUTE conformity to the doctrine is
 required.

 Hubbard called his ideology "The Science of Knowing How To
Know". He called his essays "STANDARD TECH". NO amendments were
allowed and the materials had to be LITERALLY interpreted,
without ANY verbal explainations.  Hubbard developed a "Study
Tech" and anyone questioning or disagreeing with his essays was
considered to be suffering from "Misunderstood Words".  Any
person who amended his procedures was labeled a "Squirrel" and
expelled from the organization and branded a "Suppressive
Person".  The organization calls Hubbard's essays its "Sacred
Scriptures" and copyrighted it and obtained "Trade Secret" status
on Hubbard's mystical experiences, its "Most Sacred Scriptures",
the "Upper Levels".  The organization has severe sanctions for
members who publically disclose the contents of its "Upper
Levels".

  6. LOADED LANGUAGE*

*  A new vocabulary emerges within the context of the group. Group
members "think" within  the very abstract and narrow parameters
of the group's doctrine. The terminology sufficiently stops
members from thinking critically by reinforcing a "black and
white" mentality. Loaded terms and cliches prejudices thinking.

   Hubbard wrote several thick volumes containing Scientology
jargon and members are forbidden to use terminology from
"earlier  practices" before they came into the organization. The
organization uses derisive terms for non-Scientologists (Wogs),
and critics and dissident former members (Suppressive Persons).
Hubbard was especially harsh in his vilification of mental health
professionals and medical doctors, and considered them in league
with a world-wide conspiracy against him and his organization.

  7. DOCTRINE OVER PERSON*

*  Pre-group experience and group experience are narrowly and
decisively interpreted through the absolute doctrine, even when
experience contradicts the doctrine.

  8. DISPENSING OF EXISTENCE*

* Salvation is possible only in the group. Those who leave the
group are doomed.

   The Hubbardian view that Scientology is the ONLY "Road to
Total Freedom" is constantly stressed.  The threat of expulsion
and denial of the "Upper Levels" is an effective method in
maintaining group conformity and discouraging internal
dissidence.  Even amongst many expelled members, the emotional
distress and consideration that one has been "Condemned to Hell"
by denial of access to the "Upper Levels" lingers for a long
time.

Joe

   "The Ultimate Freedom is the freedom of the mind."

                      L. Ron Hubbard

-- 
The Church Of Scientology is a dangerous cult and a threat to the Internet.  
See alt.religion.scientology for details.

Privacy through probable primes  ##  PGP public key available on request 

Xref: utcsri alt.religion.scientology:33589
Path: utcsri!newsflash.concordia.ca!canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca!tribune.usask.ca!decwrl!lll-winken.llnl.gov!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!peernews.demon.co.uk!xs4all.nl!anonymous-remailer
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: [email-masked] (Name withheld by request)
X-Warning: This message was forwarded by an Anonymous Remailer at XS4all.
X-Comment: XS4ALL does not necessarily approve of the contents of this posting.
X-Comment: Please report inappropriate use to <[email-masked]>
Subject: The Price List
X-Posting-Host: xs1.xs4all.nl
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 1995 00:53:10 +0000
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Lines: 327

		 CoS PRICES FOR PROCESSING UP TO OT8 AND BEYOND
                                 Winter 94/95

The current (conservative) total cost for the whole bridge to OT9 
readiness is estimated at $365,000 - $380,000.

Auditing hours are calculated on the basis of an average case. It 
_could_ cost a lot more. Read on for the full price breakdown.

These prices are taken directly from the latest Flag price list and, 
in the case of OT8, the Freewinds donation rate list.

Main Changes since the last posting:

OT V is now estimated at four intensives, not two.
List now includes two OT VI "set-up" intensives.
List now includes one "Pledge" intensive between OT VI and OT VII.
OT I, II, III and VI have all gone up in price.
Solo I and II prices have now been revealed.
OT VIII C/S-ing has gone up. 

Wherever there was missing data on the list, I have estimated the 
cost based on current prices at Saint Hill organization, England, 
and indicated this with an asterisk symbol (*). Saint Hill prices 
come from an insert that accompanies "The Auditor" monthly journal.

Processing is sold by the Church of Scientology in blocks of 12.5 
hours at a time. A block of 12.5 hours is known as an "intensive." 
The second column in the following price table gives a broad but 
realistic estimate of the number of intensives required to complete 
each Processing step, for Joe Average. No estimate can be perfect, 
but it should add up to a good idea of the overall amount of time 
and money required. It gets more difficult to estimate the time 
required for the upper OT levels, as this appears to be quite 
variable. I know several OTVIIs who have been on that level for 
many years.

Note that these prices are for the "Processing Route" up the 
"Bridge." Most people get interested in Scientology because they 
want to attain the results promised - problems handled, greater 
abilities, OT powers etc etc. And they don't really want to wait 
for ages to attain these. This requires them to receive 
Processing. However, as you will see, the price of CoS 
Processing is astronomically prohibitive.

So what is the alternative? The alternative is to opt for the 
"Training Route." The idea is that you study how to become an 
"Auditor" (practitioner), and, working with another student you 
process each other up the Bridge. This is called "co-auditing" 
and takes a VERY much longer time to reach eg Clear - you
could be talking 7-10 years studying flat out every weekend. The 
irony of it is that it is still incredibly expensive to do it 
this way ! It's not until you actually set foot on this route 
that you begin to see the costs mounting up - you are obliged to 
buy book after book, tape set after tape set, an "E-meter"
costing up to $3,780, (some registrars will try to sell you two - 
seriously! There is an LRH policy which specifies that a student 
must have a back up meter in case the first one develops a 
fault), a full set of "Technical Volumes" ($2,025), Review 
Auditing - by the intensive - when you and your fellow student 
run into difficulties, etc etc. For the new recruit, the Training 
Route cost to Clear is likely to be around a minimum of $50,000. 
And that's for essential purchases only! 

So you couldn't afford the Processing Route, and you soon discover 
that you can't afford the Training Route either. Anyway, you can't 
wait that long to go "Clear", and your weekends have all but 
disappeared. So what can you do now ?

Well, it finally comes down to this. You'll be offered a job working 
for the organization as a staff member. Wages are virtually 
non-existent, you work almost ceaselessly morning 'til night with 
half a day off a week if you meet your 'targets', but you get the 
offer of free processing (assuming you are somehow able to make the 
time to get it.) If you bail out before the end of your (2.5 to 5 
year) contract, you'll have to pay for any such free auditing 
received. I know people who were stuck on staff for 10 years who 
NEVER MOVED on the Bridge, they were too busy working working
working. Having said that, some orgs are now pushing to get new 
people signed up onto the "Tech Training Corps" in an effort to 
create more auditors. Same conditions as above I'm afraid, but you 
should *eventually* get trained on the Training Route up to the 
lower OT levels. It SHOULD work a bit like the co-audit 
mentioned above, but expect to have your new found auditing 
abilities FULLY exploited by your new bosses in auditing the public.
Your PCs will be paying a fortune, but you won't be seeing any of 
the money!

So really, in the end, there is only one conclusion to be drawn. 
There is something seriously flawed in the way Scientology is 
administered by the Church, when it creates these structures that 
prohibit the majority from attaining what they sought and were 
promised. On average, the Church creates "hopeless hopefuls", 
always trying to find more credit for that elusive next step on 
the Bridge. At worst, it creates worn out working machines with
great chunks of their lives missing. People eventually give up. If 
you're not a celebrity or a very rich businessman, you'll be in 
for a few surprises.

However, all is not lost! The benefits of Scientology processing are 
still there to be had, at sensible prices and from experienced 
clearing practitioners, many of whom worked directly with LRH for 
years. You'll find them all around the globe, and they will help you 
achieve your goals, using both traditional techniques and new 
advances in technology. Welcome to the Free Zone. To find out more, 
your best bet is to subscribe to the Free Zone's own USENET 
NewsGroup - alt.clearing.technology - and introduce yourself 
when you feel ready.

Okay. Here is the long awaited CoS (Flag) processing price list, from 

"Raw Meat" to OT8, with a glimpse beyond even that.

==========              ==========         =========       =====
Processing              Intensives         Cost per        Total
Step                    Required           Intensive       Cost
					   or Course       (IAS)
==========              ==========         =========       =====
Life Repair             2 x 12.5 hr        $5,600          $11,200
Purification RD         -----------        $2,560           $2,560
TRs & Objectives        2 x 12.5 hr        $5,600          $11,200
Scn Drug Rundown        2 x 12.5 hr        $5,600          $11,200
ARC Straightwire        2 x 12.5 hr        $5,600          $11,200
Grade 0                 3 x 12.5 hr        $5,600          $16,800
Grade 1                 2 x 12.5 hr        $5,600          $11,200
Grade 2                 2 x 12.5 hr        $5,600          $11,200
Grade 3                 2 x 12.5 hr        $5,600          $11,200
Grade 4                 2 x 12.5 hr        $5,600          $11,200
New Era Dianetics       3 x 12.5 hr        $5,600          $16,800
Clear Certainty RD      1 x 5 hr           $2,800           $2,800

					  SUB-TOTAL TO CLEAR  $128,560

*Solo Course Part 1    -----------         $3,200           $3,200
*OT Preparations        2 x 12.5 hr        $3,300           $6,600
*Solo Course Part 2    -----------         $1,900           $1,900
*OT Eligibility         2 x 12.5 hr        $3,300           $6,600
*OT I                   -----------        $2,000           $2,000
*OT II                  -----------        $3,800           $3,800
*OT III                 -----------        $6,500           $6,500
OT IV                   ?2 x 12.5 hr       $6,500          $13,000
OT V                    4 x 12.5 hr        $7,400          $29,600
OT VI set-ups           2 x 12.5 hr        $9,250          $18,500
OT VI                   -----------       $12,800          $12,800
Pledge Intensive        1 x 12.5 hr        $9,250           $9,250
OT VII                  -----------        $3,500           $3,500
OT VII C/Sing
(per year)             over 2 years        $3,200           $6,400
OT VIII                 -----------       $10,000          $10,000
OT VIII auditing        ?2 x 12.5 hr       $7,400          $14,800

			TOTAL BILL FROM RAW MEAT TO OT VIII   $277,010
							      ========

Now that assumes you don't run into any significant trouble along the 

way. Better round it up to at least $290,000 to allow for review 
auditing when things go wrong.

These prices have already had the IAS (International Association of 
Scientologists) discount deducted. Of course, there are other 
discounts to consider, usually given for buying up as much as you 
can in advance. Let's be very generous and knock it down to $250,000
(16% discount over the whole bridge)

While you have been progressing up the OT levels, you have 
increasingly been expected to "disemminate" - ie get other people 
interested and signed up for CoS services. 

This reached a peak when you hit OT VIII - here's the catch: OT IX 
and X will not be released until all organizations wordwide have 
reached the size of "Old Saint Hill" (Saint Hill organization, 
England, 
which did very well during the time LRH was there in the 1960s.) 
You are expected to get very active in the field of dissemination to 
try to make the release of these next OT levels a reality. I have to
say that I don't see it happening, given the poor state that many 
organizations are currently in, coupled with the prohibitive CoS 
management policies!

Further, all of a sudden the Processing and Training Routes have 
merged at the (current CoS) "top" of the Bridge. Before you can 
qualify for OT IX, you will have to take the mammoth "Saint Hill 
Special Briefing Course" - training to become an Auditor - and buy 
its associated course materials. Alternatively, you must take all 
the lower-level training courses from Level 0 to Level V Graduate
plus five other "specialist" courses. 

Chances are high that, on your way from Clear to OT8, you will have 
succumbed to the temptation to do the three most expensive and 
"prestigious" rundowns in the CoS arsenal - the "L Rundowns" (there 
are plenty of extra rundowns for you to take that are not 
specifically "on the Bridge".) You will very probably have done the 
"Key to Life" and "Life Orientation Course" too.

So to bring you right up to date, let's add these on to the $250,000 
which you have spent so far:

==========            ==========       =========       =====
Step/Course/          Intensives       Cost per        Total
Materials             Required         Intensive       Cost
required                               or Course       (IAS)
==========            ==========       =========       =====
To OT VIII (with mass discounts)                       $250,000

Saint Hill Special
Briefing Course        ------------    $25,600             

*Briefing Course 
materials (including
30% discount when 
all bought at once
- if you can afford to)------------    $18,390             

                                            SHSBC Total $43,990
                                                        =======
[ALTERNATIVE: Lower "Levels" and Specialist Training
Courses. (see below for price breakdown)                $56,000]
                                                        =======    
                                               
Key to Life and
Life Orientation 
Courses                ------------    $11,500          $11,500
L10               min. 2 x 12.5 hrs    $10,000          $20,000
L11               min. 2 x 12.5 hrs    $10,000          $20,000
L12               min. 2 x 12.5 hrs    $10,000          $20,000

REVISED TOTAL - NOW READY FOR OT IX (if/when)  $364,490 - $376,500
                                              
                                                      ============
                                       Let's just say $365K - 380K
	                                              ============

==================================================================
          Lower Bridge "Levels" and "Specialist" training 
      if taken instead of Saint Hill Special Briefing Course
==================================================================

Yearly IAS membership, 
say seven years at $300 per annum
(or Lifetime membership)                                    $2,100

	Mark Super VII E-meter                              $3,780

Student Hat Course                                            $960
*	The Study Tapes                                       $425

New Hubbard Professional TR Course                          $2,400
*	Clay Table Processing Picture Book                    $100
*	Dianetics 55! Book                                     $40
*	Technical Dictionary                                   $90
*	PRO TR Course Lectures (on cassette)                  $240

Hubbard Professional Upper Indoc TR Course                  $1,000
*	Freedom Congress Lectures (on cassette)               $590

Academy Level 0 Course                                      $2,400
*	Level 0 Lectures (on cassette)                        $240
*	Self Analysis Book                                     $18
	[Full Set of Tech Volumes]                          $2,025
	
Academy Level I Course                                      $2,400
*	Level I Lectures (on cassette)                        $375
*	Problems of Work Book                                  $18

Academy Level II Course                                     $2,400
*	Level II Lectures (on cassette)                       $590
*	Fundamentals of Thought Book                           $18

Academy Level III Course                                    $2,400
*	Level III Lectures (on cassette)                      $240
*	Scientology 0-8 Book                                   $18

Academy Level IV Course                                     $2,400
*	Level IV Lectures (on cassette)                       $240
*	Handbook for Pre-Clears Book                           $40
*	Advance Procedures & Axioms Book                       $40

Academy Level IV Internship                                 $1,600

Class V Hubbard New Era Dianetics Course                    $3,600
*	NED Lectures (on cassette)                            $180
*	Dianetics Book                                         $21

Class V NED Auditor Internship                              $1,600

Hubbard Class V Graduate Auditor Course                     $3,600
*	Class V Graduate Auditor Lectures                     $300
*	Science of Survival Book                               $52
*	Case Remedies Book                                     $40
*	The Troubleshooter                                    $700

Class V Graduate Auditor Internship                         $1,600

                                                Sub Total  $40,880
                                                           =======

(Special note: Those taking the co-audit Training Route to Clear to 
avoid the prohibitive processing costs, note that in addition to the
above you will have to purchase 1) Purification Rundown, 2) Method 
One Co-audit, 3) E-meter Course, 4) TRs and Objectives, 
5) Scientology Drug Rundown Co-audit Course, and all associated 
materials. You will also need to fork out for expensive Review 
Auditing to correct any mistakes made in your co-audit. Approximate 
total additional cost = $10,000)

Required Specialist courses
---------------------------

Hubbard Happiness Rundown Auditor Course                    $1,200
PTS/SP Course                                               $1,200
PTS/SP Auditor Course                                       $2,000
Hubbard Senior Security Checker Course                      $2,400
Hubbard Senior Security Checker Auditor Internship          $1,600
Hubbard False Purpose Rundown Auditor Course                $2,400
Hubbard False Purpose Rundown Auditor Internship            $1,600
PDH Detection and Handling Course                           $1,200
Tapes, books etc for above (estimated)                      $1,500

Total for Lower Levels and Specialist Training             $55,980

                                                      That's $56,000
                                                             =======

Xref: utcsri alt.answers:7704 alt.religion.scientology:34998 news.answers:38776
Path: utcsri!rutgers!goclenius.rutgers.edu!dziuxsolim.rutgers.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!boulder!csnews!esl.cs.colorado.edu!lindsay
From: [email-masked] (Don Lindsay)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.answers,news.answers
Subject: non-scientologist access faq
Followup-To: alt.religion.scientology
Date: 28 Feb 1995 07:44:40 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado at Boulder
Lines: 1046
Approved: [email-masked]
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
NNTP-Posting-Host: esl.cs.colorado.edu
Summary: where to find unsanctioned information about Scientology,
	Dianetics, the Church, or Hubbard. Includes book reviews,
	library references, FTP sites. Unsanctioned only means that 
	Church publications are not the primary focus.
Keywords: faq scientology dianetics hubbard books ftp

Archive-name: scientology/skeptic/access-faq
Posting-Frequency: monthly
Last-modified: Thu 2 February 1995
Version: 2.8

Access to material about Scientology, Dianetics, the Church, or L.
Ron Hubbard. The bulk of the material reviewed was written by
non-Church-members or ex-Church-members, but some Church material is
covered. All opinions belong to the various reviewers.

This material was collected off the net and edited by Don Lindsay
([email-masked]). Short contributions, pro or con, are welcome.

Changes since version 2.7:
	Update to Jim Lippard's WWW page	
Changes since version 2.5:
	Fixed email address of [email-masked]
	Note that the Factnet WWW page doesn't seem to work
	Changed FTP site for modemac
	Added FTP site of Jeff Jacobsen
	Added the tnx-l mailing list
	Added WWW pages of Skeptical Enquirer and some Skeptics
	Added the Magazines section
	Added another review of "Mind Game"
	Added a review of "Countercultures: a sociological analysis"
	Added a review of "Brainwashing", a Church publication

--------------------------------------
Usenet newsgroups:
	alt.religion.scientology
	alt.clearing.technology
--------------------------------------
BBS:
	WISENET, for WISE members only.
	FACTNet  "It has probably the largest publicly available library on 
		Scientology anywhere, and word search capabilities. 
		1-303-530-1942 (up to 28.8k)." 	(as of 6 Jul 1994 post 
		to a.r.s. by [email-masked] (Jeff Jacobsen))
		F.A.C.T.Net, 601 16th. St. #C-217, Golden, CO 80401,
		1-303-473-0111 (voice)
		Email to [email-masked].
--------------------------------------
World Wide Web:
	http://www.acmeweb.com/factnet - doesn't seem to work, but
		there is an FTP site for factnet.
	http://www.skeptic.com/
		-- the erudite Jim Lippard's doorway to all things skeptical
	ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/ffunch/fhome.html - Free Zone
	http://falcon.cc.ukans.edu/~sloth/sci/sci_index.html -- "Da Sloth"
	http://iquest.com/~fitz/csicop/ (Skeptical Enquirer page)
	http://www.ifi.uio.no/~kjetikj/skepsis/skeptic.html (Norway)
	http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/aig/staff/toby/skeptic.html (UK Skeptic page)
	http://wheel.ucdavis.edu/~btcarrol/skeptic/dictcont.html (Skeptics'
		Dictionary: mentions Dianetics)
	http://www.thur.de/religio.html - about cults and sects.
		Note: this is in German, not English.

	Notice that WWW browsers can be used to access Anonymous FTP sites.
--------------------------------------
Anonymous FTP sites:
	ftp.earthlink.net   /pub/archives/brianw -- unofficial but sanctioned
		"currently off line" says Wenger's users/welcome faq 1.5
	ftp.pcnet.com /users/brianw replaces earthlink, says Wenger.
	theta.csh.rit.edu - wasn't up when I tried it. Questions to
		[email-masked] or [email-masked]
	ftp.rmii.com pub2/factnet -- FACTnet. 
	ftp.netcom.com /pub/mo/modemac/factnet -- a factnet sampler.
	ftp.rahul.net  /pub/homer  -- Homer Smith
	ftp.primenet.com /users/c/cultxpt -- Jeff Jacobsen

   If you have "archie", then "archie scientology" will produce a
   list of sites, which typically are just "mirror" copies of the
   Usenet FAQ archive:
	rtfm.mit.edu, pub/usenet/news.answers/scientology
	src.doc.ic.ac.uk /usenet/usenet-by-group/alt.answers/scientology/users
	unix.hensa.ac.uk /pub/uunet/usenet/news.answers/scientology/users
   which is also on some archive CD's, some of which are mounted online:
	freebsd.cdrom.com  /.9/internet/rtfm/alt.religion/scientology
--------------------------------------
Electronic Mailing Lists:
	Email to [email-masked] to join a Church-sanctioned list, according
		to Wenger's FAQ.
	Alt.clearing.technology used to have a list called Theta-L, and
		perhaps still does.
	tnx-l the "Theta News eXchange" for Scientologists in good standing.
		Contact the list moderator (Steve Porter) at [email-masked]
--------------------------------------	
Magazines:

15 Jan 1995 [email-masked]:

The name is International Viewpoints, and
it is _not_ concerned with quarrels or battles between the church and
others. The editor is 65 year old 'free' scientologist Antony Phillips,
who first contacted scientology (before it was a church) in 1954 in
England, worked for a total of ten years in various scientology
organisations, and was thrown out in 1983. Details can be obtained
by writing to him at:
Internet: [email-masked]
Postal: IVy, PO Box 78, DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark
---
13 Jan 1995 ladyv <[email-masked]> (Enid Vien):

Free Spirit
Dept 1934
PO Box 6905
Terra Linda
Ca. 94903-0905

It costs $50.00 for non subscribers. If you wish to subscribe it is
$15.00 and then the book costs $40.00.
I am a subscriber and I highly recommend it.

--------------------------------------	
Books and library material are the remainder of this FAQ.

"L. Ron Hubbard: Messiah or Madman?" -- by Bent Corydon and L. Ron
Hubbard Jr.  a.k.a. Ronald DeWolf.(Secaucus, NJ: Lyle Stuart, 1987)
ISBN 0-8184-0444-2. In 1992, from Barricade Books, Fort Lee, New
Jersey, dist. by Publishers Group West, $12.95

"Bare-Faced Messiah, The True Story of L. Ron Hubbard", by Russell Miller
(N.Y.: Henry Holt & Co., 1987) ISBN 0-8050-0654-0. $19.95
London: Michael Joeseph Penguin Book Ltd, 1987.

Russell Miller is a British journalist who's done several biographies.

A Piece of Blue Sky -- by Jon Atack, 1990 
A Lyle Stuart Book, Published by Carol Publishing Group
120 Enterprise Avenue, Secaucus, NJ, USA, 07094
ISBN 0-8184-0499-X
13 Nov 1994 Tommy the Tourist (Anon User) <[email-masked]> said:
	Or you can order direct from Jon's wife Noella Atack,
	"Avalon"
	Cranston Road
	East Grinstead
	West Sussex
	RH19 3HQ
	Price 15 pounds sterling. This includes p&p if to a UK
	address. Overseas orders will need to add extra....
	If you want the facts, this is the book to get.

Review by [email-masked] (Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano), 1992:

        "Messiah or Madman?" is a poorly organized, sloppy piece of work, 
with little sense to its organization or even writing style. Passages that 
skip between various events do so with little reason, and frequently without 
even citing dates or times. There's no index, little sourcing, and much of it 
seems gleaned from court records. Howeveer, it's the only one widely 
available.

        "Bare-faced messiah" is better written, better documented, and is 
perhaps the one indispensable biography of L. Ron Hubbard. The problem is, it 
doesn't deal with much of the Church's history; but it does provide lots of 
innarestin' details about life aboard the Sea Org, and it's the best written 
of the three books available.

        "A Piece of Blue Sky" is a history of both the Church and Hubbard-- 
very well researched, lots of documentation, and well structured. It's too 
bad Atack's not much of a stylist, because the book amounts to a series of 
facts listed after each other for easy access. Still, Atack's book is the 
single best overall guide to Scientology that I've ever read, and I recommend 
it to everyone.

Review by [email-masked] (Tad Cook), 1992:

The book is called A PIECE OF BLUE SKY by Jon Atack,
and it is great!  I spent the last week totally absorbed in this
book, and I highly recommend it.  Atack is an ex-Scientologist,
and he has done a fine job of explaining their beliefs, and also
he presents a very interesting history of Hubbard and Dianetics.

Review by [email-masked] (/usr/spool/mail/djb) (Dan), 1992:

"Messiah or Madman" is largely a primary source. Meaning that the
material is recounted from actual events witnessed by the authors,
with little interpretation given (what interpretation there is is
negative, of course). Both the authors were heavily involved in
Scientology, particularly Corydon who was an important figure in the
movement. In addition to their own experiences in the movement and
with Hubbard himself, they provide page after page of quotes from
other former Scientologists, describing their own experiences and
events they witnessed.

Russell Miller's excellent book "Bare-Faced Messiah" is a secondary
source, thoroughly researched and well written, but definitely
complementary to "Messiah or Madman" rather than replacing it or being
"better" (whatever that means).

Review in anonymous posting, 20feb93:

The newly-updated version of Bent Corydon's book, _L. Ron Hubbard
Messiah or Madman_ is now available in trade paperback. Hastings is
carrying it in their biography section for $15. At least one other
major chain has it on their shelves also.

Review by [email-masked] (Flemming Funch), a Free Zone ex-scientologist,
11 Apr 1994:

the only book of those that I like and recommend is Miller's book. The
other two people are very biased and more acting out of revenge and
self-interest. Miller was never a scientologist and is mainly trying to
tell the true story as he sees it.

Miller was incidentally mostly using Atack's data to write his book.

Even though Miller is also leaning towards present Hubbard in a negative
light I think his fairly neutral listing of facts leaves it more up to the
reader to decide.

For example, Miller sets out to prove how Hubbard's claims of having
traveled extensively in China was a lie. And he goes ahead to document
exactly that Hubbard DID travel in China as a teenager. Hub exaggerated a
bit, but what I got from it was that he did do a lot of interesting things
at an early age that could inspire him with some unusual wisdom.

Review of "A piece of Blue Sky" 
by [email-masked] (Don Hutton) 12apr93:

- If you are going to read just one critical book on Scientology, read this.
  It's pretty comprehensive and pretty even-handed (which is unfortunately 
  rare in this field).  When the evidence supports L. Ron's claims (eg. his
  hydrographics studies) it says so.  When Scientology's critics do something
  dumb (like the time it was banned in Australia) it says so.  The fusillades
  against other aspects of L. Ron and his creations are heavily annotated as
  to source (eg. Sentencing memorandum in U.S.A. vs. Jane Kember, District
  Court, DC, criminal case no., 78-401, p.25.)
  I've found this, and all other books and articles critical of Scientology
  very hard to find.  I had to order "Blue Sky" through the Cult Awareness
  Network (1-312-267-7777, 2421 W. Pratt Blvd., Suite 1173, Chicago, Ill,
  U.S.A. 60645) as I couldn't even order it directly from the Canadian 
  publisher.  They're sort of your one-stop shopping place for stuff like 
  this.  They've got some good stuff and some really bad stuff (for the 
  latter, check out the "Cults - Just Say NO!" video - narrated by Charlton 
  Heston! BWAAA-HA-HA!).

P.S. There was also an interesting article by Behnar (the editor of the
Time magazine article last year) in QUILL, the journal of the American Society
of Journalists and Authors, about the aftermath of the article.  He was
eventually given some kind of medal by President George Bush for the article.
The QUILL article was from one of the fall 1992 issues.
	[Editor's note: that's Behar, see below.]
---
"Scientology from the inside out"
"How to fool the press",
Robert Vaughn Young
Quill, v81n9, 38-41, nov93

A response was published:
"Another view of Scientology"
By: Linda Simmons-Hight, Media Relations Director, Church of Sci. International
The Quill
Jan, 1994
---
the Catholic Sentinal, March 17, 1978
"Scientology Leaders Convicted of Fraud"

PARIS- The Paris tribunal has found four leaders of the Church of
Scientology, including its Amercian founder, guilty of making fradulant
claims that physical cures and professional success can be acheived
through Scientology.
   Ron Lafayette Hubbard, the American found of the sect, was condemned
to four years imprisonment and a fine of 35,000 francs (a little over
$7,000).  Henry Laarhuis, Dutch former executive director of the French
branch of the organization, was condemned to three years and a find of
15,000 francs.
   The article goes on to say Hubbard was convicted in absentia.
---
"The Prisoners of Saint Hill" by Tim Kelsey and Mike Ricks, 
the Independent [United Kingdom], Jan.31, 1994.
Reviewed in CAN newsletter April '94
---
A magazine database search turned up
	People Weekly v19 p84(5) 1983 Jan 24 by John Saar
	"Ministry of fear; scandal rocks Scientology as the founder's wife
	goes to prison and his son turns prosecution witness"
also
	Penthouse feedback, Penthouse v15 p28(6) 1984 Jan
	The other side of L. Ron Hubbard, Jr :	Ron deWolf
also
	"Follow-ups: shamed in Spain. (Heber Jentzsch, head of Church of
            Scientology arrested in Spain)"
	Fortune v119 n2 p16(1) 1989 Jan 16
also
	"See You In Court", by Russell Miller, Punch, 19feb88 p.46
	(short bit about the Church suing to stop the publication
	 of "Bare Faced Messiah")
---
Mind Game -- by Norman Spinrad, Jove Books, copyright 1980.

Review by [email-masked], 1992:
This is a novel, a "roman a clef", about an author whose wife joins the
"Transformationalism" cult. Yes, the cult is led by a pulp-era
science-fiction writer.  He even says things like, "We're developing
the Atomic Age of the mind."  Gee, any guesses? 

Review by [email-masked] Mon Jan 23 1995:

    Descriptions of Celebrity Center and infiltration of
    entertainment industry are accurate.  How the cult tore
    the marriage apart in the early part of the story
    was *too* real for me.  The pressures to disconnect from
    family who might say "go slow" were real.
    Spinrad's descriptions of the inside of the cult and the cult
    leader were phony.
    I'd say his discriptions of the outside of the cult were dead
    on.  He's never been in one, though.
    The guy had obviously been had by the Celebrity Center scam.

---
Heads - by Greg Bear, Tor, 1990 ISBN 0-812-51996-5

Review by [email-masked], 1992:
This is good science fiction, set about a century from now. The
relevance is that the villain is obviously the Church of Scientology,
with just enough details changed so that the author can't be sued.
---
EVANS, Dr. Christopher, _Cults of Unreason_, Harrap, London, 1973.
Evans, Christopher. Cults of Unreason. New York: Dell Publishing, 1975.

~From: paj@mrcu (Paul Johnson), 1992
Organization: GEC-Marconi Research Centre, Great Baddow, UK

I have just read "Cults of Unreason" by Christopher Evans.  Most of
the book is devoted to a history and discussion of Dianetics and
Scientology.  This is readable and at times very funny.  As Evans
says, "A rich vein of unconsious humor runs through the official
publications of the cult" (or words to that effect).  The book is old
and somewhat out of date, but it is detailed and impartial
---
VOSPER, Cyril, _The Mindbenders_, Neville Spearman, London, 1971.

~From: [email-masked] (Andrew Dunstan), 1992:
See also "The Mind Benders" by Cyril Vosper. (I think this is right!)
The Scientologists went to a GREAT deal of trouble in the UK to try
to suppress this book.
---
"Bigger Secrets", by William Poundstone, 1986, Houghton Mifflin, ISBN
0-395-45397-6. PP 58-62 are titled "The Secret Teachings of L. Ron
Hubbard". Summarizes Zemu. Dirt on Hubbard's war hero status.
Claims they pull in $100M/yr and have dummy corporations in "no tell
countries like Leichtenstein, Luxembourg, and Liberia".
---
~From: [email-masked] (James J. Lippard), 1992
[quoting] The Arizona Skeptic, vol. 5 
	no. 2 (September/October 1991), pp. 1-5.
"Parts of Dianetics, for 
example, have striking resemblance to two articles found in 
Volume 28 (1941) of the Psychoanalytic Review."

Dr. J. Sadger, "Preliminary Study of the Psychic Life of 
	the Fetus and the Primary Germ."  Psychoanalytic Review  
	July 1941  28:3. p.333
Grace W. Pailthorpe, M.D., "Deflection of Energy, as a 
	Result of Birth Trauma, and It's Bearing Upon Character 
	Formation."  Psychoanalytic Review  July 1941 28:3  pp. 
	305-326, p.326.
Nathaniel Thornton, D.Sc., "What is the  Therapeutic Value 
	of Abreaction?"  Psychoanalytic Review 1949 36:411-415. p.411.

Albert I. Berger, "Towards a Science of the Nuclear Mind:
Science-fiction Origins of Dianetics", Science Fiction Studies, 1989,
vol. 16:123-141 p.135

Jack Fox, Alvin E. Davis, and B. Lebovits, "An Experimental
Investigation of Hubbard's Engram Hypothesis (Dianetics),"
Psychological Newsletter 1959, 10, 131-134.

S.I. Hayakawa, "From Science-fiction to Fiction-science", Etc.: A
Review of General Semantics, 1951 Vol. 8 (4) 280- 293.  p. 293. 

---
Roy Wallis, _The Road to Total Freedom: A Sociological Analysis
      of Scientology_, 1977, Columbia University Press. ISBN 0-231-0420000
Review by [email-masked] (Peter Lucey) 12 Jul 1994:
...excellent book.
Wallis did his homework.There's very little sociologese; and lots of facts.
Its fair, too. (Though critical; how could it not be?) He seemed to
have some support from the CoS when examining Scn; though not of
his conclusions:). Highly recommended
---
Wallis also had an article in the first issue of The Skeptical Inquirer
(then known as The Zetetic) titled "'Poor Man's Psychoanalysis?' 
Observations on Dianetics."

The Jacobsen article may be obtained from Jacobsen (who also has other
stuff on Scientology) at P.O. Box 3541, Scottsdale, AZ 85271, or from
the Phoenix Skeptics, P.O. Box 62792, Phoenix, AZ 85282-2792.
---

WALLIS, Dr. Roy, _The Road to Total Freedom_, Heinmann, London,
Columbia University Press, New York, 1977, according to Atack. That's
slightly different from the above.

---
There was a cover article on Scientology in Time Magazine, 6may 1991:
"The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power", by Richard Behar. v137  p50-7

By the same author:
"The prophet and profits of Scientology"
Forbes v138 p314(6) 1986 Oct 27

"Scientology: a dangerous cult goes mainstream"
Reader's Digest v139  p87-92 October '91

Also in Time:
"Mystery of the vanished ruler." Time v121 p64(4) 1983 Jan 31

lafayette ronald hubbard scientologist. 2/10/86. covers his death

---
Los Angeles Times ran a 6-part series, June 1990, by
	 Welkos, Robert W. and Sappell, Joel.
"The Scientology Story: A Special Report"
#1 24june: The Making of L. Ron Hubbard
	   The man in control. (David Miscavige)
	   Burglaries and lies paved a path to prison
	   Defining the theology
#2 25june: Church markets its gospel with high-pressure sales
	   Shoring up its religious profile
#3 26june: Defectors recount lives of hard work, punishment
#4 27june: Reaching Into Society
#5 28june: Costly strategy continues to turn out bestsellers
#6 29june: On the offensive against an array of suspected foes
	   Suits, protests fuel a campaign against psychiatry
	   (Scientology opposes anti-hyperactive drug Ritalin)
	   A lawyer learns what it's like to fight the church
	   (Joseph Yanny harassed by the Church of Scientology)
---
~From: [email-masked] (Robert Sheaffer), 1992:

One excellent book written at a popular level is "Psychobabble" by
R.D. Rosen (Avon Books, 1979). It takes a skeptical look at EST,
Scientology, etc., as well as a number of odd practices in psychology
such as Rebirthing, Primal Scream, etc.
---

"Dianetics: A Doctor's Report", J. A. Winter, M.D., ISBN 0-517-56421-1
Copyright 1951, The Julian Press (1987 Edition), Crown Publishing Group, NYNY

Review by [email-masked] 1993:

Dr. Winter met Hubbard through the science fiction community in
1949, and became the Medical Director of the Hubbard Dianetic
Research Foundation when it was formed.

A lot of this book discusses therapy, and how dianetics, as a body of
therapeutic techniques, has a lot to offer. Dr. Winter speaks quite
highly of it.

The rest of the book discusses his experiences, his disillusionment
with the Foundation, and his resignation in protest. Partly he
felt that the state of "clear" did not give the anticipated benefits:
but also, he was unhappy that the Foundation was becoming
authoritarian, and disparaging of anyone who actually did research.
---
GARRISON, Omar V., _The Hidden Story of Scientology_, Arlington, London,1974.
([email-masked] (Martin G. V. Hunt) listed this as 1957).

Review by a Scientologist, [email-masked] (John Holifield) 
5Dec92
... for a non-scientology book to read, I suggest "The Hidden Story
of Scientology".  This is a true book by a non-scientologist that has
investigated many of the lies told about Scientology.  Its out of print,
so it may be hard to find.
---
MALKO, George, Scientology: The Now Religion, Delacourte Press, New York, 1970.
or	 New York: Uell Publishing Company. 205 pages.

Review by [email-masked] (Bret Rudnick) 27 Dec 1993:
I would also recommend _Scientology: The NOW Religion_
by George Malko, which is rather less than complimentary.

Review by [email-masked] (Martin G. V. Hunt) 28 Aug 1994:

   An easy read by virtue of Malko's fluent, lucid, albeit dated style,
"The Now Religion" presents no problems to the reader, and flows by as a
river of insight and information.  Malko's book is an even presentation,
well balanced and thoughtfully written; but be prepared for an attack on
such loose-flung terms as "cult" and "brainwashing", as Malko will not
permit any direct derogation of what he obviously considers a religion
engaged in by its victims willingly. 

   Chapters include a general overview of the cult, some biographical
material on L. Ron Hubbard, the beginnings of Dianetics, an exploration
into Scientology, an analysis into what lies behind these two, an
explication of techniques, drills, and processes, a look at the subject
"Ethics", and how it is often misapplied, and finally a summary of
conclusions.  What the book unfortunately lacks is both an index and a
bibliography, for Malko has quite obviously researched his sources quite
well, and references many, both textual and personal, in the body of the
book. 

---
Cooper, Paulette.  _The Scandal of Scientology_, New York: Tower
    Publications, 1971. (This is the lady who was harassed.)

Review by [email-masked] (Richard John Kwiatkowski), 1993:
   I would highly reccommend that anyone who is involved or thinking about
becoming involved with Dianetics or Scientology read Cooper's book.
---
Renunciation and Reformulation: a Study of Conversion in an American
Sect -- by Harriet Whitehead, 1987, Cornell University Press. 

Review by [email-masked] (Andy Carvin), 1992:

Whitehead, who is a sociologist, actually joined a Church in order to
get firsthand knowledge of the members and practices.  Anyway, it's
interesting, informative, and non-biased.  I would think that it can
be obtained in a good research library.
---
Hubbard is mentioned in "Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science",
by Martin Gardner. Dover, New York, 1957.

---
Fads & Fallacies in the Name of Science.  Gardener, Martin.
  Dover, New York.  1952.  

Have you read "The New Age: Notes of a Fringe Watcher" by Martin
Gardner(BTW it has a lovely photo of L Ron Hubbard measuring the
emotions of a tomato).  "Fads and Fallacies" is also a great book.  
	[email-masked] (Richard Nistuk)
---
        Flo Conway and Jim Seigelman's "Snapping" is a good, though 
pop-psych-influenced, account of the conversion experience that members of 
so-called 'cults' report; it compares similar experiences among Moonies, 
Scientologists, Krishnas, and many others, and also addresses the methods 
used by such organizations to _manufacture_ religious experiences. 
	-- [email-masked] (Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano)
Atack's bibliography lists this book as:  Dell, New York, 1979.
Wollersheim's lists it as: Snapping: America's Epidemic of Sudden 
	Personality Change. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1978.
---
In posting by [email-masked] (Rogue Agent), 1993:

I'm reading 'Flim Flam!' by James Randi, and came upon a reference to
Scientology.  Apparently back in the 70's Scientology set out to discredit
CSICOP by painting it as a front organization for the CIA.

Response to the above from [email-masked] (James J. Lippard):

Check out Kendrick Frazier, "A Scientology 'dirty tricks' campaign
against CSICOP," _Skeptical Inquirer_ vol. 4, no. 3, Spring 1980, pp.
8-10.  This news report indicates that Scientology documents outlining
proposals to portray CSICOP as a CIA front were discovered by John
Marshall, a reporter for the _Toronto Globe and Mail_, among thousands
of documents entered as evidence into U.S. District Court in Washington,
D.C.

---
Francis King's RITUAL MAGIC IN ENGLAND (I think that's the right
title) gives extracts from several letters written by Aleister
Crowley dealing with L. Ron Hubbard.  
	-- [private email, 1992]

For background,
Book of the Law.  Crowley, Aleister.  Thelema Publications,
  King-Beach, California.  1976.

---
"The Encyclopedia of American Religions" (J. Gordon Melton, Gale Research)
has a short section on Scientology, and also short sections on several
offshoots. 
---
In posting from [email-masked] (Mark Robert Thorson), 1992:

...Lashley coined the term "engram". 
In his book _Studies_in_the_Dynamics_of_Behavior_
(University of Chicago Press, 1932), Lashley and his students
Stone, Darrow, Landis, and Heath report on their early work.
What caught my attention is how intensively they used one
particular analytical tool, namely galvanic skin response (GSR).

----
Reviews from [email-masked] (Mary K. Kuhner) 30jan93

I went to the public library and read the two Scientology books they
happened to have.  Here are my capsule reviews.  They represent only my
own opinions.

_Introduction to Scientology Ethics_.
This book consists of several lists:  ethical principles as they apply
to people in general, to Scientologists, to auditors, and to
supervisors, and a long section on various types of "crimes" against
Scientology.  The various lists struck me as somewhat contradictory--
for example, freedom of speech was praised in general, but several of
the lists gave specific things which must not be said by Scientologists.

The list of crimes was very interesting reading.  It corroborated many
of the statements made by critics of the CoS.  Any kind of public
questioning or criticism of the CoS, justified or not, is a High Crime
(the most severe category).  Superiors are protected from criticism by
their underlings.  There is also a disturbing failure to distinguish
between "crimes" by Scientologists and non-Scientologists.  I have been
told on the Net that the High Crimes apply only to Scientologists, but
several of them (i.e. penalties for leaving the CoS) by their nature
must apply to non-Scientologists.

Recommended reading--as this book was apparently used as a practical
guideline within the CoS (though it may now be obsolete) I think it
provides a useful look at the way the organization operates.

_Scientology 8008:  the Book of Basics_
This is also mainly a collection of lists, presented with very little
explanatory text.  A major part of the book is taken up with a kind of
cosmology or creation story about the origin and nature of human beings.
I found this turgid and unreadable.  There are also lists which organize
emotional states into a linear order, list the components of
communication, etc.  Without discussion, I found these lists completely
useless.  What does it mean that enthusiasm is higher than contentment--
higher on what?  Why?

This books reminds me vividly of notes from some kind of pop-psych
seminar, without the seminar to give them any meaning.  Despite its
title, it is quite useless to an outsider.  Someone within the field
might possibly find it useful as a reference.

Not recommended.
---
[email-masked] (Homer Smith) responded to the above:

     There are 3 books by Hubbard with 8's in them.

     Scientology 0-8 The book of Basics
     Scientology 8-80
     Scientology 8-8008

     The first one is a compendium of scales.

     The second one is about dichotomies and how to produce
energy from them and use them in auditing.  This is the one
that mentions Beautiful Cruelties.

     The third one is a detailed discussion on the nature
of facsimilies and how to audit them.
---
Homer Smith later commented about 8-80:
>in 8-80, he gave the 'frequencies' of various emotions and things,

>     He also made the outrageous statement that the speed of light
>is NOT constant, but depends in fact on the frequency of the light,
>for which there is exactly zero physical evidence for and TONS against.

---
>From [email-masked] (Lenny Gray) 27 Nov 1993:

1) An entry-level book published in paperback by the church itself is:
   "Scientology -- The Fundamentals of Thought" the bulk of which, I
   believe, was written in 1956.  Though its goal is to present just
   the ideal, it does give a nice overview.

2) The book "Scientology -- 8-8008" is indeed the notes from a lecture,
   the lecture actually being their tape-series "The Philadelphia
   Doctorate Course Lectures", which was recorded in 1952-1953.  It
   represents a stage when LRH thought he had something that could
   even be used solo, and he even said so, in tape 54:

   "Auditors will ask you this question and so I'll answer it for you --
    _Can you audit yourself up to theta-clear?_  Well I don't know how
    long it would take you, and I don't know how fouled up you'd get, or
    how flat you'd spin, or anything -- but _it could be done_, with just
    using SOP issue 5.

---
[email-masked] (E. H. Welbon) 18may93:

I suggest that any one still convinced that there is a soul in the
human body (or any other species for that matter) pick up D.
Dennett's recent book "Consciousness Explained".  Dennett argues
that the evidence in favor of the existence of a soul is essentially
non-existent, while the argument for the non-existence of a soul is
very good.

Dennett also gives a method for evaluating "subjective" experiences
that he proposes tests for in an appendix (i.e.  he gives methods by
which his tests can be falsified).

---
Religion Inc.: The Church of Scientology, Stewart Lamont. 
Pub. Harrap U.K. ISBN 0 245-54334-1   1986

Apparently it describes Level III OT and the "Wall of Fire" (pp 50-52).

Review by Peter Lucey <[email-masked]>  Wed, 6 Oct 93:

An open-minded (to start) look at Scn. He has visited the US Orgs
in LA and Clearwater. He ends up puzzled and critical. Not much
new. You'd be better off with A Piece of Blue Sky, by Jon Atack.

Oh, he states that many Scientologists smoke, as LRH was a chain-
smoker so it must be OK.

Stewart's best insight is on Scn as a religion: if Scn postulates
that all human errors are engram-related, and can be erased
"scientifically" using auditing and an E-Meter, so Scn differs
fundamentally from all the major religions as they require
Grace, karma, or whatever to help the human through.

But Religion, Inc. has a priceless picture of LRH posing, in leathers
and stetson, astride a cine camera. I have'nt seen this before. It's
almost as good as the famous tomato/E-meter photo. And its in colour.

---
~From: [email-masked]
Here are excepts from last Sunday's LA Times:
FILM CLIP / A look inside Hollywood and the movies
MEDIA WATCH
The Church and The Magazines
Los Angeles Times (LT) - SUNDAY October 17, 1993
By: JANE GALBRAITH
Edition: Home Edition   Section: Calendar   Page: 27
Word Count: 1,088

...Premiere, which in its September issue ran an
8,700-word piece by writer John Richardson that examined the growing
influence of Scientology in the entertainment industry. The piece zeroed in
on the activities at the church's Celebrity Centre, outlining some of the
members who've come and gone, others who've stayed--and why.

...Under threat of a libel suit, Premiere decided it would be prudent to
allow Scientology to respond to Richardson's article, resulting in a
2,000-word essay about Scientology by David Miscavige, chairman of the
board of the Religious Technology Center.

---
[email-masked] (Robert E. McGrath) posted on 5 Nov 1993:
	_Some Books and Articles by Susan Blackmore_

1.  _Beyond the Body_.   Heinemann, London, 1982.   American paperback
     edition, Academy Chicago Publications, Chicago, 1992.

2.  "A Psychological Theory of the Out-Of-Body Experience",  _Journal of
     Parapsychology_, Volume 48, 1984, pp. 201-218.

3.  "The Adventures of a Psi-Inhibitory Experimenter", in _A Skeptic's
     Handbook of Parapsychology_,  Paul Kurtz, ed., Prometheus Books,
     Buffalo, 1985.

4.  _The Adventures of a Parapsychologist_.   Prometheus Books, Buffalo,
     1986.

5.  "The Lure of the Paranormal", _New Scientist_, Volume 127, September
     22 1990, pp. 62-65.

6.  "Lucid Dreams",  _Skeptical Inquirer_, Volume 15, Number 4, 1991, pp.
     362-370.

7.   "Near Death Experiences: In or Out of the Body?",  _Skeptical Inquirer_,
     Volume 16, Number 1, 1991, pp. 34-45.

8.  "Psychic Experiences:  Psychic Illusions",  _Skeptical Inquirer_, Volume
     16, Number 4, 1992, pp. 367-380.

9. _Dying to Live: Near-Death Experiences, Prometheus Books, 1993.

McGrath also posted a long review, praising these highly.

---
"One Nation Under God", Barry A. Kosmin and Seymour P. Lachman of the
City University of NY, 312 pg, Harmony Books, $25 

Based on a random sample of 113,000 Americans. 
It estimates there are 45,000 Scientologists, 
according to the 29nov93 Newsweek, P.81.
---

Author       Hershey, Robert D Jr
Title        SCIENTOLOGISTS report assets of $400 million
Source       New York Times,  Oct 22, 1993,  A, 12:1
Abstract     According to documents filed with the IRS, the Church of 
             SCIENTOLOGY has assets of about $400 million and appears to 
             take in nearly $300 million a year from counseling fees, book 
             sales, investments and other sources.  The financial 
             disclosures came after the church applied for tax exempt 
             status.
---
Hartwig, Renate:
Scientology - ich klage an!/Renate Hartwig. - Augsburg: Pattloch, 1994
("Scientology - I accuse")
ISBN 3-629-00637-X
288 pages, all in german
Review by Volkmar Grote <[email-masked]>, 15 Jul 94:
Renate Hartwig is a member of "Robin Direkt", a consumer protection
organisation, which has kind of specialised in Scientology, and
she is an admirable fighter.
It is about her personal experiences with the CofS in Germany
and some well documented cases of the "churches" nasty sides.
This includes some people who felt ruined by the church and some
very interesting business practices. The way the CofS tried to
silence Renate Hartwig is revealing...
...nearly all evidence is backed up by sworn or original statements.

---
Liane v. Billerbeck, Frank Nordhausen
"Der Sekten-Konzern: Scientology auf dem Vormarsch"
Christoph Links Verlag, Berlin, Germany
ISBN 3-86153-051-1

Review 25 Dec 1994 by [email-masked](Tilman Hausherr):

The title means in englisch: "The cult conglomerate: Scientology goes
forward".
Der Book is written by two journalists in cooperation with the
"Berliner Zeitung", a leading Berlin daily newspaper.
Because both Authors are journalists and not ex-Scientologists, the
book is easy to read and without emotions. It mainly examines
the business practices of members of the "Church", especially the rise
in the former east, where much money can be made because of the
rebuilding there. Different business scams are examined, including
the scam of the "Chernobyl children".
The book has a person-, company-, and a location-index; contact
adresses and a quick Scientology acronym guide.

---
Atack's bibliography also gives:

FOSTER, Sir John, _Enquiry into the Practice and Effects of Scientology_,
	 Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1971.
ST. PETERSBURG TIMES, _Scientology -- An in depth profile of a new
	force in Clearwater_, Florida, 1980.
	"Pulitzer Prizer Winning Expose (34 pages.)"
---
[email-masked] (Jeff Jacobsen) 15 Apr 1994 posted material from
the FACT BBS by Larry Wollersheim:

Bromley, David G. and Shupe, Anson D. Strange Gods: The
Great American Cult Scare. Boston: Beacon Press, 1981.

Burrell, Maurice C. The Challenge of the Cults. Grand
Rapids, Michigan, 495~6: Baker House, 1982.

Larson, Bob. Larson's Book of Cults. Wheaton, Illinois:
Tyndale House Publishers, 19~2.

Petersen, William J. Those Curious New Cults. New Canaan,
Connect]cut: Keats, Publishing Company, 197~.

Rudin, James and Marcia. Prison or Paradise? The New
Religious Cults. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980.

Conway, Flo and Jim SieSelmon. The Information Disease.
Science Digest. January 1982.

Singer, Margaret. Coming out of the Cults. Psychology Today. January 1979.
Singer, Margaret. Cults What are They Why Now. Forecast for 
	Home Economics. May/June 1979.
Ofsche and Singer. Attacks on Peripheral versus Central
	Elements of Self and the Efficacy of Thought Reform. (Available
	through American Family Foundation.)

Lifton, Robert Jay. The Future of Immorality. Chapters
Called: "Religious Totalism and Civil Liberties" and "Doubling
the Faustian Bargain". Bosie Books Inc.

Lifton Robert J.: Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A study of
  "Brainwashing" in China.  New York, WW Norton and Co, 1961
[email-masked] (Jeff Jacobsen) 1 Jan 1995 mentioned this book:
   "See chapter 22.  He discusses "loading the language" pretty well.  
   To my mind it does a few things;
    1) is a good marker for who is and who is not a follower
    2) gives one the feeling of being an Insider
    3) clearly seperates Us from Them
    4) reinforces the idea that Scientology "tech" is unique and better."

Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry III. The Sections on Dissociation 
	and Hypnotism.

Miller. The Utilization of Hypnotic Techniques in Religious
Conversion. (Available through Richard Ofshe PhD.)

Bainbridge and Stark. Scientology: On Being Perfectly
Clear. (Available through Richard Ofshe PhD.)

Schein, Edgar H. with Inge Schneier and Curtis H. Barker: Coercive
Persuasion. New York, W.W. Norton, 1961

Delgado. Gentle and Ungentle Persuassion Under the first
Amendment. (Available through American Family Foundation.) 51 So
Cal Law Rev 1, 1977.

California Appeal Court Decision Wollersheim vs. Church of
Scientology of California C.A. 2nd No. B023193 July 18, 1989 By
Johnson J. (57 pages.)

Also see reviews below by Charlie Rubin.
---
reviews by Charlie Rubin <[email-masked]> on alt.recovery.religion:
Best books on cults and mind control

... 
Even if you're not interested in cults, you should still read #3.

(1)  _Combatting Cult Mind Control_ by Steven Hassan (Park Stree Press, 1988)
	(lSBN 0-89281-243-5)
	-- This is the best one. Clear, concise, and powerful. Author is a
	   former top level Moonie who now does professional exit-couselling
	   for cult members. He really understands what's going on.
 
(2)  _Cults in America: Programmed for Paradise_ by Willa Appel (Holt,
	Rinehart and Winston, 1983)
	-- Also a good overview of the phenomena, but by an outsider (an
	   anthropologist). Very interesting discussion of the psychological
	   needs fulfilled by fairy tales, and how cult doctrines are very
	   similar to fairy tales (good vs. evil, very simplistic). Lots of
	   other good stuff as well.
 
(3)  _Influence: How and Why People Agree to Things_ by Robert B. Cialdini,
	Ph.D. (Wm. Morrow & Co., 1984)
	-- An incredible book. I can't recommend it enough. The author is a
	   social psychology professor who spent 15 years studying the
	   tactics used by "compliance professionals," including salesmen,
	   fundraisers, marketing pros, cult leaders, Chinese brainwashing
	   camps, etc. He carefully details the underlying psychological
	   mechanisms that make all these tactics work, and how everyone
	   is vulnerable to them because they take advantage of instinctual
	   responses. Very enlightening!

(4)  _The Wrong Way Home: Uncovering Patterns of Cult Behavior in American
	Society_ by Arthur J. Deikman, M.D. (Beacon Press, 1990)
	-- Also fascinating. The author is a clinical professor of psychiatry
	   who started studying cults, and then realized that the methods of
	   manipulation used in them are found throughout society, in many
	   types of groups -- corporations, political parties, schools,
	   and traditional religions. Cults simply take them to the n-th
	   degree. This is a real eye-opener.

---
[email-masked] (Martin G. V. Hunt) reviewed:

about a 1934 book:
"Scientologie 34!" by A. Nordenholz, translated into the English by
W. R. McPheeters.
it provides insight into hubby's plagiarized coining of such terms as
"beingness", "havingness", etc., as well as the use and development of
his "axioms".

Inside Scientology: Or How I Found Scientology and Became Super
  Human.  Kaufman, Robert.  Olympia Press, New York. 1972.

Battle for the Mind: A Physiology of Conversion and Brainwashing.
  Sargant, William.  Doubleday, Garden City, New York.  1957.

Dianetics in Limbo.  O'Brien, Barbara.  Whitmore Publishing Co.,
  Philadelphia.  1966.
[editor: Atack's bibliography lists the first name as Helen]

[for background]

Science and Sanity.  Korzybski, Count Alfred Habdank Skarbek.
  Institute of General Semantics, Lakeville, Connecticut.  1933.

Thought Reform of the Chinese Intellectuals.  Chen, Theodore H.
  E.  Hong Kong University Press, Hong Kong.  1960.

The Search for the Manchurian Candidate: The CIA and Mind
  Control.  Marks, John.  Times Books, New York.  1979.

Youth, Brainwashing, and the Extremist Cults.  Enroth, Ronald.
  Zondervan Press, Kentwood, Michigan.  1977.

Rape of the Mind.  Meerloo, Joost A.  Grosset & Dunlap, New York.
  1961.

Radical Departures: Desperate Detours to Growing Up.  Levine, Saul
  V, M.D.  Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Orlando, Florida.  1984.

Destructive Cult Conversion: Theory, Research, and Treatment.
  Clark, John G., et al.  American Family Foundation, Weston,
  Massachusetts.  1981.

Cults and Consequences: The Definitive Handbook.  Andres, Rachel,
  and Lane, James R., eds.  Jewish Federation of Greater Los
  Angeles, Los Angeles.  1988.

Let Our Children Go!  Patrick, Ted, with Tom Dulack.  Thomas
  Congdon Books/E. P. Dutton, New York.  1976.

All God's Children: The Cult Experience; Salvation or Slavery?
  Stoner, C., and J. Parke.  Chilton Books, Radnor, Pennsylvania.
  1977.

Nineteen Eighty-Four.  Orwell, George.  Penguin, Middlesex, England. 1954.

[magazine articles]

"Scientology Plot Against State Official."  Henderson, Bruce.
  Los Angelel Herald-Examiner, 29 May 1980.

"Scientologists Plotted to Frame a Critic as a Criminal, Files
  Show."  Gordon, Gregory.  Boston Globe, 24 November 1979.

"Scientology: Anatomy of a Frightening Cult."  Methvin, Eugene H.
  Reader's Digest, May 1980.

"How Cults Bilk Us All."  Williams, Carson.  Reader's Digest,  November 1979.

---
[email-masked] (Tony McClelland) suggested, 17 Nov 1994:

For a better understanding of Scientology beliefs and techniques, see
Hubbard's Volunteer Minister's Handbook (lSBN 0-88404- 039-9).

For a better understanding of the manipulative nature of Scientology,
see [...]  Thomas and Jacqueline Keisers' The Anatomy of lllusion
(lSBN 0-39805295-6).

Margery Wakefield 's The Road to Xenu is an excellent first-hand
account of membership, and includes Bob Penny's thought
provoking Social Control in Scientology. The Road to Xenu is
available via P.0. Box 290402, Tampa, Florida 33687.
---
"Countercultures: a sociological analysis", Zellner, W. W. 
	St. Martin's Press, New York, N.Y. 1995  ISBN 0312080840

Review by [email-masked] (Ron Newman) Thu, 2 Feb 1995:

One of the six chapters, 32 pages long, is on Scientology.
(The other chapters are about skinheads, survivalists, Satanism, the
Ku Klux Klan, and the Unification Church of Rev. Moon.)

Anyone collecting books about Scientology should get this one too.

---

"BRAIN-WASHING; A Synthesis of the Russian Textbook on Psychopolitics."
Review by [email-masked] (Jeff Jacobsen) 29 Jan 1995:

Kenneth Goff wrote the editorial note in front.  Goff says he was
formerly a communist in the US.  He also says the text in this manual
"contains the address of Beria [head of the KGB] to the American
students in the Lenin University prior to 1936."

   So, to expose the Communist/psychiatrist connection, in the public
service Scientology printed this manual.  My opinion, however, is that
Hubbard wrote this, and there are many tipoffs within the work to prove that.
   [List of reasons removed by editor]

-------------------------------< END >-----------------------------------
-- 
Don    D.C.Lindsay	University of Colorado-Boulder Computer Science

Xref: utcsri alt.religion.scientology:40862
Path: utcsri!newsflash.concordia.ca!canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca!tribune.usask.ca!news.sasknet.sk.ca!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!news.bc.net!torn!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!news.uh.edu!uuneo.neosoft.com!Starbase.NeoSoft.COM!not-for-mail
From: [email-masked] (William Barwell)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: ARS and Scientology in Phoenix AZ Paper
Date: 18 Mar 1995 15:50:51 -0600
Organization: NeoSoft Internet Services   +1 713 968 5800
Lines: 162
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: starbase.neosoft.com

In article <[email-masked]>,
Timothy Barr <[email-masked]> wrote:
>"Scientologists, Internet users square off over computer missives." It 
>can be found in the Mesa/Tempe/Chandler/Scottsdale Tribune, on the first 
>page of the Religion section of the March 18 edition. There is also a 
>picture of some protestors who were picketing in front of the local COSI 
>location. Dennis Erlich's suit was also mentioned in passing. And a new 
>line by a Lisa Goodman, media relations director for the main office of 
>COSI. <quote from article by Tribune Religion editor Kelly Ettenborough 
>to follow>
>
>Goodman called the messages posted by flamers a form of hate crime. 
>"It's not a matter of global freedom of expression. It's cyber 
>terrorism" she said.
>
From a nasty cult that showed what terrorism really was about
to Paulette Cooper amongst others.  Read teh introduction to Bent 
Corydon's book, "L. Ron Hubbard - Madman or Messiah" about the assault 
that occured in his office by a Church operative on a mission of terror.

We may have to set up a FAQ to show what Scientology REALLY is about.  
Harrasment, terrorism, defamation, frame-ups, blackmail, deception, the
whole sorry thing.

 

                  PAULETTE COOPER, OPERATION FREAKOUT
 
                                 CD - 3
                              1 April 1976
 
                  Church Documents (Court Transcripts)
       Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.

 
     ((PAGE ONE))
 
     1 April 1976
 
                           OPERATION FREAKOUT
 
     MAJOR TARGET:
 
     To get PC incarcerated in a mental institution or jail, or at least
to hit her so hard that she drops her attacks.
 
     PRIMARY TARGETS:
 
     US B1 NE SEC working in liaison with OPS NAT (if needed).
 
     To remove PC from her position of Power so that she cannot attack
the C of S.
 
US B1 (WF) SEC Taking responsibility for the area working in liaison
with OPS NAT.

     Ops NAT responsible for the overall planning of this project,
working in liaison with NE SEC ( *** needed for completion successfully
of this Op).
 
     OPS NAT responsible for any debugging of this project, necessary.
 
     NE SEC and AG/I NY organization operating (with Info power pushing
TGTS through to completion).
 
     VITAL TARGETS:
 
     1) To recruit an FSM that looks like PC and to train her on this
action.  (AG/I NY)
 
     2) To recruit an observation FSM to make a telephone call.  No
special requirements necessary except security.  (And not PTS, AG/I NY)
 
     3) To get "Pin Ball" FSMs or T.M.  FSM to get familiar with PC to
find out some of her clothes she wears particularly what sort of coat
she usually wears and her general looks, hair etc.  Also above FSM or
FSMs will have to meet with PC when the OP goes down.  (If possible,
tell FSM to get a piece of PC's clothing, AG/I NY)
 
     4) To get a cheap coat that is very similar to PC's.  (AG/I NY)
 
     5) To ascertain what PC looks like now, hair streaked? still
skinny? etc.  (AG/I NY)
 
     6) To locate a laundry near PC's place and to make sure she isn't
known there.  (Cleaners, note must have clerk, AG/I NY)
 
     7) To find out what PC is wearing the day of this action.  And what
her hair is like.  (AG/I NY)
 
     8) To have someone available to stake out PC when she leaves her
place the day of the caper, to ascertain when she leaves, what she's
wearing etc.  (AG/I NY)
 
***********************************************************************
 
     ((PAGE TWO))
 
     Operation Freakout, a plan to incarcerate (in jail or a mental
 
institution) "PC" or "Mrs.  Lovely" their frequent code name for
Paulette Cooper.  These pages consist of sample bomb threats by phone
and mail which are supposed to trace back to her, plus a bizarre scheme
to have a Scientologist pose as Cooper and crack up at a store near
where she lived so that she would be committed.
 
     In 1973, another frame-up scheme with bomb threats lead to the
arrest and indictment of Cooper.  The lower part of this page consists
of a letter attached to Operation Freakout in which they state that they
think this frame-up will work because it worked before and the FBI
believes she sent those original bomb threats.
 
     1 April 1976
 
                           OPERATION FREAKOUT
 
     MAJOR TARGET:
 
     To get PC incarcerated in a mental institution or jail, or at least
to hit her so hard that she drops her attacks.
 
     PRIMARY TARGETS:

     US B1 NE SEC working in liaison with OPS NAT (if needed).
 
     To remove PC from her position of Power so that she cannot attack
the C of S.
 
                           RE: PC OP FREAKOUT
 
     Dear Dick,
 
     SITUATION:  Cooper is still not terminately handled.
 
     DATA:  Cooper is getting her power back, attacking again.
 
     Attached is approved Op Freakout.  This additional channel (i.e.
plan).  Should really have her put away.  Worked with all the other
Channels.
 
     The FBI already think she really did do the bomb threats on the C
of S (Church of Scientology).
 
     SOLUTION:  OK this additional Channel.

     This is OK______
 
     Approved_____
 
     Disapproved_______
 
     Love,
 
     Randy (R)

Xref: utcsri alt.religion.scientology:40425
Path: utcsri!newsflash.concordia.ca!canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca!tribune.usask.ca!news.sasknet.sk.ca!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!vanbc.wimsey.com!scipio.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!pipex!peernews.demon.co.uk!cornellc.cit.cornell.edu!CTM
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: [email-masked] (CTM)
Subject: ACT-23 Basic Basic on the Chain of Chains
X-Posting-Host: cornellc.cit.cornell.edu
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 1995 07:12:48 +0000
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Lines: 340

      Repost.

                   BASIC BASIC ON THE CHAIN OF CHAINS

                                ACT - 23
                            10 October 1993

                 Copyright (C) 1993 Homer Wilson Smith
       Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.

     It has been the common experience of auditors to find some really
great process to run on themselves or their pcs only to find that after
a few hours the process grinds to a halt and the pc is left feeling just
as bad as before.

     Take for example the process,

     'Tell me about coming in.'
     'Do you have a missed withhold on coming in?'

     Now it sounds logical, doesn't it, the pc had to come into any
situation prior to being stuck in it, and so in trying to get him
earlier on the chain of that subject you of course would try to get him
to contact his responsibility for getting into it in the first place.

     So I was running this the other day, with great gain, I was nailing
the withhold over and over again releasing lots and lots of pain out of
my spine, and behind my heart, and the back of my throat, and behind my
eyes, and I finally left off on a rather large release that I hoped
would continue for a while.

     An hour later I was totally caved in again, in serious pain with
somatics all over my body and in my throat.  Finally I decided I had
better go back into session and deal with it, saying to myself 'I don't
want to be here, I REALLY don't want to be here, Jesus H.  Christ why do
I have to go through all this damn auditing nonsense, why can't I just
die in peace and be done with it.'

     So I went into session grumbling to myself, 'I don't want to be
here, I don't want to be here' kind of dragging myself into my case once
again in a long line of once agains, hoping that maybe this time I would
nail it for good.

     Well I started running 'I don't want to be here'.  And boy was that
true.  It finally became,

     'Tell me about not wanting to be here.'
     'Do you have a withhold on not wanting to be here?'
     'Do you have a MISSED withhold on not wanting to be here?'

     I ran this for a while to good effect, then it started to bog down
again.  So I started to play with it running every variation I could
think of including

     'Do you have a withhold on WANTING to be here?'
     'Do you have a withhold on being here?'
     'Do you have a withhold on coming in?'
     'Do you have a withhold on being?'
     etc.

     Finally I nailed it but good on the first one, WANTING TO BE HERE.

     'Is there a missed withhold on WANTING TO BE HERE?'

     So I took a break and started to think about all this, and this is
what came out of it.

     Ron taught us that engrams need to be run in chains back to the
basic incident.  He didn't really tell us WHY this was so, but to the
degree it seemed to work, we all did what we were told.

     One of the problems with early Dianetics was determining what a
chain was.  Was it all the incidents where you felt the same way, or all
the incidents where the same thing happened to you, or all the incidents
where the same person was the antagonist, or all the incidents where you
were thinking of something?

     Eventually Ron limited it down to attitudes, emotions, sensations
and pains and one found the earlier incident merely by ASKING for an
earlier similar incident of whatever attitude, emotion, sensation or
pain you were running, and taking what ever the pc gave you.

     Then later Ron published New Era Dianetics wherein the major
advance was the fact that you had to run each engram until you uncovered
the POSTULATE made during the moment of greatest duress.

     Later I realized that these postulates are in fact the central core
of the chain you are trying to run, and the reason that you don't just
go for earlier similar incidents based on NARRATIVE CONTENT is because
they may be very similar in what occurred to the pc, but very different
in what postulates were made.

     Narrative content refers to what actually happened in the incident,
like the chain of all times the guy fell in a lake over many lives, or
the chain of all times he was shot for being in the wrong woman's bed.

     Narrative chains might NOT have a common thread of attitudes,
emotions, sensations and pains, and more importantly they might not have
a common thread of postulates made during the incident.

     So there you are running some chain and the guy gives you a time he
had his head cut off, and an earlier time he was hung, and an earlier
time he was in Church with his mother, and an earlier...  Whoa, church?
What the hell does that have in common with the first two?

     Maybe he died of boredom?

     So you ask him, what's the common postulate to these incidents, and
he thinks about it for a moment and says,

     'I DON'T WANT TO BE HERE!'

     There you have it, that's the central postulate to the chain you
are running, and away you go down to the beginning of time trying to
find the basic INCIDENT on the chain, or the first time he postulated 'I
don't want to be here!'

     You run this to a tremendous win, and your pc walks out glowing and
swearing to tell everyone how great an auditor you are.

     But then the next day your pc comes in looking all glum again, and
you just can't figure out how things could get so bad after having been
so good.

     In old time dianetics we were taught that if an incident refuses to
run or begins to go more solid, that means either there is an earlier
beginning to this same incident, or it is not basic on the chain and you
have to look for an earlier incident.

     So you say to your pc 'Well say now, I see that you aren't looking
so good', and your pc says 'Yeah, good point'.  And you say 'Well that
chain we were running yesterday on 'I don't want to be here', did that
go more solid?'  And the pc looks around himself and says 'Bleh, yuk...'

     So you take the hint and say 'Ok, the chain has gone more solid, so
we are going to continue to run this chain to completion.  Now then is
there an earlier similar incident of 'I don't want to be here?'

     But the pc looks and looks and just can't seem to find anything,
and he gets more solid, and more pain, and more green, and more dark,
and his eyes have no light in them anymore, and you know you had better
do something quick or else you are going to lose him.

     So you say to your pc, 'Ok, apparently we ARE at the basic on the
chain of 'I don't want to be here'.  Is there an earlier similar
POSTULATE?'

     The pc immediately brightens up and thinks 'My what a wonderfully
astute auditor I have, how lucky I am to have him' but starts to think
about it and says 'Well a postulate is a postulate.  What do you mean by
an earlier SIMILAR postulate.  Either it's the same postulate or it
isn't.'

     And you think about this and you say 'Ok then, is there an earlier
POSTULATE whether similar or not?'

     THEN the pc says 'Well yes of course, that COMING IN chain we ran
the other day is earlier to not wanting to be here.  But we ran that to
completion too, so I don't think it could be that.'

     So you say, 'fine then, is there yet an earlier postulate?'

     And the pc says 'You mean earlier to COMING IN?  Hmmm yes, let's
see...' And the pc frowns and thinks and scrunches up his eye brows and
dramatizes mightily, and finally he looks up and says sheepishly, 'Well
yes, maybe there is...

     I WANT TO BE HERE.'

     So you take up the postulate 'I want to be here' and off you go.

     Clearly before the guy chose to come into a game, a 'here' of
magnitude, he first had to WANT to come in, to be 'here'.

     Just as clearly only AFTER he came in did he finally develop the
postulate I DON'T WANT TO BE HERE.

     So I WANT TO BE HERE is an earlier postulate to COMING IN which is
an earlier postulate to I DON'T WANT TO BE HERE.

     So it's pretty clear that what we are running here is a chain of
POSTULATES where each postulate has an entire chain of INCIDENTS unto
itself.  This chain of postulates we call the chain of chains.

     Each postulate on the chain of postulates is a DIFFERENT postulate,
but each one proceeds logically from the one before it.

     The basic incident on each chain of INCIDENTS must be reached
before that chain will erase, but unless that chain's postulate is the
most basic postulate on the chain of postulates, the whole bank will not
erase.

     So this is how various postulates might be laid out in the time
stream.

     1.)  NOT BEING (Native State, free unmanifested potential)
     2.)  BEING
     3.)  WANTING TO BE (approval and willingness to view more)
     4.)  WANTING TO BE HERE (here = a new there he wants to enter)
     5.)  WANTING TO GO IN
     6.)  COMING IN
     7.)  BEING HERE
     8.)  WANTING TO BE HERE  (once in)
     9.)  GLAD I CAME IN
    10.)  WANTING TO NOT WANT TO BE HERE  (pivotal game point)
    11.)  NOT WANTING TO BE HERE
    12.)  SORRY I CAME IN
    13.)  WANTING TO GO OUT
    14.)  TRYING TO GO OUT
    15.)  CAN'T GO OUT
    16.)  I DIDN'T COME IN
    17.)  NOT WANTING TO BE (at all)
    18.)  NOT BEING (Not-isness and Spiritual Death)
    19.)  STONE COLD DEAD

     The being starts off in NOT BEING or Native State.  Then he wakes
up into BEING and considers that this is good, which is WANTING TO BE.

     Then he decides he would like to partake in a game, a space-time
system of heres and nows, and this is WANTING TO BE HERE, where 'here'
is a new 'there' to go into.

     This leads him to WANTING TO GO IN, which leads to COMING IN, which
leads to BEING HERE and WANTING TO BE HERE.

     But then things go wrong, HE MAKES IT DO SO and this comes from
WANTING TO NOT WANT TO BE HERE.

     This leads to NOT WANTING TO BE HERE, which leads to WANTING TO GO
OUT, which leads to TRYING TO GET OUT, which of course fails because he
has blinded himself to, and so lost sight of, his decision to come in.

     This leads him to NOT WANT TO BE at all since he can't get out, and
eventually to NOT BEING, as a solid piece of mest that is slumbering his
Eternity away as a rock on the shore.

     Each one of these prime postulates has a first time it was made in
the present cycle of creation.  Past cycles are as-ised and no longer
count.

     A Cycle of Creation consists of moving out of Native State, moving
into creating things, then causing them to survive, then undoing them
all and going back to Native State, in preparation for another cycle of
creation should you so choose.

     Each one of these prime postulates also has endless numbers of
further times when the same postulate was made and affirmed during the
course of travel in the time stream.  Those are incidents on the chain
of that particular postulate.

     Thus each postulate forms a chain of incidents when that postulate
was made or affirmed.  When you run standard Dianetics you are running
these chains back to the basic incident of making and affirming that
particular ONE postulate.

     But each postulate has an EARLIER DIFFERENT postulate which also
has its own chain.  The basic incident on the chain of the earlier
postulate is earlier than the basic incident on the chain of the later
postulate; but all the future incidents on the chain of the earlier
postulate are intermixed in the time stream with the future incidents of
the chain of the later postulate.  This is because even after the second
postulate is formed, the first postulate is still operating and
continues to form its own incidents along with the second postulate.

     It's like shuffling two card decks of different colors together.
Each card in the shuffled deck is an incident belonging to the chain of
incidents of the same color.  The EARLIEST chain of incidents is the
chain whose BASIC incident is the first in the deck.

     It isn't true that the whole chain and ALL OF ITS INCIDENTS is
earlier than the other chain, only its first or earliest incidents are,
thus we call that chain the EARLIER chain.  Only its BASIC incidents and
maybe a few of its earliest incidents actually earlier than all of the
second chain.

     Each incident on a given chain has the same core or reigning
postulate as every other incident on the SAME color chain.  But
different colored chains have different reigning postulates.

     We call such postulates, CORE, REIGNING, OPERATING, PRIMARY CENTRAL
or GOVERNING postulates of the chain.  The terms are interchangeable.

     Thus by looking at later incidents it is sometimes hard to tell
which chain of incidents is more basic until you find the basic incident
on each chain and determine which basic incident happened first.

     Further each of these chains is related to each other, because the
reigning postulate of each chain is derived from and is a natural
consequence of the reigning postulate of the chain just before it.

     Thus when you are running a chain, and you have these big wins, and
then suddenly your pc is doing real bad again, almost as if no auditing
had taken place, you can be sure that the postulate on the chain you ran
was NOT the basic postulate on the chain of chains that makes up the
central core of your pc's case.

     You DON'T ask for an earlier similar incident on the same chain,
you ask for an EARLIER POSTULATE ON THE CHAIN OF CHAINS!

     COMING IN is rather late on the chain of chains actually.

     Long before you came into anything you had to BE and WANT TO BE.
So you are really getting back to the source of Sovereign Desire with
this stuff, and if you miss the basic basic postulate, or even just the
next earlier postulate, you can expect your case to go down in flames.

     It gets WORSE the closer you come to the basic postulate, if you
them proceed to miss it, so the closer you are to getting it right the
better you had better be as an auditor and be able to spot these things
and carry your pc on through.

     Remember that as you audit your pc on COMING IN and GETTING OUT, he
will dramatize these items on session itself!

     So if he wants out, you can be sure you are late on the chain, and
when you start to get it right, he will be more than happy to come in
and get auditing.

     And THAT is the sum totality of an ARC broken field.

     The guy doesn't want more auditing because no one would LET him go
earlier than WANTING TO GET OUT!

     He wants to get out of his problems, his upsets, his unhappiness,
his oppositions, his body, his bank, his universe, his whatever.  What
ever it is he hands you, he doesn't want to have anything to do with it!

     You see he CAME IN to Scientology WANTING TO GET OUT, so its
natural to audit him on GETTING OUT for a while, but if you do it too
long, without getting him earlier similar to COMING IN, he will
dramatize his item on session and GET OUT.

     Bang, no more Church.

     Homer

Xref: utcsri alt.religion.scientology:40924
Path: utcsri!newsflash.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!pipex!peernews.demon.co.uk!support.com!tom.klemesrud
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: [email-masked] (tom.klemesrud)
Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150
X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.29
Subject: C of S Points & Authorities
X-Posting-Host: [163.179.3.2]
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 1995 16:42:47 +0000
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Lines: 1163

                                             

     _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/   _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
     _/  Tom Klemesrud, Sysop      _/   _/  L.A. Valley College BBS   _/
     _/  [email-masked] _/   _/  FidoNet 1:102/837   KoX   _/
     _/  [email-masked]          _/   _/  North Hollywood, CA USA   _/
     _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/   _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Andrew H. Wilson
    WILSON, RYAN & CAMPILONGO
    115 Sansome Street
    Fourth Floor
    San Francisco, CA 94104
    (415) 391-3900
    
    Thomas M. Small
    Janet A. Kobrin
    SMALL, LARKIN, & KIDDE
    10940 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1800
    Los Angeles, California 90024-3945
    (310) 209-4400
    
    Helena K. Kobrin
    7629 Fulton Avenue
    North Hollywood, CA 91605
    (213) 960-1933
    
    Attorneys for Plaintiffs,
    RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER and
    BRIDGE PUBLICATIONS, INC.

    
                   UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    
                  NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    
    RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER, a           )    CASE NO.
    California non-profit corporation; and   )
    BRIDGE PUBLICATIONS, INC., a California  )    MEMORANDUM OF POINTS
    non-profit corporation,                  )    AND AUTHORITIES IN
                                             )    SUPPORT OF RENEWED
                         Plaintiffs,         )    MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
                                             )    INJUNCTION AGAINST
     vs.                                     )    DEFENDANTS NETCOM ON-
                                             )    LINE COMMUNICATIONS
    NETCOM ON-LINE COMMUNICATION SERVICES,   )    SERVICES, INC. AND TOM
    INC., a Delaware corporation; DENNIS     )    KLEMESRUD
    ERLICH, an individual; and TOM           )
    KLEMESRUD, an individual, dba CLEARWOOD  )    DATE:  April 7, 1995
    DATA SERVICES,                           )    TIME:  
                         Defendants.         )    CTRM:  Hon. Ronald M.
                                             )          
Whyte                         TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
    TITLE                                                     PAGE
    
    I.    PRELIMINARY STATEMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
    
    II.   FACTUAL STATEMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
    
     A.   Plaintiffs Have Demonstrated Their Exclusive Rights
              To Reproduce And Publish The Materials That Are The
              Subject Of This Application. . . . . . . . . . . . 5
    
     B.   Defendants Are Engaging In Unlawful Copying
              And Publishing Of Plaintiffs' Literary Works . . . 6
    
     C.   Defendants Could and Should Easily Take Action
              To Prevent Erlich's Violations Without
              Overburdening Their Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . 9
    
     D.   Absent An Injunction, There Is A Strong
              Likelihood That Defendants Will Continue To
              Make And Publish Unauthorized Copies Of The
              Copyrighted Materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
    
    III.  DEFENDANTS NETCOM AND KLEMESRUD CAN BE FOUND LIABLE FOR
              COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
    
     A.   Defendants Are Guilty Of Direct Infringement . . . . .12
    
     B.   Defendants Are Guilty Of Contributory
              Infringement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
    
    IV.   PLAINTIFFS ARE ENTITLED TO A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ON
              ALL CAUSES OF ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
    
     A.   Plaintiffs Have Established A Likelihood Of
              Success On The Merits Of Each Cause Of Action. . .19
    
     B.   Plaintiffs Will Be Irreparably Injured If
              Defendant Is Not Preliminarily Enjoined. . . . . .19
    
     C.   The Equities Weigh Heavily In Favor Of
              Granting The Preliminary Injunction. . . . . . . .21
    
    V.    CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

                       TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
    
    CASE                                                      PAGE
    
    Aleknagik Natives, Ltd. v. Andrus,
    648 F.2d 496 (9th Cir. 1980) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
    
    Apple Computer, Inc. v. Formula Int'l. Inc.,
    562 F.Supp. 775 (C.D. Cal. 1983) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
    
    Apple Computer, Inc. v. Formula lnt'l. Inc.,
    725 F.2d 521 (9th Cir. 1984) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,19
    
    Baxter v. MCA, Inc.,
    812 F.2d 421 (9th Cir. 1987)
    cert. denied, 108 S.Ct. 346 (1987) . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
    
    Beltran v. Myers,
    677 F.2d 1317 (9th Cir. 1982). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
    
    Bridge Publications Inc. v. Vien,
    827 F.Supp. 629 (S.D.Cal. 1993). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
    
    Casella v. Morris,
    820 F.2d 362 (11th Cir. 1987). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
    
    Data East USA, Inc. v. Epyx, Inc.,
    862 F.2d 204 (9th Cir. 1988) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
    
    Donaldson, Douglas & Gumble, Inc. v. Terris,
    37 U.S.P.Q. 39 (W.D. Pa. 1938) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
    
    Epstein Family Partnership v. KMART Corp.,
    13 F.3d 762 (3rd Cir. 1994). . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18, 21
    
    Famous Music Corp. v. Bay State Harness
    Horse Racing & Breeding Assoc., Inc.,
    554 F.2d 1213 (1st Cir. 1977). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
    
    Gershwin Publishing Corp. v.
    Columbia Artists Management, Inc.,
    443 F.2d 1159 (2d Cir. 1971) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
    
    Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum v. NFL,
    634 F.2d 1197 (9th Cir. 1980). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
    
    Morgan v. Veach,
    59 Cal.App.2d 682 (1943) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
    
    People ex rel. Younger v. F.E. Crites, Inc.,
    51 Cal.App.3d 961 (1975) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
    
    Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Frena,
    839 F.Supp. 1552 (M.D.Fla. 1993) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
    
    Religious Technology Center v. Scott,
    869 F.2d 1306 (9th Cir. 1989). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
    
    Religious Technology Center v. Wollersheim,
    796 F.2d 1076 (9th Cir. 1986),
    cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1103 (1987) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
    
    Sega Enterprises Ltd. v. MAPHIA,
    857 F.Supp. 679 (N.D. Cal. 1994) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
    
    Shapiro, Bernstein & Co. v. H.L. Green Co.,
    316 F.2d 304 (2d Cir. 1963). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
    
    Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios, Inc.,
    464 U.S. 417 (1984). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
    
    Treasure Valley Potato Bargaining Ass'n v.
    Ore-Ida Foods, Inc., 497 F.2d 203 (9th Cir. 1974),
    cert. denied, 419 U.S. 999, 95 S.Ct. 314 (1974). . . . . . .20
    
    U-Haul International, Inc. v. Jartran, Inc.,
    522 F.Supp. 1238 (D.Ariz. 1981), aff'd, 681 F.2d 1159
    (9th Cir. 1982). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
    
    Wainwright Sec. v. Wall Street Transcript Corp.,
    558 F.2d 91 (2d Cir. 1977) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

    OTHER
    
    3 Nimmer, Nimmer on Copyright,
     12.04[A][1], p. 12-67 (1994) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
    
    17 U.S.C.  504(c)(2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
    
    17 U.S.C.  101. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
    
    17 U.S.C.  201(d) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12, 19
    
    Cal.Civil Code  3426.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
    
    Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 64 . . . . . . . . . . 5
    
    M. Nimmer, 3 Nimmer on Copyright  13.01 . . . . . . . . . .12
    
    Sarah B. Deutsch, "Superliability on the Superhighway?,"
        The Multimedia Law Report, at 5 (November 1994). . . . . .
.16                    I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

     Plaintiffs once again seek issuance of a preliminary injunction
against defendants Netcom On-Line Communication Services, Inc.
('Netcom'), and Tom Klemesrud, dba Clearwood Data Services
("Klemesrud') (collectively, 'defendants").  Additional facts and
evidence now available demonstrate that arguments raised earlier by
those defendants should not insulate them from the injunctive remedy
to which plaintiffs are entitled as to all defendants.  Indeed,
their principal defense -- purported inability to deal with the
subject infringements -- is simply not true.

     In their original application, plaintiffs briefed extensively
their rights in the works in question, the intentional violations of
those rights by defendant Dennis Erlich, and the law which
demonstrates that they are entitled to preliminary injunctive relief
to restrain the commission of such acts pendente lite.  Plaintiffs
incorporate by reference the facts and law contained in their
initial application, and will avoid repeating those matters where
possible.  They will demonstrate here that defendants' arguments to
avoid being enjoined are spurious -- particularly in light of the
post-restraining order infringement of defendant Dennis Erlich;
their non-passive infringements resulting from their own voluntary
and volitional use of their own equipment in spite of being on
notice; and the simple methods of dealing with the specific
situation raised here without triggering the parade of horribles for
their systems and the computer industry which defendants predict
obedience to a lawful court order portends.

     On February 21, 1995, the Court extended its TRO as to Erlich,
but vacated it as to Netcom and Klemesrud and denied plaintiffs'
application for a preliminary injunction as to those two defendants
without prejudice.  The Court relied on defendants' arguments that
there was no action they could take to prevent the infringing
postings by defendant Dennis Erlich and that it would be enormously
burdensome and contrary to public policy to require them to do so.

    Defendants' attempts to make themselves appear mere 'passive'
conduits of others' messages were less than forthright./1/ In fact, 
----------
/1/   Defendants' papers in opposition to the preliminary injunction
had only been. served on plaintiffs that same morning just prior to
the hearing, and plaintiffs were therefore unable to research
defendants' statements further and provide adequate reply at that
time. confidential materials, and in many instances the entire work.

----------

defendants' own systems are not mere conduits of Erlich's postings. 
Rather, Erlich's postings are: (1) generated on or loaded onto
Klemesrud's computer for copying to Usenet via Netcom's computer;
(2) copied by Klemesrud's computer to Netcom's server, which makes
a copy of it pending transmission; (3) transmitted to Usenet by
Netcom's computer; (4) recopied back to Netcom's disk where it
remains stored for ready access by Netcom's paying subscribers for
several weeks; and (5) recopied back to Klemesrud's disk where he
keeps it available for his paying subscribers to access for up to 72
hours. Netcom even emphasizes in its promotional materials that the
availability of newsgroup (also called "netnews") access is one of
its most popular services.

    Netcom's promotion is confirmed by the fact that the newsgroup
(or public discussion group), known as 'alt.religion.scientology'
("a.r.s."), in which Erlich makes his postings, is readily available
for access on Netcom's system.  When one logs into Netcom's
computer, it is possible to look at Erlich's or others' postings on
a.r.s, and also to download them or print them off.  An example of
such a print-off is attached as Exhibit B to the Declaration of Lynn
R. Farny.  Furthermore, the same is true of Klemesrud's system. 
Logging into that system, even as a guest, one can obtain access to
a.r.s. and can download or print any postings from the BBS, which
would include infringements when they are there. (Farny Dec., 1 4.)
The print-off of Erlich's February 26, 1995 infringing posting,
filed with the contempt motion is an example of infringing materials
maintained on disk by Netcom and accessed by a subscriber.

    Thus, defendants' equipment is itself generating and storing
the unauthorized, infringing copies to service their paying
customers, and they, too, are primary infringers of hundreds of
pages of plaintiffs' copyrighted published and unpublished,

    Defendants' ability and obligation to deal with the problem
were also downplayed to the Court, when actually they could have
dealt with it quite simply by warnings to the specific
user--Erlich--who has been committing the violations, followed by
cancellation of his service if he refused to comply. Klemesrud's
direct ability to deal with his subscriber, Erlich, is obvious, and
can be seen through the admissions in the declaration which he
filed./2/ Netcom's ability to 
----------

/2/   Klemesrud made a number of significant admissions in his
declaration: (1) P 18: "I can of course delete a subscriber from my
subscription list, which has the effect of preventing access by the
person . . ."; (2) P 19: "I restrict access to the Alt. news groups,
and files submitted by BBS users, to those over 18 years of age . .
."; (3) P 21: "I have made it a point to not maintain news groups on
certain subjects such as explicit sex groups, hate groups, and other
groups whose presence I believe to be detrimental to the operation
of a first class bulletin board."; (4) P 28: he knows Dennis Erlich
"to be a subscriber to my system and a frequent user of the bulletin
board"; (5) P 33: "I expect my subscribers to act as responsible men
and women . . ."; (6) P 33: "I have, on occasion, suggested that
certain subscribers whose remarks I found offensive, distasteful,
and inappropriate, to take their accounts elsewhere."

----------

deal with the problem with its subscriber--Klemesrud--or even to
work out methods of dealing directly with Erlich also exists. 
Furthermore, Netcom's and Klemesrud's own usage conditions, to which
their subscribers are required to adhere, prohibit subscribers from
engaging in copyright infringement, and prescribe discipline such as
suspension and disconnection of accounts for violations of their
rules.  These rules are a written embodiment of the formerly
unwritten usage rules of the Internet, known as 'Netiquette.'

     Klemesrud had these rights with respect to the infringements
initiated by Erlich, and Netcom had these rights with respect to
Klemesrud's forwarding of Erlich's infringements to Netcom's system. 
They refused to take any action, being unwilling even to issue
warnings not to engage in the infringing postings./3/ By their
refusal

----------

/3/   While  Klemesrud's initial response to plaintiffs' attorney
(in Exhibit D to Declaration of Helena K. Kobrin 2/7/95) appeared on
the surface to offer to deal with the problem, analysis of what was
offered shows that the offer of action was cosmetic only and had no
possibility of eliminating the problem. Klemesrud said he would
consider deleting materials (from his BBS only, but not from the
newsgroup generally) if he was sent a copy of the materials to
compare to the posting.  At the same time, he said the material was
only on his BBS for three days, and insisted that copies be mailed
to him.  Ms. Kobrin pointed out in her response that the materials
in question were trade secrets and could not be furnished to him;
that he was not addressing the larger issue of the infringing
postings being passed into the newsgroups; and that by insisting
that materials be mailed to him, even his offer to delete them from
his BBS was insincere, since by the time they were gotten to him by
mail, the three days he kept them on his disk would have passed
anyway. (See e-mail messages between Helena Kobrin and Tom
Klemesrud, dated December 31, 1994 and January 1, 1995 in Exhibit E
to Kobrin Dec.) 

----------

coupled with their actual copying of Erlich's infringements onto
their own disks to make them available for paying subscriber access
over extended periods, they have embroiled themselves in this
matter, and should be preliminarily enjoined from continuing their
activities.  In addition, as Erlich has, on February 26, 1995,
violated he TRO issued against him, and demonstrated that he did not
give up in the seizure all copies of the infringing works, the
question of exerting control over Erlich's postings is very much
alive and was not mooted by the seizure and TRO, as Netcom contended
in its opposition to the original injunction application.

     An injunction would not require Klemesrud and Netcom to make
decisions of what is infringement or what is fair use.  They have
been informed that Erlich is a repeat violator of plaintiffs'
copyrights.  He is under a TRO which he has already violated.  They
have the means to isolate his usage and terminate his access.  It is
their obligation to figure out what means they wish to use and to do
so pending the outcome of this litigation.

     Defendants' copying of plaintiffs' copyrighted literary works
violates federal copyright law, and the unauthorized disclosure of
the contents of the unpublished works violates RTC's rights under
California trade secrets laws as well.  Absent the issuance of the
injunction and impoundment orders requested, Erlich will continue
his unlawful actions and Klemesrud's and Netcom's unlawful copying
will also continue.  Plaintiffs accordingly request issuance of the
ex parte order to show cause re: preliminary injunction mandated
under these circumstances by Rules 64 and 65 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure./4/

----------
/4/     In support of their application, plaintiffs rely on the
declarations of Thomas M. Small, Warren McShane, Marilyn Pisani and
Helena K. Kobrin previously submitted with the Ex Parte Application
for TRO, and on the declarations of Dr. Kenneth R. Castleman, Dr.
Alfonso F. Cardenas, David Elrod, Andrew H. Wilson, Helena K.
Kobrin, and Lynn R. Farny submitted herewith.

----------

                  II.     FACTUAL STATEMENT

A.   Plaintiffs Have Demonstrated Their Exclusive Rights To
    Reproduce And Publish The Materials That Are The Subject Of
    This Application

    In the TRO applications and the accompanying declarations of
Warren McShane and Marilyn Pisani, plaintiffs have provided the
information showing their exclusive rights to reproduce and publish
the materials which are the subject of the complaint.  That
discussion is incorporated herein, and will not be repeated.

     One matter related to the trade secrets status of the Advanced
Technology requires clarification, however, in response to Netcom's
citation, in footnote 4 of its preliminary injunction opposition, to
Religious Technology Center v. Wollersheim, 796 F.2d 1076 (9th Cir.
1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1103 (1987).  Relying on that case,
Netcom claimed that the materials in Exhibit B to the complaint had
been ruled not to constitute trade secrets.  However, the Ninth
Circuit's ruling in Wollersheim did not so hold, as clarified later
in Religious Technology Center v. Scott, 869 F.2d 1306, 1309-10 (9th
Cir. 1989) ("RTC v. Scott").  There, the Ninth Circuit ruled that
the Advanced Technology could be protectable as trade secrets, as
long as RTC proved that there was economic advantage in keeping the
materials secret. Id.

     Applying that decision and analyzing all of the required trade
secrets factors, including economic advantage to RTC, the Southern
District of California held in 1 993 that the Advanced Technology
materials are trade secrets under Cal.Civ.Code SS 3426. 1, et seq.
and granted summary judgment accordingly, including damages and a
permanent injunction.  See Bridge Publications Inc. v. Vien, 827
F.Supp. 629, 633 (S.D.Cal. 1993), and cases cited therein.  Thus,
the right of plaintiff RTC to protect these materials against
unauthorized disclosure under California law is clear.

B.  Defendants Are Engaging In Unlawful Copying And Publishing Of
    Plaintiffs' Literary Work

     As detailed in the declarations of plaintiffs' witnesses and
the application for TRO, defendant Erlich has engaged in the
repeated unlawful copying of the protected works onto the Internet
through postings on a newsgroup, or public discussion group, known
as 'alt.religion.scientology" ("a.r.s.")/5/ Even though Erlich has 
----------

/5/     The list of Erlich's known infringements prior to filing of
the complaint and plaintiffs' steps to obtain his voluntary
cessation of infringing postings are detailed in the TRO application
and accompanying declarations and are incorporated here. 

----------

been subject to a TRO, and now an Amended TRO, with regard to his
postings, he has continued to violate plaintiffs' rights and the
Court's order.  On Sunday, February 26, 1995, Erlich posted to
a.r.s. the first item in Exhibit B to the complaint--the Class VIII
'Assists' tape--as to which he is specifically restrained by the
terms of both the original and amended TROs.

     Erlich's postings are made through a bulletin board service
('BBS") maintained by Klemesrud, who accesses the Internet via
Netcom's system, to which Klemesrud is a subscriber.  They include
both published literary works and unpublished confidential works of
L. Ron Hubbard, as listed in Exhibits A and B of the complaint.
Klemesrud and Netcom provide the gateway through which Erlich's
Internet access is achieved, but their participation in Erlich's
infringements is not limited to the passive carrier functions they
would have the Court believe.

     When Erlich accesses Klemesrud's BBS, the functions Erlich is
performing ar either saved directly to Klemesrud's computer, or
saved on Erlich's computer and the information then sent by him to
Klemesrud's computer, which in turn makes a copy of it.  In the
former situation, each time that Erlich presses a key on his
keyboard or downloads a file, that character or file is written onto
Klemesrud's computer, not Erlich's. (Castleman Dec., 11 8-10.) Thus,
Erlich's infringing postings may be generated directly on
Klemesrud's computer.  When Erlich posts a message to a Usenet
newsgroup such as alt.religion.scientology, he prepares it on his
personal computer or the BBS computer, and labels it for transfer to
the Netcom computer.  At the next preestablished time for transfer,
Klemesrud sends it on to the Netcom computer.  His action is
analogous to that of the bulletin board operator enjoined in Sega
Enterprises Ltd. v. MAPHIA, 857 F.Supp. 679, 683-684 (N.D.Cal.
1994), who stored unauthorized copies of Sega games on his BBS,
which were uploaded and downloaded by his users.

     The Erlich messages which travel to Netcom via Klemesrud's BBS
are stored on disk by Netcom's computer after they are received. 
The message headers are examined by Netcom's computer and routed on
individually to their destinations. (Castleman Dec., 11 22-27.) Once
they are so routed, Netcom's host computer also directs a copy of
that message to itself, or to a "news server" machine which is
maintained at that site, where it receives and stores a copy on
disk.  That message remains on Netcom's disk for several weeks
before it is deleted to make more room for new messages. Netcom
actually advertises that "several weeks' worth of messages from
"nearly 8000' newsgroups are stored for customer access on the disk
in the Netcom host.  This feature of their services, namely access
to these newsgroups, is promoted in Netcom's advertising as 'among
our more popular services.' (Castleman Dec., 11 25, 28, and Ex.  A,
at 4.)

     After it goes through Netcom to Usenet, the message also comes
back to Klemesrud's BBS, when the BBS picks up the new postings from
Usenet, and stays on the BBS for up to 72 hours. (Castleman Dec., 1
15; Klemesrud Dec., 1 23.)/6/

----------

/6/     References to Klemesrud Dec. are to his declaration filed at
the January 21,' 1995 hearing.  References to the Francis Dec. are
to the Declaration of Rick Francis filed with Netcom's opposition to
the preliminary injunction.

----------

     By maintaining these functions of their computers, Netcom and
Klemesrud are actively copying data, and in the case of Klemesrud's
BBS, may be creating the data on its disk.  Thus, when Erlich posts

his infringing messages, Klemesrud and Netcom are active
participants as copiers.  Until the filing of the complaint, those
postings known to plaintiffs consisted of 1 54 pages of copyrighted
materials.  The seizure revealed a total of over 200 instances of
infringements by Erlich, of which 90 went through Klemesrud's and
Netcom's systems, and were also stored in those systems for up to
three days and several weeks respectively.  And the February 26,
1995 eight-page posting by Erlich of the Class VIII 'Assists" tape
is another infringement of an unpublished, confidential work of the
same ilk in violation of the TRO, and also was stored in Netcom's
and Klemesrud's computers, as shown by the print-off of that
document filed with the contempt motion.  In fact, when Erlich's TRO
violation was brought to the attention of Klemesrud's attorney, he
responded by informing plaintiff's counsel that Klemesrud had
removed the violation from his BBS, thereby again admitting that he
has been holding Erlich's copyright infringements on his computer
for his subscribers to access. (Wilson Dec., 1 3.)

     Plaintiffs' notifications to defendants and their fruitless
efforts to obtain voluntary cooperation in eliminating Erlich's
infringements are detailed in the TRO application and supporting
declarations and exhibits, as are the details of how all copies of
the Advanced Technology possessed by Erlich are unauthorized and the
fruit of theft or misappropriation.  Those discussions are
incorporated herein.

     Defendants Klemesrud and Netcom were unwilling to take any
responsibility for dealing with the Erlich problem when their help
could have been provided to solve the one situation.  Now that they
have been included in this lawsuit as a result of their
unwillingness to apply Netiquette to this situation,/7/ they insist
that plaintiffs request

----------

/7/ Netcom has taken action to remove individuals from accessing
the Internet on other occasions, such as the much-publicized Canter
and Siegel case where two attorneys advertised on the Internet and
generated a flood of return mail, overloading the systems through
which it came.  In another case, the media reported that Netcom
disconnected the Christy Knife Co. of Fremont, Ohio for engaging in
prohibited commercial use of the Internet by advertising its
merchandise.  This action cut off access of the company and its
employees. (Elrod Declaration, 1 13.)

----------

relief which would cripple their ability to function.  The amended
language of the proposed OSC shows that the relief requested by way
of injunction is narrowly tailored and deals with the situation at
hand and any other known situations of which defendants are warned. 
Thus, it is narrowly focused and easy to implement, as discussed
below.  It does not require Klemesrud and Netcom to make
determinations of what is fair use or what is an infringement. 
Systems operators often act on complaint& of various sorts of
violations to enforce the usage rules and not make their systems a
party to unethical use. (See Castleman Dec. I 1 32-33; Cardenas
Dec., I 6-10, 16, 18-20; Elrod Dec., 11 9-12.)

    C.   Defendants Could and Should Easily Take Action To Prevent
         Erlich's Violations Without Overburdening Their Systems

    In opposing issuance of a preliminary injunction, Klemesrud
interposed arguments about being unable to prevent Erlich from
logging on under an assumed name, and claimed that he did not verify
the identity of his users, but he never claimed that he was unable
to stop Erlich's postings.  In fact, his declaration admits that he:
(1) knows that Erlich is a subscriber to his BBS; (2) is able to
delete individuals from using his system; (3) has excluded hate
groups and other objectionable groups from his system; (4) has asked
posters of 'offensive, distasteful, and inappropriate' remarks 'to
take their accounts elsewhere'; and (5) would delete materials
posted by Erlich if they are "wholesale copying of religious texts
in order to deprive the Church of Scientology of income.  "
Klemesrud's system easily permits him to take such actions as more
fully detailed in the declaration of Kenneth R. Castleman, at
paragraphs 29-32.  The available options include removing the person
from the system, limiting his access so he cannot access Usenet
newsgroups, denying posting privileges, eliminating a newsgroup
which has too many unlawful postings, and acting upon complaints of
property owners whose rights are being infringed by his subscriber. 
Yet Klemesrud has done none of the things which he claims he is able
and willing to do.

     As a matter of Internet "Netiquette," it is entirely
appropriate for Klemesrud, as the systems operator ('sysop') of a
BBS, to take action against a copyright infringer on his system.  In
practice, sysops of BBSes do so when necessary to prevent copyright
infringement, defamation, pornography, or other actions on their
systems which are illegal or tortious. (Castleman Dec., 11 32-33,
Elrod Dec., 11 9-1 1; Cardenas Dec. I 10.)

     The 'Rules and Regulations of Los Angeles Valley College
BBS'--the BBS run by Klemesrud--require no less.  His rules prohibit
'Personal attacks, harassment, threats, racial slurs/comments, lewd
messages etc.," as well as uploading of "bombs, viruses, etc." or
'copyrighted/pirated software," which are described as federal
offenses.  One remedy listed for violations is "dismissal of the
perpetrator from the board.' (Ex.  B to Castleman Dec., Rules and
Regulations of Los Angeles Valley College BBS No. 1 and 2.) Another
rule is that "Message writing privileges to public forums will only
be allowed after a donation is received, and the Sysop is satisfied
that the User will not break these rules, and/or all applicable
laws.' (Id., P 12 (emphasis supplied.)) By his own rules, Mr.
Klemesrud should be removing Mr. Erlich from his BBS, as Mr. Erlich
is both violating the BBS's rules and causing it to violate the
rules of its access providers, thereby jeopardizing Los Angeles
Valley College BBS, Netcom and the entire BBS community.  If he did
not want to remove him entirely, he could remove his message writing
privileges, leaving him with the ability to use other BBS services.
(Castleman Dec., P 32-33.)

     Where a user engages in unlawful postings, his immediate
service provider is obligated by Netiquette to deal with his
violations, first by warnings and ultimately denial of access, if
nothing else works.  Furthermore, where the immediate provider will
not deal with the problem, then the next provider up the line takes
on the obligation of doing so. (Castleman Dec., 91 34-36.) Thus, if
Klemesrud refuses, Netcom should take action itself.

     As discussed in footnote 6, Netcom has removed users in the
past for abuse of the Internet through its system.  There is no less
reason to do so here.  And doing so would be consistent with
Netcom's own Terms and Conditions for usage of its system.  In
paragraph 2.2 of the Terms and Conditions, Netcom prohibits posting
of copyrighted materials or distribution of such materials to
others.  Paragraph 7.3 of the Terms & Conditions provides that it is
unethical and possibly criminal to violate 'any of the NETCOM
conditions of use." It further states that users are expected to
report violations, which will be investigated and the "account in
question" may be suspended in the interim "to prevent further
possible unauthorized activity," with either cancellation of the
account or criminal prosecution of violators where applicable.

     The means of taking action is simple. Netcom's equipment runs
the UNIX operating systems software.  The programs available on that
software for handling USENET messages can easily be programmed to
identify individual users. (Castleman Dec., 11 35-36.)

     Any site running the UNIX operating system software on its
computer, whether Netcom or another of the millions of UNIX systems
in existence, can obtain and modify for its own needs, and use it to
handle the mail passing through its system in any way desired.  For
example, one simple modification would be to have the software
compare the To: and/or From: addresses of each message against a
stored list of blocked sources and destinations and delete any
message that produced a match.  This would likely take only a few
microseconds per message.  Other possibilities exist by virtue of
the protocols which Netcom's equipment is set up to use, per its own
literature. (Castleman Dec., 11 39-43.)

    The critical point is that various different uncomplicated
means exist for monitoring an infringer of whom defendants have been
informed.  Such a system could easily be used to identify Erlich and
block his postings altogether, as properly warranted by his threats
to ignore any court orders, and his subsequent February 26 posting
in clear violation of the original and amended TROS.

    D.   Absent An Injunction, There Is A Strong Likelihood That
         Defendants Will Continue To Make And Publish Unauthorized
         Copies Of The Copyrighted Materials

    Erlich has shown his total disregard for plaintiffs' rights,
and also has shown contempt for the power of the court in his
statement that: "No local government or court in the U.S. has the
power to tell me otherwise' and his violation of the TRO.  This
shows that defendant Erlich is likely to continue his infringing
conduct unless effectively restrained by this Court.  The failure of
Klemesrud and Netcom to prevent Erlich's access to the Internet and
their resultant infringing copying are components of the continuing
infringement, and they also should be restrained by this Court.

    III. DEFENDANTS NETCOM AND KLEMESRUD CAN BE FOUND LIABLE FOR
         COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

    Only two elements must be proven in a copyright infringement
action: ownership of a valid copyright and copying of the
copyrighted work.  Data East USA, Inc. v. Epyx.  Inc., 862 F.2d 204,
206 (9th Cir. 1988); Baxter v. MCA, Inc., 812 F.2d 421, 423 (9th
Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 954, 108 S.Ct. 346 (1987); M.
Nimmer, 3 Nimmer on Copyright S 13.01.

    The TRO application explains the rights of the copyright owner
to full protection under 17 U.S.C. S 201 (d) and plaintiffs' rights
as exclusive licensees to assert those rights.  It also details the
proper registration of the works on which suit was brought.

    No one, including defendant Erlich himself, has disputed that
Erlich made infringing copies.  Defendants' position is that they
did nothing but passively provide the line on which the
infringements passed.  As discussed above, this is not accurate. As
discussed below, Klemesrud's and Netcom's direct and contributory
infringement is remediable.

    A.   Defendants Are Guilty Of Direct Infringement

    Defendants Klemesrud and Erlich engaged in actual copying of
the copyrighted works.  They duplicated all or substantial portions
of numerous works onto disks in their computers where the data was
stored for periods of time ranging from a few minutes to several
weeks, thereby making them accessible to millions of Internet
subscribers who could become additional copiers.  The briefer time
periods are those in which the infringing postings were on
Klemesrud's or Netcom's disks to facilitate transmission to the
Internet (or in Klemesrud's case, to Netcom for retransmission to
the Internet). (See, Castleman Dec., 1 22, 27.) The longer time
period is the time in which the alt.religion.scientology newsgroup
containing the unauthorized copies remains resident on disks in
Netcom's or Klemesrud's systems for several weeks (Netcom), or up to
three days (Klemesrud). (See, Castleman Dec., 24, 28; Klemesrud
Dec., 1 26.)

    The conduct of defendants is wholesale and willful copying of
copyrighted materials subject to the special remedies of 17 U.S.C.
S 504(c)(2). Netcom admitted in its opposition to the preliminary
injunction at page 1 1, that:

    two federal courts have found that a BBS may be liable for
    direct copyright infringement, if it stores copyrighted
    material on its database and allows subscribers to download and
    copy the material without the permission of the copyright
    owner. Sega Enterprises Ltd. v. MAPHIA, 857 F.Supp. 679
    (N.D.Cal. 1994); Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Frena, 839
    F.Supp. 1552 (M.D.Fla. 1993).This is precisely what Klemesrud
    is doing and what Netcom is doing as well.

    By continuing to make infringing copies of literary works for
which United States copyright protection exists, defendants have
engaged in undeniable infringement of plaintiffs' rights as
exclusive licensees of the copyrights, in violation of the Copyright
Act, 17 U.S.C. S 101, et seq.

    B.   Defendants Are Guilty Of Contributory Infringement

    Under the Copyright Act, a party may be vicariously liable for
the infringing act of another '[w]hen the right and ability to
supervise coalesce with an obvious and direct financial interest in
the exploitation of copyrighted materials.' 3 Nimmer, Nimmer on
Copyright, S 12.04[A][1], p. 12-67 (1994) (quoting Shapiro,
Bernstein & Co. v. H.L. Green Co., 316 F.2d 304, 307 (2d Cir.
1963)).

    The cases which have been decided under this doctrine have one
major tenet in common: where the actor has the right and ability to
supervise the infringers' activities, then vicarious liability can
be found. See, e.g, Shapiro, supra, 316 F.2d at 307 (landlord liable
for sales of infringing works on his premises); Donaldson, Douglas
& Gumble, Inc. v. Terris, 37 U.S.P.Q. 39 (W.D. Pa. 1938) (owner of
orchestra hall vicariously liable for infringement by orchestra
despite not paying orchestra and notwithstanding contract granting
orchestra exclusive right to choose music); Famous Music Corp. v.
Bay State Harness Horse Racing & Breeding Assoc, Inc., 554 F.2d 1213
(1st Cir. 1977).

    In Sega Enterprises Ltd. v. MAPHIA, 857 F.Supp. 679 (N.D. Cal.
1994), the defendants ran a computer bulletin board on which were
posted unauthorized copies of copyrighted video game software owned
by Sega.  The court's decision arose from a motion for preliminary
injunction filed by Sega.

    The defendants encouraged users of their bulletin board to
upload Sega video games so that other users could download them for
their own personal use.  Those that uploaded games were provided
with free downloading privileges or other software; those that
wished to download games or other programs could 'pay' for this
privilege by purchasing other goods (such as software used to
translate the downloaded games) or services (such as the provision
of credit card numbers).

    The court found first that Sega owned valid copyrights in the
games which had been copied (Sega, p. 686), and the court stated
that "[o]ne who, with knowledge of the infringing activity, induces,
causes or materially contributes to the infringing conduct of
another,' may be held liable as a contributory infringer.' (Sega, at
686 (quoting Casella v. Morris, 820 F.2d 362, 365 (11th Cir. 1987);
Gershwin Publishing Corp. v. Columbia Artists Management, Inc., 443
F.2d 1 1 59, 1162 (2d Cir. 1971).

    Further, '[e]ven if Defendants do not know exactly when games
will be uploaded to or downloaded from the MAPHIA bulletin board,
their role in the copying, including provision of facilities,
direction, knowledge and encouragement, amounts to contributory
copyright infringement.' ($M, p. 686-687; citing Playboy
Enterprises, supra.) Based on the foregoing, the court found that
Sega was likely to succeed on the merits of its case.

    In this case, it is apparent that both Netcom and Klemesrud
have a significant financial interest in their respective services
being used by their subscribers.  They also provide facilities
through which the uploading and downloading of the infringing
materials occurs, and direction for Erlich's use of those facilities
and they have the right and ability to supervise those who subscribe
to their services.  These result from their subscription contracts
and from Netiquette.  Furthermore, it is clear that both Netcom and
Klemesrud have been informed of the infringing activities which have
taken place on the respective facilities which they provide. (First
Amended Complaint, 1 36.) Their unwillingness to take action against
Erlich's infringing postings after they have been so informed acts
as an encouragement to him to continue his illicit activities.  They
therefore have knowledge of the activities and have made the
conscious decision not to exercise their rights to prevent further
infringements in the future.  Based on the foregoing, both
defendants have met the standards necessary to be found liable for
contributory infringement.

    Netcom has premised its defense to this action on the ground
that it is a "massive transmitter of electronic information" and
that "public policy" does not countenance finding such providers
liable for copyright infringement.  By its own definition, however,
Netcom is not such a "passive transmitter." Specifically, Netcom has
stated: "Passive transmitters have no knowledge or control of the
content of communications that pass over their access lines.'
(Netcom's Memorandum in Opposition to Request for Injunctive Relief,
p. 7:19-21.) This statement is belied by the facts of this case.

    Netcom has been aware since December 1994 that Erlich has been
using its facilities to transmit protected materials onto the
Internet.  Moreover, as stated by Dr. Castleman, it is possible to
screen information flowing to Netcom from Klemesrud's BS for
materials which may be infringing. (Castleman Dec., 11 40-43.)
Furthermore, it is relatively simple for Netcom simply to scan
incoming messages for anything originating from Erlich and to block
all such messages.  Finally, Netcom has he unfettered right to
simply cut off Klemesrud's access to Netcom in order to prevent
further dissemination of copyrighted materials in violation of
Netcom's own Terms and Conditions.

    Unlike the telephone lines to which it wishes to analogize
itself, Netcom is not regulated by the government nor is it required
to provide services to anyone who requests such services. See Sarah
B. Deutsch, "Superliability on the Superhighway?," The Multimedia
Law Report, at 5 (November 1994) ("[telephone service] is subject to
FCC regulation and telephone companies must provide the service as
regulated common carriers on an equal access, non-discriminatory
basis to all consumers").  Instead, Netcom is just one of many
unregulated, private enterprises which provides its paying customers
access to the Internet.

    Contrary to Netcom's assertion, it is not simply a 'passive"
participant in the Internet.  Its computers are programmed with
considerable software which allow it to sort out the information it
receives, store it in particular places, identify that which it does
not wish to store, track the usage of its subscribers, etc., in
addition to copying the infringing materials in the Usenet
newsgroups to its own disks for all of its customers to access. 
Since Netcom is able to cut off a single user if that user fails to
pay the prescribed subscriber fees, it similarly is capable of
cutting off a user who violates the law."/8/

----------

/8/   The argument that Erlich could move to another access provider
or change his sign-on name misses the point.  Plaintiffs are not
asking this Court to find Netcom and Klemesrud liable for Erlich's
unidentified or future acts on other services, they simply are
seeking to force the defendants to cease providing the means for
Erlich's infringing activities.

----------

     Netcom's reliance on Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios,
Inc., 464 U.S. 417 (1984) is misplaced.  In So@n , the Supreme Court
refused to find the manufacturer of video cassette recorders liable
for the infringing activities of the purchasers of those tapes. 
Because the purchasers' use of the tapes was beyond the control of
the manufacturer, however, the Supreme Court held that it would be
inappropriate to find the manufacturer vicariously liable for
copyright infringement.

     Here, however, Netcom and Klemesrud maintain complete control
over the use of their facilities.  They make the decisions as to who
uses their computers, what resources are available on those
computers, and what information is passed from their computers to
others.  Unlike video cassette tapes, where the tapes are used in
the privacy of the user's home, here the copies are made available
to millions of computers around the world.

     As there is no rational reason for distinguishing between the
BBS operator in $M and the BBS operator and access provider here,
liability should be imposed on both Klemesrud and Netcom for
contributory infringement due to their knowing and continuing
contribution to the infringing activities of Erlich.

    IV.  PLAINTIFFS ARE ENTITLED TO A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ON ALL
         CAUSES OF ACTION

    Defendants do not dispute the availability of injunctive relief
under the section 502(a) of the Copyright Act, only its availability
as applied to them under the circumstances herein.

    In the Ninth Circuit, a party seeking preliminary injunctive
relief must show: '(1) a likelihood of success on the merits and the
possibility of irreparable injury or (2) the existence of serious
questions going to the merits and the balance of hardships tipping
in its [the copyright owner's] favor." Apple Computer, Inc. v.
Formula Int'l, Inc., 725 F.2d 521, 523 (9th Cir. 1984); Beltran v.
Myers , 677 F.2d 1317, 1320 (9th Cir. 1982); Aleknagik Natives, Ltd.
v. Andra, 648 F.2d 496, 502 (9th Cir. 1980).  The two standards
actually are not separate tests but are the 'outer reaches' of a
single continuum such that the greater the balance of hardships tips
in favor of the moving party, the less likelihood of success on the
merits need be shown.  Apple Computer, Inc. v. Formula lnt'l.  Inc.,
562 F.Supp. 775, 783 (C.D. Cal. 1983) aff'd 725 F.2d 521 (9th Cir.
1984); Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum v. NFL, 634 F.2d 1197, 1201
(9th Cir. 1980).

    In fact, because the defendants here were put on notice that
the infringements were occurring, and they were warned of possible
litigation if they took no action, there should be no balancing of
harm in this situation.  Where a defendant acts with full knowledge
of the plaintiff's rights and with an understanding of the
consequences which might ensue, no balancing of equities is to be
made.  Epstein Family Partnership v. KMART Corp., 13 F.3d 762, 765
(3rd Cir. 1994); Warsaw v. Chicago Metallic Ceilings, Inc., 35
Cal.3d 564, 573; Morgan v. Veach, 59 Cal.App.2d 682, 690, 139 P.2d
976, 980 (1943); People ex rel.  Younger v. F.E. Crites, Inc., 51
Cal.App.3d 961, 968, 124 Cal.Rptr. 664, 668 (1975)/9/ Not only did
defendants refuse to take action after being put on notice, they
also refused to enforce their own regulations.

----------

/9/   In Warsaw, the court particularly noted that the defendants
had taken action in violation of the plaintiffs' rights even after
the litigation was filed, putting them on notice.  The court found
that: '[d]efendant gambled on the outcome of the action and lost.'
It therefore would be required to remove buildings at its own
expense, even though it argued that it had relied on the denial of
a preliminary injunction in erecting the structures. Id. at 573,
576, 199 Cal.Rptr. at 777, 780.  Defendants here would therefore do
well to strike a more cooperative attitude at the onset of this
litigation.

----------

    Here, the Court found, in denying the earlier application for
preliminary injunction as to defendants Klemesrud and Netcom, that
plaintiffs had 'not established a sufficient continuing threat of
irreparable harm or a probability of success on the merits,' and
that 'the threat of harm to those defendants and the public
outweighs any further threat of harm to plaintiffs, particularly in
light of the seizure order and the continuing TRO against defendant
Erlich.' (Amended TRO, at 1-2.)

    In making these findings, however, the Court was relying on
incomplete and inaccurate facts, and did not know that defendant
Erlich was about to violate the TRO.  As plaintiffs will demonstrate
below, the threat of irreparable harm is indeed continuing, as
graphically illustrated by defendant Erlich's violation of the TRO
by copying an unpublished, confidential work which was one of the
documents as to which seizure was ordered, and defendants' own
copying of that document (and Erlich's other infringing postings) to
remain captive in their systems for their customers' access. 
Furthermore, because: (1) the solutions which can be implemented by
Klemesrud and Netcom to deal with the problem are simple,
inexpensive, and not time-consuming; (2) plaintiffs have
demonstrated prime facie ownership of the copyrights in question;
and (3) these defendants have engaged in direct and contributory
infringement, there is a probability of success on the merits, and
the threat of harm to defendants and the public is minimal.  In
contrast, the threat of harm to plaintiffs from continual postings
by the renegade Erlich is great and real.

    A.   Plaintiffs Have Established A Likelihood Of Success On The
         Merits Of Each Cause Of Action

    Ownership of the copyrighted works has been clearly established
in the TRO application and supporting declarations and exhibits and
will not be separately addressed here.  Because plaintiffs, as
exclusive licensees, are entitled 'to all of the protection and
remedies accorded the copyright owner by this title,' [17 U.S.C. S
201 (d)], they are likely to prevail at trial on the direct and
contributory infringements.

    B.   Plaintiffs Will Be Irreparably Inured If Defendant Is Not
         Preliminarily Enjoined

    As a general rule, if the holder of the copyright establishes
a probability of success on the merits, a court will presume
irreparable harm. Apple Computer, supra, 725 F.2d at 525. ("A
showing of a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits in a
copyright infringement claim raises a presumption of irreparable
harm."); Wainwright Sec. v. Wall Street Transcript Co., 558 F.2d 91,
94 (2nd Cir. 1977), cert den., 434 U.S. 1014, 98 S.Ct. 730 (1978)
("[I]f probable success -- a prima facie case of copyright
infringement -- can be shown, the allegations of irreparable injury
need not be very detailed, because such injury can normally be
presumed when a copyright is infringed.").

    In U-Haul International, Inc. v. Jartran, Inc., 522 F.Supp.
1238, 1255 (D.Ariz. 1981), affd, 681 F.2d 1 1 59 (9th Cir. 1982), a
case under the Lanham Act involving false and deceptive advertising,
the court found irreparable injury without any proof of actual
injury.  The Court noted:

    [i]njury sometimes occurs whose measure is uncertain and a
    threat of injury may be quite real even though the measure of
    threatened injury defies calculation. . . . Indeed, one reason

    for issuing an injunction may be that damages, being
    immeasurable, will not provide a remedy at law.

id. at 1255-56 (quoting Treasure Valley Potato Bargaining Ass'n v. 
Ore-Ida Foods, Inc., 497 F.2d 203, 218 (9th Cir. 1974), Mr . denied,
419 U.S. 999, 95 S.Ct. 314 (1974)) (emphasis added).

    Defendant Netcom argued in its opposition to a preliminary
injunction that there was no irreparable harm because Erlich's
materials had been seized and his infringements were thus disabled. 
Any possible merit of that argument was eviscerated with Erlich's
posting on February 26, 1995--post-seizure--of the Class VIII
'Assists' tape transcript, which is an unpublished work listed in
Exhibit B to the complaint, of which a copy on disk was seized
pursuant to the Writ of Seizure.

    Here, the danger of irreparable injury is even greater than in
the usual case, because Erlich continued his infringements in
disregard of the Court's orders.  He copied not only published works
available for purchase, but also unpublished works, and did so over
an international computer network which potentially exposes the
infringements to 25-35 million users, with the attendant risk that
the works could be copied and recopied virtually without limit. 
Defendants Klemesrud and Netcom are themselves engaging in such
copying by their storage of the postings on their computers for
days.  Plaintiffs have no control over copying by defendants and
others, and that lack of control constitutes irreparable injury
sufficient to support the issuance of a preliminary injunction.

    C.   The Equities Weigh Heavily In Favor Of Granting The Prior
         Injunction

    In this case, all equitable considerations lie on the side of
plaintiffs and weigh heavily in favor of granting a preliminary
injunction.  If relief is denied, plaintiffs will continue to suffer
inevitable and irreparable harm, both under the law and in fact, as
a result of the violation of plaintiffs' exclusive rights to
publication of the copyrighted works in question, including the
unpublished confidential works which are never published or sold to
anyone.  The events occurring in the short time since the case was
filed demonstrate this to be true.  If either Netcom or Klemesrud
had taken the responsibility of warning Erlich and then taking him
off if he refused to refrain from posting copyrighted materials, his
continued infringement in violation of the TRO could never have
occurred, and in fact, this suit would never have been filed against
them.

    Even if defendants could show any harm as a result of the
requested injunctive relief, such harm should not enter into the
Court's consideration.  Defendants were put on notice that the
infringements were occurring and chose to take no action to prevent
them.  Therefore, no balancing of equities need be made.  Epstein
Family Partnership, supra, 13 F.3d 765, Morgan v. Veach, supra, 59
Cal.App.2d at 690, 139 P.2d at 980.  Furthermore, it is difficult to
conceive how defendants could possibly demonstrate harm where they
are merely being asked to enforce their own rules and maintain
appropriate Netiquette.

    Despite their protestations to the contrary, defendants were on
notice of Erlich's specific postings, and did nothing to get him to
stop.  They obviously acted with notice of the copyrighted nature of
the literary works, both from the copyright notices on those works
in many instances and plaintiffs' letters, e-mail, and verbal
communications with them.  Their copying is clearly intentional and
without justification.

    Plaintiffs are not attempting to enjoin defendants Klemesrud
and Netcom generally, but only with respect to Erlich and other
known infringers of whose infringements they have been notified. 
The scope of the proposed injunction language has been revised
accordingly.  The problem of other known infringers is by no means
hypothetical.  The First Amended Complaint describes postings of
some of the copyrighted, unpublished, confidential materials listed
in Exhibit B to the complaint on February 25, 1995 by an individual
named Grady Ward, who is Netcom's direct subscriber. Netcom's
attorney was put on notice of these postings by their subscriber. 
In spite of the fact that it has previously stated it would take
action to deal with direct subscribers engaged in such
infringements, which is consistent with its own Terms and Conditions
and its prior disconnection of other abusers, it has taken a week to
respond to counsel's letter, and agreed then to do something, only
if provided with the copyright registrations. (Kobrin Dec. 11 2-3.)
Netcom has had these registrations since it was served with the
Complaint, since these postings were some of the same materials
included in Exhibit B to the Complaint and, in addition, copyright
protection is afforded material without being registered with the
Copyright Office.  A court order is needed to force these defendants
to comply with the law.

                             V. CONCLUSION

    Klemesrud and Netcom have far more involvement and culpability
in this copyright infringement case than they led the Court to
believe in their initial briefing related to the preliminary
injunction.  Their infringements are both contributory and direct,
in light of their copying of the infringing postings into their own
computers for customer access over periods of multiple days and the
initial creation of Erlich's infringements on Klemesrud's computer. 
The Court cannot take a complacent approach to these defendants on
the theory that Erlich has been restrained and his infringing
materials seized, since he has actually continued his infringing
postings in spite of the TRO, and his attempted apology is useless
to undo the damage, even if it is sincere, which is doubtful. 
Erlich's means of continuing to infringe and defendants' own
infringements must be stopped pending the conclusion of this litigation, so
that plaintiffs' rights can be maintained as they
were at the outset and not further trampled by defendants.

Dated: March 6, 1995         Respectfully submitted,

                             Andrew H. Wilson
                             WILSON, RYAN & CAMPILONGO                    

                             Thomas M. Small
                             Janet A. Kobrin
                             SMALL, LARKIN & KIDDE

                             -and-

                             Helena K. Kobrin

                                    /s/ [Helena K. Kobrin]

                                    Attorneys for Plaintiff        
                                    RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER and 
                                    BRIDGE PUBLICATIONS, INC.

                        STATEMENT OF ISSUES

    The principal issue presented by this application is whether
the action of defendants Klemesrud and Netcom in infringing
plaintiffs' copyrights in published and unpublished, confidential
religious scriptures warrant the issuance of an order to show cause
why a preliminary injunction should not be issued requiring the
defendants to cease and desist from infringing plaintiffs' rights
under the federal copyright laws by making unauthorized
reproductions of copyrighted works on the Internet network or other
databases, and from violating RTC's rights under California trade
secrets laws by copying unauthorized copies of confidential works of
L. Ron Hubbard onto that network's database.  A related issue is
whether those actions entitle plaintiffs to an order impounding the
infringing materials and the articles by which unauthorized copies
have been reproduced.

Xref: utcsri alt.religion.scientology:40848
Path: utcsri!newsflash.concordia.ca!canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca!tribune.usask.ca!news.sasknet.sk.ca!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!news.bc.net!vanbc.wimsey.com!scipio.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!pipex!peernews.demon.co.uk!support.com!tom.klemesrud
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: [email-masked] (tom.klemesrud)
Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150
X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.29
Subject: Plaintiffs' Reply re Contempt
X-Posting-Host: uucp4.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 1995 16:16:47 +0000
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Lines: 586

                                             

     _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/   _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
     _/  Tom Klemesrud, Sysop      _/   _/  L.A. Valley College BBS   _/
     _/  [email-masked] _/   _/  FidoNet 1:102/837   KoX   _/
     _/  [email-masked]          _/   _/  North Hollywood, CA USA   _/
     _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/   _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Andrew H. Wilson 
WILSON, RYAN & CAMPILONGO 
115 Sansome Street Fourth Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104 (415) 391-3900

Thomas M. Small
Janet Kobrin
SMALL, LARKIN, & KIDDE
10940 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1800
Los Angeles, California 90024-3945
(310) 209-4400

Helena K. Kobrin
7629 Fulton Avenue
North Hollywood, CA 91605
(213) 960-1933

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs,
 RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER and
 BRIDGE PUBLICATIONS, INC.

                   UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER, a     ) CASE NO.  C95-20091 RMW
California non-profit corporation; ) 
and BRIDGE PUBLICATIONS, INC., a   ) PLAINTIFFS' REPLY IN 
California non-profit corporation, ) SUPPORT OF ORDER TO SHOW 
                                   ) CAUSE RE CONTEMPT
               Plaintiffs,         ) 
                                   )
       vs                          )
                                   )
NETCOM ON-LINE COMMUNICATION       ) DATE:  March 17, 1995
SERVICES, INC., a Delaware         ) TIME:  9:00 am
corporation; DENNIS ERLICH, an     ) CTRM:  Hon. Ronald M.
individual; and TOM KLEMESRUD, an  )         Whyte
individual, dba CLEARWOOD DATA     )
SERVICES,                          )
                                   )  
               Defendants.         )
                                   )
___________________________________)

                        TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE                                                       PAGE

I.  INTRODUCTION......................................         1

II.  DENNIS ERLICH IS NOT AN INNOCENT VIOLATOR OF THE TRO      2

     A.   Erlich's Long-Existing Confidentiality
          Obligations............                              3

     B.   The Court's Warnings to Erlich at the
          Hearing..............                                4

     C.   Erlich's Contemptuous Statements About the Court,
          the Case, and His Intended Violations...........     5

     D.   Mr. Erlich Has a History of Violating Court
          Orders...........                                    7

III. ERLICH HAS VIOLATED THE CLEAR ORDER OF THIS COURT.......  8

IV.  THE SANCTIONS REQUESTED ARE REASONABLE AND
     APPROPRIATE.......................................       11

V.   CONCLUSION........................................       12

                       TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
CASES                                                       PAGE

Armstrong v. Executive Office of President,
1 F.3d 1274 (D.C. Cir. 1993...........                        11 
Fonar Corp. v. Deccaid Services, Inc.,
983 F.2d 427 (2d Cir. 1993), cert. denied 62 U.S.L.W.
3273............                                              10

In re Dual-Deck Video Cassette Antitrust Litigation,
10 F.3d 693 (9th Cir. 1993)................................ 8, 9

Karim-Panahi v. Los Angeles Police Dept.,
839 F. 2d 621 (9th Cir. 1988)....................             10

Project B.A.S.I.C. v. Kemp.
947 F.2d 1 1 (1st Cir. 1991)......................            11

Rinehart v. Brewer,
483 F.Supp. 165 (S.D. Iowa 1980)..................             9

Spallone v. United States,
493 U.S. 265, 110 S.Ct. 625 (1990)...............          11,12

Vertex Distributing v. Falcon Foam Plastics, Inc.,
689 F.2d 885 (9th Cir. 1982)......................             9


                         I.  INTRODUCTION
     The Opposition filed by defendant Erlich's now counsel
attempts to whitewash' Erlich's clearly contemptuous behavior as
the simple errors of an innocent "soapbox" satirist or critic who
has been victimized by the plaintiffs in his litigation in order
to silence his criticism.  Implicit in the Opposition is the
suggestion that this Court has contributed to plaintiffs'
"nefarious campaign" against Mr. Erlich, first by ordering the
seizure of unauthorized copies of plaintiffs' materials in
Mr. Erlich's possession by law enforcement officers other than a
U.S. Marshall, and then by issuing a Temporary Restraining Order
("TRO") that was defectively unspecific or indefinite.  Erlich's
conclusion is that the Court should excuse his disobedience of
the Court's orders as a reasonable interpretation of hose orders
made in good faith, and in any event cured by Mr. Erlich's
apology to he Court./1/
----------
/1/   It should be noted that Mr. Erlich's February 27 apology
was only issued after hand service on Mr. Erlich of a letter
stating plaintiffs' intention to file a motion for contempt.

----------
     Mr. Erlich's counsel would exonerate Erlich by casting
plaintiffs as the culprits and Mr. Erlich as the victim.  The
Court should not be misled by this twisting of the truth.
     In fact, plaintiffs' action against Mr. Erlich is directed
solely to his violations of plaintiffs' intellectual property
rights, under both the copyright and trade secrets laws, and
measures taken in this case are strictly in accordance with those
laws and established procedures followed by other courts in
similar circumstances.
     Mr. Erlich's behavior has been anything but innocent.  He
repeatedly, (1) violated plaintiffs' intellectual property
rights; (2) refused to take any action to cease his violations
once warned; (3) stated that no court could stop his actions; and
(4) dared plaintiffs to sue him for his violations.  Once suit
was filed, he flouted the Court's Orders by his further posting
of an unpublished, confidential work on February 26, 1995.  The
Court's orders were clear and unambiguous, as initially issued,
as clarified at the February 21 hearing, and as later modified,
and Mr. Erlich knew full well that the work he posted on February
26 was one within he scope of the orders.  His accompanying
statement made it clear that he knew, and also that he had no
legitimate purpose for his publication -- he was motivated only
by malice against plaintiffs and his declared defiance of the
Court's authority./2/
----------
/2/   As a former Church of Scientology staff member, Mr. Erlich
also knew over a dozen years ago that the material he posted in
violation of the TRO was an unpublished work, always treated with
utmost confidentiality by plaintiff Religious Technology Center
("RTC") and its licensees.  Even without the TRO, he was well
familiar with the perpetual confidentiality obligations imposed
upon his access to those materials while a staff member because
he had read confidentiality policies and agreed to be bound by
them.  It was only after doing so that he was allowed access to
those materials.  (McShane Dec., Feb. 24, 1995,  7-10.)

----------
     Finally, Erlich's legal arguments do not excuse such a
direct and flagrant violation of the Court's orders.  The
material facts here are beyond dispute, and establish a clear and
intentional act by Mr. Erlich in violation of the TROs.  The
Court should hold Mr. Erlich In contempt and impose the
reasonable and appropriate sanctions sought by plaintiffs to
enforce the Court's authority and impress upon Mr. Erlich that he
must not flout the Court's orders in the future.  A the hearing
on the application for writ of seizure, the Court declined to
order seizure of Mr. Erlich's computer, and stated that It would
hold Mr. Erlich in contempt if he violated the seizure order.  He
should now be found in contempt and the impoundment of his
computer should be ordered, in addition to the other entirely
reasonable sanctions requested.
    II.  DENNIS ERLICH IS NOT AN INNOCENT VIOLATOR OF THE TRO
     Numerous facts establish that defendant Erlich is no
innocent violator of the TRO:
     A.   Erlich's Long-Existing Confidentiality Obligations
     Erlich's admissions that he is a former Church of
Scientology staff member who studied the confidential Scientology
scriptures in that capacity underscore that he knew he was
violating plaintiffs' rights in the materials.  Any Scientologist
who qualifies to receive and is given access to its confidential
Advanced Technology scriptures must study specific documents
describing the confidentiality the materials and the required
security measures and agree to maintain such measures himself,
before being permitted access to any Advanced Technology. 
(McShane Dec., Feb. 24, 1995,  8.)  A copy of the pertinent
non-confidential portions of Erlich's NED for OTs ("NOTs")
Advanced Courses Specialist Checksheet, bearing his signature
throughout, is Exhibit D to the February 24 declaration of Warren
McShane.  The portions of that checksheet which are attached to
the declaration show that Erlich had to study a policy which
required specific security measures to obtain access to Advanced
Technology./3/
----------
/3/   Other such policies are required to be studied as part of
other confidential courses which Mr. Erlich studied.  (E.g.,
McShane Dec., March 16, 1995,  3, and Ex. A and B.)  Erlich
would never have had access to these documents without agreeing to
confidentiality.  (McShane Dec., Feb. 24, 1995,  8.)
          Mr. Erlich also signed a staff contract, Exhibit F to the
February 24 declaration of Warren McShane, by which he bound himself to abide
by the Church's "administrative, ecclesiastical, moral and ethical policies,
rules, norms, and practices . . ."  Those policies include these
confidentiality policies.  These all establish his knowledge of what he was
doing.

----------
     Contrary to Erlich's implication that It is his right to use these
materials as part of his alleged "ministry," any right that Erlich might have
had to use the confidential scriptures in connection with functions as a
Scientology minister were terminated when he was expelled from the Church, and
never included the right to publicly disseminate the materials.  (McShane
Dec., February 20, 1995,  13.)
     B.   The Court's Warnings to Erlich at the Hearing
     In contrast to the attempts of Mr. Erlich's counsel to cast his
violation as the suit of ambiguity in the Court's remarks at the February 21
hearing, those marks were crystal clear as to Mr. Erlich's obligations. 
First, there could be no doubt that Mr. Erlich was subject to the original TRO
until it was amended:
          MR. ERLICH: . . . is there currently a restraining order on me or
     a temporary restraining order?

          THE COURT:  There was one that was issued initially and that will
     be modified forthwith.

          MR. ERLICH: Has it -- does it lapse?  Does it lapse until the
     modification?

          THE COURT:  No.  It stays in effect until the modification.
(Transcript, at 33:15-23.)/4/  Common sense dictates that, having ----------
/4/   References to "Transcript" are to the transcript of the February 21,
1995 hearing which is attached as an exhibit to defendant Erlich's opposition
to the Order to Show Cause.

---------
been so formed, Erlich's proper course was to continue to comply with the
original TRO until he saw the amended one.  Furthermore, the provisions in the
original and amended TROs on the point of disclosure of the unpublished
confidential works identically prohibit all disclosure of the materials listed
in Exhibit B to the complaint.  Any claim that he did not know what acts were
prohibited is entirely specious.
     Second, the Court's remarks, including those quoted in Mr. Erlich's
Opposition at 3:19-21, show that the Court intended "to prohibit any
publication of confidential material," while prohibiting publication of other
copyrighted material "that was not that which is fair criticism or comment or
fair use."  (Transcript, et 30:23-31:2, as quoted in Erlich's opposition at
3:19-21 (emphasis supplied)).
     Third, on the fair use point, the Court also stated that:
     The concern I have is that what the application indicated . . .
     was that what you were doing was publishing verbatim large
     portions of copyrighted materials . . .  That's what I don't want
     to have happen.
(Transcript, at 34:14-21.)  Mr. Erlich's unequivocal response was: 
"Absolutely not"  (Transcript, at 34:22).  He was obviously intending to
convince the Court he would comply with the TRO, when he in fact had no
intention to comply, and violated it a mere five days later, as plaintiffs had
predicted he would do at the hearing on their Application for Writ of Seizure. 
The Court could not have been clearer that Mr. Erlich was to err on the side
of caution:
          MR. ERLICH:  Am I likely to get raided again, in other words, if I
     post a paragraph of some of the works that they seem to think are in
     question?

          THE COURT:  Well, I'm not sure that I would recommend that you go
     out and you publish verbatim large portions of protected works, if
     that's what your question is.

          MR. ERLICH:  Comment on?

          THE COURT:  You know, if you want to comment on what's happened in
     court or comment on something where you're not revealing either
     information that's trade secret or copying large portions of copyrighted
     material, you know, that's something that you're entitled to do, but I
     would be careful.

          MR. ERLICH:  Yes, Your Honor, I will be.
(Transcript, at 35:5-17 (emphasis supplied)).
     Thus, any contention that even as a pro se party, Mr. Erlich was not on
notice of his obligations, is absurd.  Ignorance is no excuse, and there was
no ignorance here.  Erlich posted eight pages of unpublished, confidential
material.  Prohibition of its disclosure was clearly conveyed by paragraph 2
of each of the TROs.  Mr. Erlich cannot claim his posting was fair use; indeed
it was not even "use."  It was nothing more than malicious copying and
disclosure of the materials.  Erlich should therefore be held accountable for
his violation of the Court's order.
     C.   Erlich's Contemptuous Statements About the Court, the Case, and
          His Intended Violations
     Mr. Erlich's lack of innocence is also highlighted by his remarks
outside of the Court's presence.  Prior to the commencement of this
litigation, Mr. Erlich stated that:  "No local government or court in the U.S.
has the power to tell" him to stop his infringing postings of plaintiffs'
materials.  (Ex. F to Kobrin Dec. filed in support of Application for TRO). 
His recent actions show that his statement is becoming a self-fulfilling
prophecy, and his posted comments on alt.religion.Scientology show his
contumacious attitude towards the Court, his intention to continue his
activities, and his view that the current proceedings are just a temporary
inconvenience.  His comments are in marked contrast to the feigned respect and
compliant attitude Mr. Erlich puts on for the Court's view.
     Mr. Erlich's most direct, post-complaint statement reflecting his same
pre-complaint attitude was made on March 10, 1995:
     I have my own religion, thank you.  Don't want followers, devotees
     or paritioners [sic].  I do want to be free to preach as I see
     fit.  The US government and the courts thereof have not been
     granted the right to tell me I can't.  Ain't their bizness [sic].
(Ex. C to McShane Dec.)
     Most recently, Mr. Erlich has announced his intention to resume his
postings shortly.  When copies of the materials in question in this case were
requested by another poster on alt.religion.Scientology, Erlich responded: 
"Give me a couple of weeks, til this is over.  Then I'll be happy to post it
again." (McShane Dec., March 16, 1995,  5, and Ex. D.)  Also with respect to
those works, on March 13, Mr. Erlich posted the following on the Internet:
     I certainly do not believe that RTC has ownership of those
     materials.  If they can convince a judge that they do, I'll still
     have fair use rights to criticize and quote them in the context of
     discussion.

     You scienos take the position that there is no such thing as fair
     use of the Oat Tea material and embarrassing internal
     documents./5/

     Tough position.  Learn to fall back early.  It'll hurt less.
(Ex. E to McShane Dec.)  This statement was made after Mr. Erlich ----------
/5/   The term "scienos" is Mr. Erlich's derogatory expression for
Scientologists.  "Oat tea" is a derogatory reference to the confidential
unpublished Advanced Technology materials, which are sometimes called "O.T."
materials.  O.T. stands for operating thetan, which means the spiritual being
able to function apart from a body.  The Class VIII materials which Erlich
posted are O.T. materials.

----------
zprofessed to realize in his apology letter that his posting had violated the
Court's TRO because the confidential materials were not subject to the fair
use exception.  His remarks demonstrate the utter deceit in his letters to the
Court.
     A representative sampling of other statements made by Mr. Erlich in
earlier postings also demonstrate his true lack of respect for the Court and
its pronouncements, and his intent to ridicule whatever happens in this case:
     1.   In a February 16 posting, Mr. Erlich referred to the Court's Writ
of Seizure as a "bogus court order," and his conduct since the imposition of
the TRO reflects that opinion.  (McShane Dec., March 16, 1995,  8 and Ex.
F.)
     2.   Regarding his response to plaintiffs' February 24 filing regarding
the seized infringing materials, on February 24, Mr. Erlich stated:
     I will have to respond to whatever bs they submit by next Friday
     when the judge will rule on continuing or dropping the Temporary
     Restraining Order, which is preventing me from doing exactly
     nothing that I already was not doing in the first place.
(McShane Dec., March 16 1995,  9 and Ex. G.)
     This posting belies Mr. Erlich's apology to the court and proves that on
February 24, he knew he was subject to the TRO.
     3.   On February 28, 1995, a day after his apology was written to the
Court, Mr. Erlich posted the following statement:
     And from the judges [sic] Amended TRO he seems to think it's just
     "business as usual" to allow my enemies into my house, into my
     private files, to copy, delete and cart off anything they want.
(McShane Dec., March 16, 1995,  9 and Ex. H.)
     4.   And finally, one of the more telling remarks by Mr. Erlich as to
false facade he is presenting to the Court was made on March 9, 1995:
     Alas.  I will probably not get to expound on my theories of
     existence before a Federal Judge.  Probably the better for me,
     though.  I'd undoubtedly crack wise and get in some kinda trouble.
(Ex. I to McShane Dec., March 16, 1995.)
     D.   Mr. Erlich Has a History of Violating Court Orders
     Erlich's violation of the TRO was not the first time he has violated
Court orders.  While plaintiffs would prefer not to bring up other matters,
the Court should be informed that Mr. Erlich is not the self-righteous
minister he professes to be, and that he has shown a lack of respect for Court
orders previously.
     On January 23, 1985, the Superior Court for the County of San Diego
issued a judgment of divorce between Mr. Erlich and his wife.  Mr. Erlich was
ordered to pay $200.00 per month for support of their minor child, who was
then five years old.  (Declaration of Rosa Erlich Munsey,  2 and 26.)  In a
recent declaration, Mr. Erlich's ex-wife stated that, with the exception of a
total of $500.00 paid in 1985-1986, Mr. Erlich has never paid any child
support pursuant to that order.  (Declaration of Rosa Erlich Munsey,  26.)
     The nine-year violation of the 1985 court order, continuing to this
date, is strong evidence that Mr. Erlich will continue his activities
unabated, if the Court does not utilize its contempt powers against him.
     III.  ERLICH HAS VIOLATED THE CLEAR ORDER OF THIS COURT
     Erlich attempts to excuse his violation of this Court's TRO by arguing
that the Order was ambiguous and that, since he was not represented by
counSEl, he did not understand it.  As set forth above, the facts belie
Erlich's claimed lock of knowledge.  Moreover, his position finds no support
in the law of this Circuit.
     Fundamentally, civil contempt "consists of a party's disobedience to a
specific and definite court order by failure to take all reasonable steps
within the party's power to comply."  In re Dual-Deck Video Cassette Antitrust
Litigation, 10 F.3d 693, 695 (9th Cir. 1993) (cited by Erlich sub nom.
Go-Video, Inc. v. Motion Picture Assoc. of America).  The only issues
presented by Erlich are whether this Court's Order was clear and whether he
understood it.  Plaintiffs submit that both issues must be answered in the
affirmative.
     In its February 10, 1995, Order, this Court restrained Erlich, inter
alia,
     From disclosing or displaying, or causing to be disclosed or
     displayed, any portion of the unpublished confidential works
     identified in Exhibit B to the Complaint, or of any other work
     that is part of the Advanced Technology.
(February 10, 1995, Temporary Restraining Order, at 3:23-26.)  The Amended TRO
contains the same language as to Exhibit B.  Nothing could be clearer.
     It is correct that, "where the language of [an order] is too vague, it
cannot be enforced."  Vertex Distributing v. Falcon Foam Plastics, Inc., 689
F.2d 885, 889 (9th Cir. 1982).  Thus, "if a defendant's action 'appears to be
based on a good faith and reasonable interpretation of [the court's order],'
he should not be held in contempt.' Id. (quoting Rinehart v. Brewer, 483
F.Supp. 165, 171 (S.D. Iowa 1980)).  The emphasis In the analysis of this
defense, however, is on the "good faith" of the party's interpretation of the
Court's Order./6/  Try as he might, Erlich's 
----------
/6/   The "good faith" defense relates only to the party's interpretation of
the Order, not his intent.  "[T]here is no good faith exception to the
requirement of obedience to a court order."  Dual-Deck Video Cassette, 10 F.3d
at 695.  It therefore is irrelevant "why" Erlich violated this Court's Order,
the only issue is whether he understood the Order when he did so.

----------
intentional misinterpretation of the TRO here cannot be reconciled with the
facts underlying the cases he has cited to support his position.
     For example, in the Dual-Deck Video Cassette litigation, Go-Video
previously had filed suit against Matsushita and others.  During that earlier
litigation the parties had entered into a standard protective order
prohibiting the use or disclosure of material obtained through discovery. 
Dual-Deck Video Cassette, supra, 10 F.3d at 694.  When Go-video discovered
materials which it believed supported a claim of further antitrust violations
by the defendants, and the court denied leave to amend, Go-Video filed a
second lawsuit.
     The defendants claimed that Go-Video had violated the earlier order by
referencing some of the earlier discovery in the second lawsuit.  Finding that
Go-Video "went to great lengths to avoid revealing in the public filing's
anything it had learned in discovery," and that no claim had been made that
"the stated purposes of the order were violated," the appellate court vacated
the lower court's contempt judgment on the ground that: "'Substantial
compliance' with the court order is a defense to civil contempt, and is not
vitiated by a 'few technical violations' where every reasonable effort has
been made to comply."  Id. at 695-96 (emphasis supplied).
     Erlich did not take "every reasonable effort" to comply with this
Court's Order.  The TROs and the Court's verbal explanation of his obligations
were unambiguous./7/  Intentionally copying ----------
/7/  Erlich's reliance on Karim-Panahi v. Los Angeles Police Dept., 839 F.2d
621 (9th Cir. 1988) is misplaced.  Faced with the district court's dismissal
of Karim-Panahi's civil rights complaint, the Ninth Circuit in that case
stated that "[I]n civil rights cases where the plaintiff appears pro se, the
court must construe the pleadings liberally and must afford plaintiff the
benefit of any doubt."  Id. at 623.  The policies underlying the Karim-Panahi
decision (to promote the redress of civil rights violations and to address a
non-lawyer's inability to draft proper complaint) cannot be said to support
Erlich's purposeful misconstruction of the clear order of this Court.

---------
confidential material onto the Internet cannot be construed as a "reasonable
effort to comply."  And as Erlich's February 24 posting, supra, demonstrates,
he knew he was subject to the unambiguous TRO when he made the posting.
     Erlich's other cases are equally in applicable.  In Vertex, supra, and
Fonar Corp. v. Deccaid Services, Inc., 983 F.2d 427 (2d Cir. 1993), cert.
denied 62 U.S.L.W. 3273, the orders allegedly violated were facially
ambiguous.  See, Vertex, supra, 689 F.2d at 890 (no contempt where the parties
"engage[d]) in a semantic battle over the meaning" of a consent judgment, thus
negating attempt to show that defendant's interpretation was "unreasonable");
Fonar, supra, 983 F.2d at 429 (order prohibiting copying of "Maintenance
Software" ambiguous where "Maintenance Software" is never defined).  Since the
Order here specifically prohibits Erlich from copying both the materials set
forth in Exhibit B to the Complaint (a copy of which Erlich had in his
possession when he copied the materials on February 26) and the Advanced
Technology (a term Erlich knows well through his prior membership in the
Church of Scientology), there was nothing ambiguous about this Court's
Order./8/
----------
/8/  In both Project B.A.S.I.C. v. Kemp, 947 F.2d 11, 18-19 (1st Cir. 1991),
and Spallone v. United States, 493 U.S. 265, 280 (1990), the parties against
which contempt judgments were sought were not even parties to the original
orders.  Finally, in Armstrong v. Executive Office of President, 1 F.3d 1274,
1289 (D.C. Cir. 1993), an earlier Declaratory Judgment merely had stated that
certain guidelines prepared by the defendants were inadequate, it did not
order the defendants to promulgate new guidelines.  As a result, no contempt
order was proper when new guidelines were not promulgated.  Id. at 1289.

----------
     Here, in contrast, both the law and the order in question are clear. 
Since the Court's Temporary Restraining Order was definite and specific, and
Erlich plainly failed to take reasonable stops to comply with that Order and
in fact intentionally violated it, a judgment of contempt should be entered.
   IV.  THE SANCTIONS REQUESTED ARE REASONABLE AND APPROPRIATE
     In contrast to Erlich's posturing that the requested sanctions are
"burdensome" or "crippling," they are quite mild in contrast to the remedies
which are available for contempt.  Plaintiffs could have sought sanctions,
including fines and imprisonment, for criminal contempt.  They could have
sought imprisonment or financial damages beyond their attorney fees for civil
contempt.  They did neither.  Instead, plaintiffs have made a reasonable
request for sanctions to which they are absolutely entitled under the Court's
contempt power and the Copyright Act:
     1.   A finding that Mr. Erlich is in contempt of the Court's TRO.
     2.   An order impounding his computer, which was originally requested
in the ex parte TRO application as permitted under 17 U.S.C.  503.
     3.   Plaintiffs' fees and costs in connection with this motion.
     Erlich's citations and argument support the granting of these sanctions. 
His citation to Spallone v. United States, 493 U.S. 265, 280, 110 S.Ct. 625,
635 (1990) takes entirely out of context the point of the Court's statement
that a court should exercise "the least possible power adequate to the and
proposed."  Plaintiffs seek sanctions far less stringent than they might have
requested against the exact party who was bound by and violated the Court's
order./9/
----------
/9/ In contract, in Spallone, individual members of a city council were held
in contempt for failure to vote in favor of an anti-discrimination ordinance. 
This was an abuse of discretion where the sanctions should have been against
the city only, which was the party to the discrimination action.  Id. at 276-277, 110 S.Ct. at 632-633.
----------
     With respect to the contention that plaintiffs have not demonstrated
actual injury, the contention is ludicrous.  The only monetary award which
plaintiffs seek the fees and costs of filing this motion, which is clearly an
"actual Loss" resulting from Mr. Erlich's non-compliance.  In re Dual Deck,
supra, at 696.  In Dual Deck, no fees were deemed appropriate because the
contempt order was found to be an use of discretion and the contempt motion
unnecessary.  Id. at 696.  Here, there is a blatant and admitted violation of
the Court's order.  No attempt to characterize the problem as
"ultra-aggressive litigation strategy" can metamorphose Mr. Erlich into the
victim, when it is plaintiffs' rights which have been violated.  Mr. Erlich
should have considered the possible penalties before he violated plaintiffs'
rights.  That he apologized a day later is irrelevant after he learned
plaintiffs were moving for contempt -- his transgression cannot be deemed
minor regardless of any apologies or any professed (but unsupported) steps to
do it when his posting of the confidential unpublished materials was made onto
public computer network which con potentially be accessed by millions of
people.
     The computer of which plaintiffs have requested impoundment is In Mr.
Erlich's home, and is the computer he uses to access alt.religion.Scientology. 
While he claims that he relies on it for business purposes, during the seizure
he stated that he had three computers at his business.  (McShane Dec., Feb.
20, 1994,  10.)  Thus, his claim that it is needed for his business is not
credible.  Furthermore, there is no reason for the alleged burden on him to be
considered by the Court when Mr. Erlich has never considered the burdens he
was placing on the plaintiffs by violating their rights.
                          V.  CONCLUSION
     Neither this suit, nor this contempt motion is about attempts to stop
public debate on Scientology.  If that were so, Mr. Erlich and others would
have been sued two years ago, when alt.religion.Scientology first came
on-line.  Or Mr. Erlich would have been sued when he first started printing
his anti-Scientology publication entitled "The Informer," or at any other time
in the many years during which Mr. Erlich claims to have been a Scientology
critic.  No suits have been brought by plaintiffs against Mr. Erlich prior to
this one, and no other suits have been brought against other Internet users or
posters on alt.religion.Scientology.
     This case is about Mr. Erlich's refusal to respect plaintiffs'
intellectual property rights.  It is a continuing situation, which will not go
away, unless this Court gives Mr. Erlich the clear message that his actions
will not be tolerated and he will be held responsible for them.  Mr. Erlich
should be hold in contempt, and he reasonable and appropriate sanctions
requested by plaintiffs should be imposed.

Dated:  March 15, 1995        Respectfully submitted,

                              Andrew H. Wilson
                              WILSON, RYAN & CAMPILONGO

                              Thomas M. Small
                              Janet A. Kobrin
                              SMALL, LARKIN & KIDD

                              Elliot J. Abelson

                                   -and-

                              Helena K. Kobrin

                                                            

                              Attorneys for Plaintiffs
                              RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER and BRIDGE
                              PUBLICATIONS, INC.

Xref: utcsri alt.religion.scientology:40847
Path: utcsri!newsflash.concordia.ca!canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca!tribune.usask.ca!news.sasknet.sk.ca!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!news.bc.net!vanbc.wimsey.com!scipio.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!pipex!peernews.demon.co.uk!support.com!tom.klemesrud
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: [email-masked] (tom.klemesrud)
Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150
X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.29
Subject: Declarations of McShane & Rosa Erlich
X-Posting-Host: uucp4.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 1995 16:16:50 +0000
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Lines: 303

                                             

     _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/   _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
     _/  Tom Klemesrud, Sysop      _/   _/  L.A. Valley College BBS   _/
     _/  [email-masked] _/   _/  FidoNet 1:102/837   KoX   _/
     _/  [email-masked]          _/   _/  North Hollywood, CA USA   _/
     _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/   _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Andrew H. Wilson 
WILSON, RYAN & CAMPILONGO 
115 Sansome Street Fourth Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104 (415) 391-3900

Thomas M. Small
Janet Kobrin
SMALL, LARKIN, & KIDDE
10940 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1800
Los Angeles, California 90024-3945
(310) 209-4400

Helena K. Kobrin
7629 Fulton Avenue
North Hollywood, CA 91605
(213) 960-1933

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs,
 RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER and
 BRIDGE PUBLICATIONS, INC.

                   UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER, a     ) CASE NO.  C95-20091 RMW
California non-profit corporation; ) 
and BRIDGE PUBLICATIONS, INC., a   ) DECLARATIONS OF WARREN
California non-profit corporation, ) MCSHANE AND ROSA ERLICH
                                   ) MUNSEY IN SUPPORT OF
               Plaintiffs,         ) PLAINIFFS' REPLY IN  
                                   ) OF ORDER TO SHOW 
       vs                          ) CAUSE RE CIVIL CONTEMPT
                                   )
NETCOM ON-LINE COMMUNICATION       ) DATE:  March 17, 1995
SERVICES, INC., a Delaware         ) TIME:  9:00 am
corporation; DENNIS ERLICH, an     ) CTRM:  Hon. Ronald M.
individual; and TOM KLEMESRUD, an  )         Whyte
individual, dba CLEARWOOD DATA     )
SERVICES,                          )
                                   )  
               Defendants.         )
                                   )
___________________________________)

                  DECLARATION OF WARREN MCSHANE
     I, Warren McShane, hereby declare:
     1.   I am over 18 years of age and a resident of the State of
California.  I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth
herein and, if called as a witness, could and would competently
testify thereto.
     2.   Since August of 1983, I have been employed by Religious
Technology Center ("RTC"), a church of the Scientology religion. 
Since October 1983, I have been a Director and Officer of RTC, and
I am currently its President.
     3.   I have previously informed the Court of requirements that
Dennis Erlich had to meet In order to be permitted to study the
Church's Advanced Technology materials.  True and correct copies of
two of the policies on confidentiality and secrecy which are
studied by students of the Advanced Technology are attached hereto
as Exhibits A and B.  They require strict confidentiality of the
materials be observed and prohibit copying of any sort, even the
taking of notes related to these materials.
     4.   On March 10, 1995, Mr. Erlich made a posting on
alt.religion.Scientology ("a.r.s.") which stated, in different
words, the same contempt for the Court's authority which he
expressed in his previous statement that no court or government
could stop his postings.  A true and correct copy of that posting
is attached hereto as Exhibit C, containing the following quote:
     I have my own religion, thank you.  Don't want followers,
     devotees or paritioners [sic]. I do want to be free to
     preach as I see fit.  The US government and the courts
     thereof have not been granted the right to tell me I
     can't.  Ain't their bizness [sic].
     5.   Mr. Erlich has also announced his intention to resume his
postings shortly in Exhibit D, where, in response to a request from
another person for an e-mail of "the illegal file that the s__ts at
the Scientology bank are trying to restrict," Erlich responded:
"Give me a couple of weeks, til this is over.  Then I'll be happy
to post it again."  The document to which he is referring is the
confidential unpublished works. unpublished works.
     6.   On March 13, Mr. Erlich made a posting (Exhibit E),
containing the following statement:
     I certainly do not believe that RTC has ownership of
     those materials.  If they can convince a judge that they
     do, I'll still have fair use rights to criticize and
     quote them in the context of discussion.

     You scienos take the position that there is no such thing
     as fair use of the Oat Tea material and embarrassing
     Internal documents.

     Tough position.  Learn to fall back early.  It'll hurt
     less.
The term "scienos" is Mr. Erlich's derogatory expression for
Scientologists.  "Oat tea" is a derogatory reference to the
confidential unpublished Advanced Technology materials, which are
sometimes called "O.T." materials.  O.T. stands for operating
thetan, which means the spiritual being able to function apart from
a body.
     7.   In a February 16 posting, Mr. Erlich referred to the
Court's Writ of Seizure as a "bogus court order," and his conduct
since the imposition of the TRO reflects that opinion.  (Exhibit
F.)
     8.   Regarding his response to plaintiffs' February 24 filing
regarding the seized infringing materials, on February 24, in
Exhibit G, Mr. Erlich stated:
     I will have to respond to whatever bs they submit by next
     Friday when the judge will rule on continuing or dropping
     the Temporary Restraining Order, which is preventing me
     from doing exactly nothing that I already was not doing
     in the first place.
     9.   On February 28, 1995, in Exhibit H, Mr. Erlich posted the
following statement:
     And from the judges [sic] Amended TRO he seems to think
     it's just "business as usual" to allow my enemies into my
     house, into my private files, to copy, delete and cart
     off anything they want.
     10.  One of the more telling remarks by Mr. Erlich as to false
facade he is
     Alas.  I will probably not get to expound on my theories
     of existence before a Federal Judge.  Probably the better
     for me, though.  I'd undoubtedly crack wise and get in
     some kinda trouble.
     I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true
and correct.
     Executed at Los Angeles, California, the 16th day of March
1995.

                              /s/
                              Warren McShane                DECLARATION OF ROSA ERLICH MUNSEY
     I, Rosa Munsey, do hereby declare as follows:
     1.   I am over the age of eighteen years and a resident of
Diego County, California.  I have personal knowledge of the matters
contained herein and could competently testify to their truth if
called as a witness, except where I base my statements information
and belief, and as to those statements, I firmly believe them to be
true.
     2.   I was married to Dennis Lance Erlich from December 31,
1975 until our separation in August 1983.  We have a daughter,
Holly, from this marriage, who was born in 1980.
     3.   Dennis and I lived together in Clearwater, Florida from
1975 until June 1982, where we were staff of the Church of
Scientology.  We left Church staff in 1982 and moved to Colorado
Springs, Colorado where we lived for a year and then lived for two
months in Clifton, New Jersey.
     4.   In August 1983, Dennis and I separated.  I took Holly
with me to San Diego and Dennis moved to Omaha, Nebraska.  Dennis
kept in touch with me by phone following the separation.  Holly as
three years old at the time.
     5.   In March/April 1984 I was working at my job with Paine
Webber and continually requested child support payments from
Dennis.  He said he would not pay child support, but instead would
take care of Holly for me.  We agreed that he would not have
custody of Holly but that she would merely visit.  In late April I
agreed that Dennis could see Holly and that he would return her in
June.
     6.   On April 22, 1984, I put Holly on a plane to Omaha, based
upon our full agreement that she would be staying with him through
June only.
     7.   The entire time that Holly was with Dennis, I called her
every week.  During some of these telephone conversations around
the end of May or early June, I started mentioning that Holly will
be coming home very shortly and reminding him to send her back in
June.
     8.   There were several times between May and June 1984 where
Dennis initially implied he wasn't going to give Holly back and
then he changed his mind.
     9.   Sometime after Dennis started implying that I was not
going to get Holly back, I spoke with the San Diego County
Sheriff's Department Detective Unit about what I should do.
     10.  On June 25, 1984, when Holly was due back, Dennis called
and said he would not send her back to me and I would never see her
again.  He called me two days later in the morning while I was at
work and made some outrageous and completely false accusations
against me and again said he would not send Holly back to me.  He
made it very clear that I would never see her again.
     11.  Later that same day, on June 27, 1984, I hired an
attorney to get an emergency court order to get custody of Holly. 
Later that evening, I called Dennis and he made the same outrageous
accusations he had made on previous phone calls saying at he was
"going to have me killed," that he was "going to have arrested,"
telling me, "you will never see her again."
     12.  Also on June 27, 1984, I had a mutual friend of ours in
Colorado, Mike Beatty, call Dennis on my behalf so I could find out
how Holly was because Dennis wouldn't tell me.  Mike reported back
that Dennis was acting in an erratic manner saying things like "the
aliens were invading," "the world was coming to end" and that I was
insane.
     13.  I was dreadfully concerned about my daughter.  My concern
was that since leaving the Church, Dennis had found a new to
"counsel" people which included smoking pot, taking a walk and then
talking.  He tried to get me to do it several times when visited in
October, November and December 1983.  I did not anticipate and he
continued to consider using this "process" to clear his mind.
     14.  Before I sent Holly to Nebraska, Dennis swore to me that
he was not doing drugs, otherwise I never would have sent Holly to
visit him.  He also said that he would put Holly in day care
because she was in day care in California but he never once did,
     15.  On June 28, 1984 I filed for divorce and obtained an
order from the California court granting me immediate custody of
Holly and ordering Dennis to turn her over to me.
     16.  On June 29, 1984 Dennis and Holly called me from Nebraska
and my answering machine was on and the machine recorded the
conversation.  I heard Dennis prompt Holly and she said to me that
I was sick and she said "Why did you make me do it?"  I asked her
what, and she said "Why did you make me do those sexy things?"  I
told her I didn't know what she was talking about and that I love
her more than anything in the world and would do anything to help
her.  Then I said, "Tell me Holly, is your Daddy making you say
these things?"  Holly said "yes."  I asked her, "Has your Daddy
given you anything to smoke?"  Holly said "Yes."  During this
conversation, I could hear Dennis in the background saying, "Say
it, say it."
     17.  On July 5, 1984, I filed an application for enforcement
of a foreign court order in the District Court in Nebraska to get
custody of Holly.  My father and I flew out to Nebraska and the
judge granted me custody of Holly on July 12, 1984 and I took her
home immediately thereafter.
     18.  Before I flew to Nebraska I called the San Diego County
Sheriff's Department Detective unit and told them about the false
testation charges that Dennis was making against me.  The detective
I spoke to, Detective Wayne Simmons, told me to call immediately
upon my return with Holly.
     19.  When Holly and I got back to California, I called
Detective Simmons, and asked him what to do and he said she needs
to be seen at Children's hospital and in liaison with Child
Protective Services, he made an appointment for her to be seen at
the hospital.
     20.  Holly was then examined by a doctor and it was verified
that she had been sexually molested, but it was unknown who had
molested her.
     21.  A social worker was sent out to visit me who apparently
believed Dennis' false claims and she had my daughter taken from me
and put into a foster home.  After several months, I was able to
get a new unbiased social worker assigned to my case and Holly was
then returned to me shortly thereafter in November 1984.
     22.  In 1986, I asked Dennis why he accused me of molesting
Holly and he said, "because I wanted to get back at you, you made
me mad when you wouldn't get back together with me".
     23.  In 1987 Holly told me about an incident where Dennis had
her go to bed in her underwear and then Dennis touched her in a
sexual way.  After Holly told me about this incident, I told the
counselor that Holly had been seeing about this incident and she
reported the matter to Child Protective Services and Dennis got no
more visitation after that.
     24.  Holly required seven and a half years of counseling as a
result of the abuse by her father.  Through the course of this
counseling she remembered the incidents more clearly.  After Holly
remembered that her father molested her, she wrote a letter to him
which I saw before she sent it.  I did not change anything on her
letter.  Holly told him that she knew he had molested her and that
she didn't want to see him or talk to him any more.  Holly has not
talked to him or written since then.
     25.  It cost me approximately $2,100.00 attorney fees to get
my daughter back and at least $1,200.00 in counselling costs in the
subsequent years.
     26.  Although on January 22, 1985, I was awarded Two Hundred
Dollars ($200.00) a month child support as part of the divorce
settlement, Dennis paid one Hundred Dollars ($100.00) in 1985 and
another Four Hundred Forty ($440.00) in 1986 and there have been no
other child support payments since 1986.  He has not paid a since.
I never pushed the matter as I was afraid of Dennis and didn't want
him involved in any way with my daughter or me.
     27.  There were several instances when Dennis abused me, one
time in 1977, we were in our bedroom and something made him mad and
while I was laying on our bed he sat on me and hit me in the face. 
Another time in 1982, I asked him a question and he got very upset
at me, grabbed me by the hair, he threw me across the room, I flew
across the room and while I was cowering, he grabbed by the hair
again, threw me in the bathroom, I was cornered in the shower, he
hit me across the face and I felt like he broke my jaw. I was in my
first trimester of pregnancy with his child at the time and he knew
I was pregnant.  Shortly thereafter we moved to Colorado and he
convinced me to get an abortion.
     28.  Dennis Erlich's cruelty has caused my family much
suffering.
     29.  I make this statement of my own free will because I
believe the true facts about Dennis Erlich should be known.
     I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.
     Executed this 17th day of February, 1995 in San Diego County,
California.

                              /s/
                              Rosa Erlich Munsey

From elastic!jaywon.pci.on.ca!noc.tor.hookup.net!hookup!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!globe.indirect.com!einstein.emg.com!netcomsv!uu3news.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!noring Thu Aug 24 09:13:52 1995
Xref: elastic news.admin.misc:3172 news.admin.net-abuse.misc:2598 talk.politics.libertarian:6461
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.clearing.technology,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.politics.datahighway,alt.privacy.anon-server,alt.religion.christian,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property,misc.legal,misc.legal.computing,news.admin.misc,news.admin.net-abuse.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.society.civil-liberty,talk.politics.libertarian
Path: elastic!jaywon.pci.on.ca!noc.tor.hookup.net!hookup!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!globe.indirect.com!einstein.emg.com!netcomsv!uu3news.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!noring
From: [email-masked] (Jon Noring)
Subject: [FORWARD] URGENT PRESS RELEASE - FACTNET
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Followup-To: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
References: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 15:08:46 GMT
Lines: 506
Sender: [email-masked]

[FACTNet's computers/archives were seized yesterday at CoS instigation.
Fortunately, the archives are available on the Internet as Factnet expected
this to happen for quite a while.  FactNet now has an ACLU lawyer representing
them, showing the seriousness of the matter.  And the charges given in the
following document are serious.  I urge you to forward this document to
everybody interested in net.freedom, as the CoS raids are a serious threat to
free.speech everywhere.  Followup discussion set to alt.religion.scientology,
comp.org.eff.talk, and misc.legal.computing .]

***************************************

In article to alt.religion.scientology, Kim Baker <[email-masked]> writes:

AS a recently appointed member of the board of Directors of FACTNET, 
I am releasing this document for all to see - this was to be a press 
release by FACTNet before the raid on Bob and Larry.

------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
===========================================================================
August 20, 1995
 
CoS raid on FACTNet & Arnie Lerma re the Fishman/Geertz docs
 
First, Dennis Erlich was raided by Scientology officials. Then, last
February, Scientology tricked the Finnish police into taking down Julf
Helsingus's anon.penet.fi server in order to obtain the identity of a 
critic.
 
On August 12th, Arnie Lerma was raided.  Arnie is a director of
FACTNet, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit electronic library and historic
preservational archive. The raid occurred after Lerma posted a public
court record from the FACTNet archives to the Internet. 
 
Scientology has threatened other Internet providers with destructive
nuisance suits. Some have yielded and dropped newsgroups or clients
that Scientology finds "controversial." The Internet and the First
Amendment are under a devastating attack.
 
FACTNet is fighting back. In this second public statement since the
raid, we identify critical new information and concerns for
debate.
 
FACTNet's Second Statement:
 
1) FACTNet alleges that Scientology's attorneys and executives
   deliberately swore out false and misleading affidavits and court
   motions against FACTNet's director Arnie Lerma to deceive a judge 
   who was unfamiliar with Scientology's criminal history.  
   Scientology's purpose was to trick the judge into granting an 
   illegal search warrant and seizure order for Arnie Lerma's 
   computer and records. 
   
   In those court documents, Scientology's attorneys and executives 
   make several false and misleading claims:
   
a) That L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology's founder, was the sole author of
   the materials
   
b) That the materials were legally copyrighted and trademarked.

c) That those copyrights and trademarks were legally transferred from
   Hubbard through several intermediary corporations to Religious
   Technology Corporation (RTC), the umbrella organization filing the
   complaint for Scientology.

2) FACTNet did not start this legal action, but in defending itself
   FACTNet has been provided with a powerful opportunity to fulfill 
   its purpose as an educational and dialog promoting public library 
   and archive. FACTNet has begun assembling evidence for this case 
   that will show:
 
a) Hubbard was not the sole author of these materials as claimed in
   his copyright applications.
   
b) Substantial portions of the Fishman-Geertz documents were
   plagiarized by Hubbard from the secret initiation rites of other
   Satanic, black magic and occult secret societies.
   
c) Hubbard created the falsely copyrighted works from the assets of a
   nonprofit corporation, creating an inurement to himself personally.
   (Hubbard used the staff and resources of Scientology to help 
   "create"  these inured personal assets.)  
   
d) The transfers of the fraudulently filed copyright and trademarks
   from Hubbard to other intermediary corporations and finally to RTC
   are also fraught with transfer fraud and misrepresentation.
   
e) Scientology has used copyright and trademark laws and
   confidentiality agreements for purposes never intended by the law,
   namely, to coerce silence or hide illegal actions or actions that
   threaten the safety of individuals or the general public. (There 
   are many reports of former and current Scientology members 
   committing suicide, attempting suicide or becoming psychotic or 
   neurotic while being initiated with these rituals contained 
   in the Fishman-Geertz documents.) 
   
3) In those false and misleading court documents used to obtain the 
   search warrent and seizure order, Scientology's
   attorneys and executives conceal vital information from the court:

a) The Fishman Geertz documents which Arnie Lerma posted to the net
   were public court records legally obtainable from the LA Superior
   court clerk in the Scientology v. Uwe Geertz and Steve Fishman 
   case.
   
b) The Fishman Geertz documents which Arnie posted to the net were
   previously obtainable legally as part of the public court record 
   from the LA Superior court case, Wollersheim v. Church of 
   Scientology.
   
c) The substance of what Arnie posted to the Internet was first 
   publically published in 1971 by Robert Kaufman, and has been since 
   been publically republished numerous times, all over the world by 
   many other individuals.
   
d) Hubbard himself planned to widely publish a screenplay based on the
   substance of the Fishman-Geertz documents.
   
e) In the 50's or 60's, a low budget science fiction film was made
   containing much of the substance of the theme of OT3 (the largest 
   part of the Fishman-Geertz documents).

4) FACTNet alleges that Scientology's attorneys and executives
   deliberately swore out false and misleading affidavits and court
   motions against FACTNet's director Arnie Lerma in bad faith and 
   with the dirtiest of hands.

a) The real and covert purpose of Scientology's lawsuit is to put
   another "head on a pike," to intimidate other critics into silence
   under threat of expensive, malicious and drawn out frivolous court
   actions, as well as to gain access to documents pertaining to
   FACTNet that Arnie had in his possession as a legitimate
   Board member of FACTNet.
   
b) Scientology's notorious 40 year history of "dirty tricks" tactics 
   in and out of the courts is replete with evidence on 
   Scientology's real policies and purposes in attacking critics.

5) Scientology is a wolf in sheep's clothing. It is not a church in
   the sense that most people think of a church. Scientology has its
   origins in the secret societies of Satanism, black magic,
   occultism, and Nazi philosophy and tactics. The IRS held off for
   almost 20 years before giving Scientology the same religious status
   that it routinely gives to other Satanic and neo-Nazi "churches."

Scientology continues to abuse the religious sanctuary, privileges and
immunities our Constitution affords legitimate charitable and
humanitarian religions. If a government official has not been
carefully watching the computer and records seized from Lerma's home
24 hours a day, they will have to be considered contaminated evidence.
This is because FBI documents seized from Scientology's headquarters 
show Scientology has secret policies to plant false records on critics 
or alter a critic's records.  (Some of these documents are contained 
a FACTNet  archive file called APP#.txt?) 

MORE ABOUT THE CONTENTS AND PURPOSES OF THE Fishman-Geertz DOCUMENTS
 
No one knows how many copies of these documents have been downloaded
from sites all over the net. It is possible that more that 100,000
netizens may have read them already.
 
I, Lawrence Wollersheim, was personally processed through most of the
materials described in the Fishmen-Geertz documents.  I will attempt
to explain how Scientology uses these documents, the context in which
they are delivered, and their purpose. 
 
1) The Fishman-Geertz documents contain some of the highest secret
   initiations of Scientology.  To see these materials, individuals 
   must sign themselves into years of indentured servitude to the 
   organization or pay $60-100,000 or more.  Whether staff or public, 
   they must be security checked and sign a series of 
   confidentiality agreements.
   
(FACTNet believes these confidentiality agreements are illegal because
 they are usually signed with the individual in a trance state and
 because the individual is not told about the occult and hypnotic mind
 control nature of these materials.  No one is allowed to learn about
 the large number of people who have been seriously harmed while or
 shortly after being processed on these materials.)
 
2) To increase the individual's suggestibility, before the individual
   gets to the level to be able to view these materials, Scientology 
   runs them through hundreds, sometimes thousands, of hours of 
   repetitive hypnotic and thought reform processes. 

3) The secret hypnotic exercises up to OT3 described in the
   Fishman-Geertz document deepen the hypnotic trance to induce the 
   final suggestibility boost in preparation for the OT3 shock. 

   On OT3 the individual is told, while in the suggestibility of 
   hypnotic trance, that they really are not one individual, but they 
   are a composite of hundreds, possibly thousands, or tens of 
   thousands of individual beings trapped in one body as the result of 
   a galactic war 76 million years ago. (In Scientology these other 
   individual beings are called body thetans or BT's.) 

The individuals receiving these techniques are told, while in hypnotic
trance, that these beings are fighting for control of their bodies and
identities.  They are told that these beings can make them act
irrationally or make them terminally ill, and that ONLY Scientology
has the technology to safely remove these being out of their bodies.
If anything goes wrong they only have Scientology to turn to. 
 
On these secret levels the member spends sometimes hundreds of hours
talking to the beings they have been hypnotized into believing exist.
They locate these beings on their various body parts and try to get
them out of their body through various initiation processes.  

In the Fishman-Geertz documents and ancilliary documents the member is
told that this is a prison planet and he or she is really an alien.
Because he is in Scientology now, he is one of the good alien leaders
or geniuses or artists.  It is up to those who have "woke up to who
they really are" to help Scientology retake the planet earth (Clear
the planet) and re-conquer the Galaxy. They are also told they are in
a very dangerous area that broke Hubbard's back when he was trying to
find an escape from it, and that Hubbard found the only "route out".
 
On OT2 the individual "processes out" religion as a control aberration
of the "bad guy" alien race. Later, on OT 3, they process out many
traditional religious symbols and concepts.
 
4) To make up your own mind about Scientology's secret hypnotic
   initiations, you should have a little context on Hubbard and
   brainwashing.  Hubbard wrote a manual called the "Brainwashing 
   manual" where he describes how to break people and enslave every 
   aspect of their lives. In this manual he demonstrates a superior 
   knowledge of Russian, Korean and Chinese brainwashing techniques. 

Although there are seven main techniques to effective brainwashing,
this is not the place to explain all seven. The most powerful of the
seven bears repeating in light of the OT3 materials:  "Frequent and
intense attempts cause a person to reevaluate the most central aspects
of their experience of self and prior conduct in negative ways.
Efforts are designed to destabalize and undermine the subject's basic
consciousness, reality awareness, world view, emotional control, and
defense mechanisms as well as get them to reinterpret their life's
history and adopt a new version of causality."
 
In order to more effectively dominate and control the individual by
attacking the individual's core concepts of self, Hubbard tricks the
individual in trance into believing he is not who he always thought he
was. To fragment the individual's personal integrity and self control
Hubbard induces a hypnotic state of multiple personality or
schizophrenia. It's no wonder people would go psychotic if tricked
into believing this story when their suggestibility is at its highest
and their defenses at the lowest.
 
Hubbard was most ingenious in applying the most important technique of
brainwashing. He not only attacked the individuals core sense of self
by inducing a personality schizophrenia, but followed it up by turning
the individuals whole world view and understanding of causality upside
down with the alien story while the individual was in deep trance. If
there is a hell this could be it.
 
6) By distributing the Fishman-Geertz document for public dialog,
   Arnie Lerma acted in accordance with the highest purposes of 
   FACTNet.
   
FACTNet has received and researched almost 300 reports of individuals
who committed suicide, attempted suicide, or became psychotic or
neurotic while receiving Scientology processes.  The materials of the
Fishman-Geertz document that Arnie Lerma distributed deal particularly
with the areas that are MOST OFTEN associated with these alarming
reports and the worst of thought reform.  Arnie Lerma also acted to
inform unknowing third parties of possible grave personal danger to
their safety and well being regarding these materials, a danger even
Scientology secretly acknowledges. 

The seriousness of this cannot be overstated. In the courts, thought
reform programs are commonly called coercive persuasion.  In United
States v. Lee 455 U.S. 252, 257-258 (1982), the California Supreme
Court found that "when a person is subjected to coercive persuasion
without his knowledge or consent... [he may] develop serious and
sometimes irreversible physical and psychiatric disorders, up to and
including schizophrenia, self-mutilation, and suicide."
 
7)  For 11 years, from approximately 1969-1980, I (Lawrence
    Wollersheim, Executive Director of FACTNet) was a member of
    Scientology and held numerous Sea Organization staff 
    administrative positions. I am personally familiar with most of  
    Scientology's processes by having received them. I was processed 
    to Scientology's highest secret initiatory levels. I have also 
    been through the Sea Organization's "Rehabilitation Project Force" 
    (RPF) program, a debilitating concentration/work camp for members 
    who are not following orders. 

During my years in Scientology I personally witnessed many individuals
go psychotic on the secret initiations described in the Fishman-Geertz
documents. From my experiences, I estimate as many as 70% of the
people going through these levels experience periods of psychosis.
From my having personally experienced these processes and my
understanding of the techniques of thought reform, I believe the real
purpose of these processes is to establish the deepest level of total
unchallenged control over the mind, life and assets of the individual
receiving the secret initiation. 
  
I fear that Scientology has made a significant advance in thought
reform techniques which easily explains why so many people could go
psychotic, or attempt or commit suicide on Scientology's secret
levels.  I believe that these processes when used on individuals in
Scientology are in essence thought reform experimentation with human
guinea pigs who have no idea what is really being done to them.

WHAT YOU CAN DO TO HELP FACTNET'S DIRECTOR ARNIE LERMA

This issue concerns EVERY individual who has a love of human freedom 
and human rights.

In its latest raid and lawsuit against Arnie Lerma, Scientology has
initiated a radical new tactic to intimidate and silence their
critics. This is the most serious new step in suppressing public
debate and freedom of speech ever entered into by Scientology on the
Internet.  Scientology has gone from attacking individuals who
privately possess information critical of it to attacking the very
vehicles set up by society to collect and preserve information: our
public libraries and public archives.
 
This is a major acceleration of Scientology's coercive and abusive
tactics -- not just against FACTNet -- but against the vital social
mechanisms to preserve and distribute information for public debate,
public education, and public safety.
 
This acceleration of Scientology's abusive tactics must be met with
the strongest of public condemnation and immediate action to defend
public libraries and archives and the Internet from this new form of
"book burning." Freedom of information concerns EACH and EVERY one of 
us.
 
I say it is time we haul out a 2"x4" and smack the CoS with the
message, "HANDS OFF THE INTERNET AND HANDS OFF FACTNET! THE INTERNET 
IS FOR THE PEOPLE! " We must demonstrate the true power of the 
Internet. We must ACT NOW. For if we don't, our fundamental rights to 
freedom of expression and thought may be permanently undermined.

To help FACTNet and Arnie Lerma we ask you to begin the biggest public
dialog in the history of the Internet on Scientology's free speech
crushing tactics and the contents and dangers of the Fishman-Geertz
documents. Let us also get Scientology's celebrity big donors like Tom
Cruise, Kirstey Alley, John Trovolta, MiMi Rogers, and Sonny Bono and
the other Hollywood promoters of Scientology involved in the debate.
 
Let us ask them and their fan clubs on the net how they can finance
Scientology to attack free speech?  How can they recruit the young
into a net-and-library bashing organization?  Let us ask these
celebrity Scientology promoters whether they feel they should be held
personally responsible, legally and financially, for using their
reputation to bring people into Scientology who are later harmed by
these secret initiations.
 
We ask you to help us redistribute this posting so that the talk of
millions of Internet users will be "What do you think about the
Scientology Internet raids and what do you think about the contents of
the Fishman-Geertz documents?" This ethical use of the dialog power of
the Net will begin to slow the Scientology intimidation machine, but
it will still take more.  
 
FACTNet needs other former and current Scientology members that have
been scared into silence to tell your stories and get them to FACTNet
for our defense in this case. FACTNet needs the estimated 16,000  anti
Scientology readers of alt.religion.scientology to bring the public
debate over the issues to Scientology's current members and the
families of current members, but still more is needed.
 
FACTNet needs your tax deductible donations.  We are fighting an 
organisation that has billions of dollars at its disposal, and that 
has silenced many who have spoken out previously.

Donate $5, $10 -- whatever you can afford -- to FACTNet by mail.  Or 
point your Web browser to [unique http address] or email [unique email 
address] for instructions on how to contribute. If you have a credit 
card handy, FACTNet is set up to receive your tax-deductible donation 
quickly and SECURELY.
 
You've watched O.J. You know we need HEAPS of money to get "justice"
in our system today. Your contribution will go to our defense funds
and to giving FACTNet's unique and essential 100,000-page archive of 
cult and thought reform information a permanent home on the Internet.

If you can spare $25, FACTNet will e-mail you a FBI mini collection 
of key documents seized from CoS headquarters -- that outline brutal 
CoS techniques for attacking critics, even the U.S. Government: lying,
stealing, breaking and entering, and more. You've never read anything
like these secret internal documents.
 
If you can afford to contribute $100, we will place you on FACTNet's
Early Warning System and notify you personally by e-mail of emerging
threats to your First Amendment freedoms.
 
Even if you have never had anything to do with Scientology, or never 
heard about them before, THIS IS YOUR FIGHT! Do not think "it won't 
happen to me", or, "it's only hurting those who are gullible". It 
could happen to your children, your brother or sister, your cousin, 
your friend. FACTNet has taken on the fight against co-ercive tactics
for the people. We need the people to stand united.

The issue isn't just CoS. And it's bigger than cults. The 
issue is FREEDOM. Maybe you liked the movie, _The Net,_  maybe not. 
But when Sandra Bullock yells, "They did it to me, they'll do it to 
you" .... I CHEERED!
 
FACTNet has proof that many cults are watching Co$'s "wins," sharing
tactics and lawyers with Co$, and preparing for their own assaults on
our liberty.  How long until other posters to Usenet groups are hauled
into court? How long until even major services like America Online,
Prodigy, and Microsoft Network are censored by the Scientology
litigation and intimidation machine?
 
Remember, alone, we're easy pickings. Together, we're an amazing 
force. We are the people, and history shows that it is the will of the
people, united, that triumphs.

The more you feed the public dialog and contribute, the more we 
can fight back effectively against Co$. But even one action or just $5 
can accomplish a tremendous amount -- multiplied by the efforts and
contributions of tens of thousands of your fellow Netizens.
 
NO ONE can stand alone in this fight. We WILL win with your help.
We won in the underlying Scientology v. Ewe Geertz case. (In
this case, Scientology first demanded millions in damages, then as
more information came out, they said: "give us a dollar and we will 
drop the case". Then, as even more came out about them, they dropped 
the case with prejudice against them and their tail between their 
legs. Now, Geertz and Fishman have filed a malicious prosecution case 
AGAINST Scientology for its bad faith malicious litigation.)
 
FACTNet will be true to its acronym (Fight Against Coercive Tactics
Network). We will not just defend.  We will use your donations to also
seek new charges against Scientology for damages for its bad faith and
dirty handed attack on our nonprofit library and archive.
 
So please, please, mail us a donation to help us fight back or point
your  browser to [unique web address] or email [unique email address]
and find out  more about how you can help win this battle safely.
 
IMHO,
Lawrence Wollersheim
Executive Director
For the Board of Directors of FACTNet, Inc.
 
P.S. FACTNet's Director Arnie Lerma goes before the court NEXT WEEK --
so  please act quickly. Don't let Helena Korbin and Scientology's
high-powered lawyers roll all over our First Amendment rights --  and
destroy the Internet in the process. Point your browser to [unique web
address] or email [unique email address] RIGHT NOW before you turn
back to your busy day. 
 
FACTNet 
601 16th St. C-217, Golden CO. 80401, USA
Voice 1-303-473-0111

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
The FACTNet electronic lending library and archive can be found on our
BBS, 1-303-530-1942.  Log on and follow the instructions on the
screen.  Selected information can also be found at the following
sites.
 
Internet FTP Sites:
 
ftp.rmii.com  (The directory pub2/factnet contains a BIG zipped file
that mirrors the BBS's state last June.)
ftp: marvel.loc.gov
ftp.primenet.com/users/c/cultxpt
ftp.rahul.net/pub/homer
FTP.PCNET.COM/users/brianw
RTFM.MIT.EDU/pub/usenet/alt.answers/scientology/users
 
America Online:
Keyword Religion; select 'other religions'; goto other religions file
area, scroll back to Oct 25, 94 and you will find many affidavits.
Also, select ''Philosphy" then "philosophy file area" and scroll back
to March 25, for affidavits from Fishman and Scarff.
 
OTHER WWW WEB SITES: (Information may still be on most of these sites.
Some may have been removed )
 
http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/home.html
http://www.demon.co.uk/castlsys/clambust.html
http://www.xs4all.nl/~fonss/  
http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/home.html
http://amazing.cinenet.net/scientology.html
http://wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us:80/~btcarrol/home/Bobshome.html 
(the Scientology stuff is in his dictionary thing)
http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Legal/Cases/CoS_v_the_Net/
http://www.theta.com/goodman/
http://www.sky.net/~sloth/sci/sci_index.html
http://www.snafu.de/~tilman
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Fishman/

                                k.b.

*************** end of forwarded Press Release from FactNet ***************

-- 
OmniMedia              | The Electronic Bookstore.  Come in and browse!  Two
9671 S. 1600 West St.  | locations:  ftp.netcom.com  /pub/Om/OmniMedia/books
South Jordan, UT 84095 | and  ftp.awa.com  /pub/softlock/pc/products/OmniMedia
801-253-4037           | E-book publishing service follows NWU recommendations.

From elastic!jaywon.pci.on.ca!noc.tor.hookup.net!hookup!news.mathworks.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!noring Thu Aug 24 09:14:23 1995
Xref: elastic news.admin.misc:3170
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.politics.datahighway,alt.privacy.anon-server,alt.religion.christian,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property,misc.legal,misc.legal.computing,news.admin.misc
Path: elastic!jaywon.pci.on.ca!noc.tor.hookup.net!hookup!news.mathworks.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!noring
From: [email-masked] (Jon Noring)
Subject: [FORWARDED] WASHINGTON POST SUED FOR VIOLATING SCIENTOLOGY COPYRIGHTS
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Followup-To: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal
Summary: Propaganda Piece From the Church of Scientology
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
References: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 03:00:12 GMT
Lines: 131
Sender: [email-masked]

Forwarded from alt.religion.scientology.  It is a propaganda piece written by
the Church of Scientology (CoS), so read it with this fact in mind.

Followup discussion has been set to alt.religion.scientology, comp.org.eff.talk,
and misc.legal.

Jon Noring

*****************************************************************************

In article to a.r.s., [email-masked] (Andrew Milne) writes:

                                                August 22, 1995
NEWS RELEASE

CONTACT:  LEISA GOODMAN OR
EARLE COOLEY
(202) 667-6404

     WASHINGTON POST SUED FOR VIOLATING SCIENTOLOGY COPYRIGHTS

     The Washington Post and two of its reporters were sued today in the
U.S.  District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia by the
Religious Technology Center (RTC), holders of the intellectual property
rights of the Scientology religion.  According to the lawsuit, the
Washington Post and its writers have engaged in "extensive, intentional
copyright infringement and trade secrets misappropriattion, targeting
confidential Scientology scriptures belonging to RTC." Judge Leonie
Brinkema of the U.S.  District Court in Alexandria, due to the urgent
nature of the matter, scheduled an August 25 hearing on the temporary
restraining order and impoundment application to get the Washington Post
to turn over the misappropriated documents.

     The lawsuit is an amendment of a complaint that was filed on August
11 against an Arlington man, Arnaldo Lerma, and his Internet access
provider Digital Gateway Systems, for copyright and trade secrets
infringement.  According to Boston lawyer Earle C.  Cooley, who
represents Religious Technology Center, the newspaper and their two
reporters, Richard Leiby and Marc Fisher, were added to the lawsuit
because they engaged in their own direct infringements of plaintiff's
copyright interests and misappropriation of plaintiff's trade secrets,
while at the same time aiding, supporting, encouraging, and facilitating
blatant acts of infringement and misappropriation by Lerma.

     The day after the lawsuit was filed, on August 12, a search and
seizure order by Judge Brinkema was carried out at Lerma's home by
Federal Marshals and computer software, hardware and documents were
confiscated.  Church lawyers report that they were able to establish
that Lerma lied because, contrary to his assertions that computer discs
had been purged of any stolen materials, their electronic experts have
already found 63 copyright items among the seized material.

     The new lawsuit reveals that Lerma sent the protected materials to
Leiby when he was put on notice by the Church to stop violating its
copyright and trade secret rights.  The Church now charges that this was
done in an attempt to obstruct justice by concealing the stolen copies
from lawful seizure.  The suit claims the existence of evidence which
shows that Richard Leiby choreographed and instigated Lerma's illegal
conduct for his own campaign of harassment against the Scientology
religion.  According to the lawsuit, Leiby's campaign dates back more
than 15 years.

     Church spokeswoman Leisa Goodman said "The Washington Post and Mr.
Leiby violated fundamental journalistic integrity by conspiring with
lawless elements on the Internet to harm the religion of Scientology."

     Once the Church became aware that its materials were in the
possession of Richard Leiby, it demanded their immediate return.  Leiby
and the Washington Post handed the stolen copies over to RTC's lawyers
last week on August 15.  However, "the return of the materials, a
seeming display of good faith, was an utter ruse", the complaint states.
"At the same time that the materials were being returned to the Church
in Washington, Leiby, Fisher and the Post were getting copies of the
same stolen records from the clerk's file in LA where litigation was
pending regarding the sealing of such materials.  A Post reporter
persuaded the clerk's office to take the documents away from a Church
employee who had checked out the file, to make copies for the Post," the
complaint continues.

     The Church reacted with an emergency motion to the judge on the
case in Los Angeles, who immediately ordered the entire case file sealed
on August 15, when he was told that the Washington Post had obtained a
copy of the copyrighted and trade secret materials.

     According to the lawsuit, the Church immediately demanded the
materials back and also put the post on notice "that its actions could
not remotely be deemed news gathering, but rather constituted wholesale
copying of a large amount of copyrighted trade secret information in an
attempt to sanitize the illicit acquisition of infringing documents
which Leiby and the Post concealed on Lerma's behalf."

     Church spokeswoman Goodman discounted the notion that any free
speech or fair-use issues were involved.  "Violators of copyright and
trade secret laws traditionally try to hide behind free speech or
fair-use claims.  The Church is a strong proponent of free speech and
fair-use.  It publishes its own investigative magazine and cherishes the
First Amendment.  However, free speech or fair-use does not mean free
theft and no one, the Washington Post included, has the right to cloak
themselves in the First Amendment to break the law."

     Despite repeated warnings from Church lawyers, last Saturday the
Washington Post published a lengthy article by Marc Fisher, which
included quotes from the copyrighted, trade secret materials.  "Prior to
publication of the article, the defendants were placed on notice that
their actions would constitute a violation of plaintiff's rights," said
Goodman.

     "The Post made a serious mistake," RTC's lawyer Earle C.  Cooley
contends, "in allowing themselves to be manipulated by a few maliciously
motivated dissidents who want to use the Post to forward their religious
hate campaign.  The courts take these matters very seriously.  The law
is clear: If you are going to violate copyrights, you will have to
answer for it in court.  This applies to the Washington Post just as
much as to anyone else."

     With this lawsuit, Religious Technology Center is asking the court
to order the return of its documents by the Washington Post and grant a
permanent injunction against the Post and the individual violators of
its rights.  It also seeks statutory damages and punitive damages.

                                 -30-

************* end of forwarded post ****************

-- 
OmniMedia              | The Electronic Bookstore.  Come in and browse!  Two
9671 S. 1600 West St.  | locations:  ftp.netcom.com  /pub/Om/OmniMedia/books
South Jordan, UT 84095 | and  ftp.awa.com  /pub/softlock/pc/products/OmniMedia
801-253-4037           | E-book publishing service follows NWU recommendations.

   From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Scientology suits
   Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 19:04:45 -0400
     To: [email-masked]
     Cc: [email-masked]
--------

>Xref: utcsri comp.org.eff.talk:60821 comp.security.misc:20358 ott.general:14550
>Newsgroups: comp.security.misc,comp.org.eff.talk,ott.general,ncf.general
>Path: utcsri!utnut!torn!nott!cunews!freenet.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!ai474
>From: [email-masked] (Farrell McGovern)
>Subject: Potential Security Threat to everyone on the NET.
>Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
>Sender: [email-masked] (Farrell McGovern)
>Reply-To: [email-masked] (Farrell McGovern)
>Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
>Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 17:42:39 GMT
>Lines: 256

Greetings:

	In case you were unaware, there is a major battle happening
between a number of Net Citizens, and the Scientologists. The appended
document (Known as the Capricorn Document) outlines a possible threat to
everyone who runs a system that carries Usenet, a WWW server or email and
has even one user who has posted or made available information that is
critical in any way of the so-called Church of Scientology. 

	The greater threat that stems from the Scientologists's threat is
the precident it would set if allowed to go through. It could mean that if
any user of your system, or yourself are critical of an organization, they
could come and sieze your equipment...computers, modems, etc., as has been
done already to a couple of people already, as well as the anon-posting
site in Finland...so this affects not just people who reside in the USA,
but the rest of the world as well. For more information, you may want to
start following the comp.org.eff.talk and alt.religion.scientology
newsgroups.

ttyl
     Farrell

[begin (The Capricorn Document)]

Path: news.unt.edu!cs.utexas.edu!convex!news.eng.convex.com!news.netins.net!news-feed-1.peachnet.ed
u!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!EU.net!sun4
nl!xs4all!utopia.hacktic.nl!not-for-mail
From: [email-masked] (Anonymous)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: The Capricorn Document -- Scientology's Plan?
Date: 18 Aug 1995 20:25:25 +0200
Organization: RePLaY aND CoMPaNY UnLimited
Lines: 203
Sender: [email-masked]
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: utopia.hacktic.nl
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 11145     
XComm: Replay may or may not approve of the content of this posting
XComm: Report misuse of this automated service to <[email-masked]>

[forwarded]

What is about to be laid out for you is going to be a bit bizarre but a
few months ago had someone told you that Internet users would be raided,
you would have said that was an insane concept. What you are going to read
is based on some insider information and some educated speculation. 

Take it as you will. 

There is something called a RICO suit. RICO stands for
Racketeering-Influenced Corrupt Organization. It was written to fight
organized crime conspiracies that reach across state lines and involve a
number of people and organizations. 

Scientology is building a RICO suit to file against dozens of people and
organizations across the U.S. that they will say are a conspiracy to
destroy the Scientology religion. The words "religious genocide" will be
used. At the center of the conspiracy will be the Cult Awareness Network
and it will extend out to include some psychiatrists, some attorneys, some
media and a number of critics and former members. The Net will be cited as
the nervous system/nexus for the conspiracy. The suit will be used to sue
people that Scientology executives feel they cannot reach or sue in any
other way. 

Key attorneys who have successfully fought Scientology in the courts will
be named, in the theory that they cannot be of any help to the defendants
because they are defendant. Key experts on Scientology and cults will also
be named for the same reason. Some "deprogrammers" (exit counselors) will
be named. A number of people who post on the Net will be named. (You were
wondering why they were tracking down a number of people who post to
alt.religion.scientology? That's why. So they can be served.) A couple of
ISPs will probably be named as well as some media people. 

(Believe it or not, much of the design of this suit is to make it as
believable as possible. They will look at the elements and someone might
say, "Hey, we don't have any...", as if it were a movie or a story, the
presence of which will make the conspiracy work if it has to be put onto a
huge board, showing how all the pieces fit. And before you ridicule this
idea, read on.)

There will also be elements that will allow the suit to be exported
overseas. That is, there will be links to Germany and Spain. The RICO suit
cannot name someone in a non-US country as a defendant but it will lay the
groundword so a similar suit can be filed in another country, which will
then link back to the US suit. Germany and some people and institutions
there will be a primary target in Europe. 

When that happens, then the entire matter will also be packed and taken to
the various European councils and commissions on the allegations of
"religious genocide." The Net will be cited as the "conveyor belt" of
"false reports" and "hate." 

The idea is to silence as many areas as possible by bringing them into
litigation. Then even if they speak out, Scientology can say how they are
being sued and place everything in that context. 

As much as possible, people who work for companies or corporations will be
named as individuals. The strategy is to not let the company's insurance
cover them, so they have to pay for their own attorney. 

What will be used to link the conspiracy will be material that has been
posted on the Net as well as writings from other places, such as news
articles, news letters etc. Thus the great wealth of "anti-Scientology" 
posting that have been going on for months will be used to show thousands
of "hate-filled" posts attacking the "religion of Scientology." (Note: 
Many of the posts from Scientologists to ARS were designed by to draw
those responses or to make it appear that it happened. In some cases,
posts were written to make it appear as if they were coming from
anti-Scientologists.) This includes alleged "death threats" against
Scientologists. 

This idea of a large, multi-defendant suit was proposed by Hubbard years
ago, long before RICO. He wanted to use it against the government. He
wanted then to have it move to the Eureopean Commission (now a Council) on
the charge of religious genocide, trying to destroy a religion. Initial
work has already been done, presenting material to these commissions. 

It will also be taken to the US Congress, where there is already concern
for the anarchy of the Net, as well as other legislative bodies. 

The first suit of this kind by Scientology was pre-RICO. It was put
together in the mid-1970s as a massive conspiracy between the FBI, the
IRS, the US Department of Justice, etc. It asked for $750 million dollars
in damages. The suit was pursued for year but was finally lost. 

That orginal Hubbard plan is what is being used to design the RICO suit. 
The raid on Dennis Ehrlich and then Arnie Lerma are about
copyright/trademark violations but they are being used to find the
documentation needed for RICO. It may have been the reason for the raid on
penet.fi. Whether or not Scientology feels it has enough now to file the
suit (since they have documents from California and DC and the Net and
thus inter-state) is what is being reviewed. Another raid may be needed. 

If you look at ARS posts from the perspective of a massive suit being
planned, then you see Woody's "the Net persecutors" in a different light. 
Yes, he is a bot but while everyone laughs at him and ridicules him and
taunts him, he is pumping out the message that is part of the plan. So is
Milne. Most of what they have been doing is baiting people who will say
outrageous things so this can all be compiled for the court record to show
that ARS is a hotbed of hate for their "genocide" charge. 

Now some will say this is insane, that this is crazy, and ask, does
Scientology really hope to win this type of suit? Won't they just irritate
more people and the Net? Don't they care? 

First, it must be remembered that according to Hubbard, the purpose of a
law suit is not to win. The purpose is to harass. (They are expensive and
time-consuming for defendants.) For Scientology they are a way to get
information through subpoenas and the discovery process. It will give them
the resources they feel they need to get more information to find the
source of the "conspiracy." 

So they don't care if they irritate more people. They believe that people
are critical of them because of this conspiracy. Thus they must face that
criticism to find the conspiracy, for when it is exposed, then the
criticism will stop. (There are more technical reasons in Hubbard's
material but that is basically the idea.) And if the criticism increases,
it means that they are getting closer to the truth. (In other words, the
more you berate them, the more they feel they are right. It is like
beating a masochist to get him to stop being a masochist. It doesn't work.
What does? Read on.)

It needs to be said quickly that the greatest mistake one can make about
this group is to misestimate it through ridicule and disdain.  First, it
doesn't do anything to them and second it makes one feel that they are
weak, stupid, incapable etc. and that you are better. Those who take that
attitude don't last. There is no better way to lose anything than to be
arrogant. 

It has been said that the Net will prove to be Scientology's Viet Nam. 
This is true as long as those on the Net don't make the mistake that the
American generals made: they held the Viet Cong in disdain. They saw the
VC as crude, primitive, dumb commies while Americans were clearly smarter,
more technologically advanced and thus superior. Look who runs Viet Nam
today. 

Many people on ARS make this mistake and all it really does is encourage
others to do the same. This doesn't mean that one can't ridicule or
chastize or laugh at something stupid but you better do it with the
knowledge what and who you are laughing at and not let it replace or mask
some smarts. 

This admonition is made here not because some will laugh at this whole
theory of a RICO suit and will boast and strut and laugh and urge
Scientology to come get 'em etc. That sort of macho bullshit is the last
thing that is needed. It proves nothing except that one does not know
Scientology. And that attitude hasn't stopped Scientology. Witness Dennis
and Arnie and whoever is next. 

Now the question becomes, if this is true, if Scientology is planning a
RICO suit, what can be done. Well, as far as the suit, nothing. They will
file what they will file. What has been done and said on ARS has been done
and said. It can't be retracted. A lot of people (from both sides) have
made a lot of stupid remarks and Scientology has saved ever word of it.
(However, if you want to give them more to convince the authorities why
ARS is a hate-filled group, hey, go for it. It will only be attached to
the next submission to the next judge for the next raid or suit.)

Those who feel they may be possible target should take due precautions. 
They should consult an attorney, for example, for proper advice. They
might also want to take proper precautions regarding their documents,
e.g., to make sure that what they have is okay to have etc. Ask your
attorney, not ARS. 

As far as ARS itself, the actions taken on ARS have now given the
Scientologists the opportunity to get the Fishman documents sealed. This
is a win for Scientology and was handed to them by ARS actions. Scream all
you want but what was done on ARS was able to do what Scientology could
not do. Scientology tried to get those files sealed and the courts
refused. Well, they are now sealed and Scientology is now going to use
that fact for more letters etc. 

Is anyone catching on? 

In short, some people need to wise up. If they want to endanger themselves
by taunting the organization, do it in e-mail. Otherwise they are
endangering more than themselves. There is much to the Scientology belief
system and its history that deserves open dialogue and discussion and
debate. There is more than enough without endangering the debate itself.
Taunting is not debate or dialogue. (Anyone remember the geological
analysis of OT 3? That was not a taunt. That was analysis and good
analysis at that.)

There is some concern about the attack on MoFo. Don't worry about it that
much. It doesn't mean that it isn't serious. Only that it is MoFo's
concern.  Scientology wants to start undercutting MoFo, hoping MoFo might
lose some clients. Leave it to MoFO. ARS shouldn't try to fight their
fights.  There is more than enough on ARS to talk about. 

To close on the RICO suit itself, don't waste time trying to be an
armchair attorney on ARS and try to guess what one should do when the suit
is filed. That is like those dumbass reporters at the Gulf War who wanted
the Army to say what would they do if Hussein used gas, etc. You don't
discuss defenses in public! All it shows is your own ignorance. If
Scientology is dumb enough to go RICO, there are things that can be done. 
What has to be done right now is work by individuals who feel they may be
named, companies (ISPs) who feel that way, those who are concerned about
the direction ARS has taken and the integrity of ARS, not to mention the
Net itself. 

Good luck. 

Capricorn

-- 
"Freedom is meaningless unless  | [email-masked] - James Childers
 you can give to those with whom| No man's freedom is safe
 you disagree." - Jefferson     |    while Congress is in session
        EA 73 53 12 4E 08 27 6C   21 64 28 51 92 0E 7C F7
--
The Information Cowpath is strewn with Meadow Muffins...even the best of
us get the Meadow Muffin Blues every now and then...
POEE, ERIS, FNORD, DISCORDIA, KALLISTI, POLYAMORY, R.A.W., LEARY, GOLDEN
APPLE, FIAWOL, APA, TORI AMOS, KATE BUSH, SARAH MCLACHLAN, LOREENA MCKENNITT
-- 
Frank Ch. Eigler // [email-masked]
                // [email-masked]
               // [email-masked]
From elastic!jaywon.pci.on.ca!noc.tor.hookup.net!metrics.com!nic.wat.hookup.net!wire!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!news.bc.net!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!news.sas.ab.ca!fn1.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca!identity Wed Sep 20 22:12:43 1995
Xref: elastic can.legal:1523
Path: elastic!jaywon.pci.on.ca!noc.tor.hookup.net!metrics.com!nic.wat.hookup.net!wire!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!news.bc.net!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!news.sas.ab.ca!fn1.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca!identity
From: [email-masked] ()
Newsgroups: can.legal
Subject: Bad Scientology-Good Scientology
Date: 19 Sep 1995 22:37:21 GMT
Organization: Edmonton Freenet, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Lines: 85
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: fn1.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca
Summary: 85 lines of text that are not popular.
Keywords: Scientology, Psychology, Professional Misconduct
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2.3]

Broad Public Announcement

After contemplating the optimum solution that will serve the greatest good
for the greatest number, I have decided to sue the Church of Scientology
of Toronto, the Church of Scientology of Alberta, and a secular
Scientology group in the field of education called Progressive Academy
Education Society of Alberta in Edmonton, for the failures and omissions
and bad actions of those organization's scientology staff members, which
include failure to adhere to the ethical codes of scientology. I seek
redress for the consequences and impact upon the lives of the members of
my family said gross professional misconduct has had. 

Please feel free to contact me at the E-Mail address below.

My true motives for hostility of this type and magnitude is that my wife
and I and our children have all been denied the benefits of properly
performed marriage counseling, and these people want me to just accept the
unworkable technology they dreamed up and continue along in Scientology as
if nothing was wrong with the ethical standards of these people, and I am
just expected to accept injustice upon myself as a requirement of good
standing with these scientology organizations? Those organizations staff
members went insane in their efforts to force me to accept the unworkable
technology being delivered Edmonton. 

It is the being denied workable technology that exists but is being made
unworkable and quite harmful in the hands of these people that I am
hostile about. The efforts of these individuals is to deny me all
scientology services unless I accept altered versions of it, and this goes
against my constitutional right to freedom of religion. 

I reserve my right to the practice my religion and the right to sue those
who in their efforts to destroy the sanity of other people, apply powerful
religious confession technology as incorrectly as possible, and then try
to take advantage of the ensuing disasters by offering themselves as the
solution to the problem the bad marriage advises caused. 

My wife was told to keep Scientology out of the divorce due to how
backward and self serving the counseling we did receive had been. These
people risk de- certification and have done all possible to escape any
corrective discipline with cruel disregard to the welfare of the members
of my family which their efforts to foment conflict and sever
communications caused. 

There is a war going on behind the scenes in scientology that this divorce
is only a small symptom of. 

If you can envision that I was in active training to be a psychologist
(shudder at the thought) and other psychologists sold and delivered
counseling contrary to that which is recommended in the standard manuals.
You will understand how easy this is going to be to prove negligence. And
you are going to have to be wiling to wade threw the efforts to cover up.

I am not letting these people get away with willful and knowing damage
caused my family and other people by their refusal to get trained
correctly. It is honesty that is lacking here. And that lack of honesty
for fear of the consequences should they tell the truth is what makes
these people a menace to the public. Give me some help to effectively sue
this case, and you will be one very respected person. Not many people
survive standing up against persons who have come into positions of power
in scientology for they can command others upon penalty of expulsion to do
their dirty work for them. It is not the little fish I want here. We will
have those for breakfast. The bigger fish we will make a sit d own dinner
over, and we will invite the towns people to the feast. It promises to be
one big media feeding frenzy, with lots of costs and punishments galore, 
even for the innocent. But that is only occasioned by the  
refusal to "own up" on the part  of the actual offenders. 

I would rather settle this out of court, but the lack of real ability of
scientology to effectively police the members of it's own profession makes
it necessary to find and use an alternative measure since practitioners
who lie and false report actions to look more competent than they really
are, just can not be trusted. 

For more data let me know you are interested in seeing Justice done on
this mater. The ones who have been responding to these posts have too much
prejudices against scientology and do not seem to be able to brush aside
all bias and rumor to be effective in serving my needs. 

--

Signed: Nelson 
E-Mail at: [email-masked]

From [email-masked] Sun Apr  7 01:54:28 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:5974 misc.news.internet.discuss:379
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.news.internet.discuss,alt.culture.usenet,alt.censorship
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!reptiles.org!hookup!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!henri
From: [email-masked] (henry)
Subject: GRADY WARD PRESS RELEASE
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Siged: SigEd V1.3.1, Add .sig and PGP flexibility to posts.
X-Siged-Url: http://www.nyx.net/~pgregg/siged/
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 05:39:20 GMT
Lines: 62
Sender: [email-masked]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: March 29, 1996 
 
Grady Ward (707) 826 7715 [email-masked] 
 
http://www.northcoast.com/~grady/Welcome.html 
 
FEDERAL JUDGE LIMITS SCOPE OF TEMPORARY INJUNCTION 
 
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA - Grady Ward, a computer lexicographer from Arcata, 
California won a limiting of the temporary injunction sought against him by

the criminal cult of scientology based in Los Angeles, California. 
 
While U.S. District Court Judge Ronald M. Whyte, temporarily enjoined Grady

Ward of Arcata, California, and anyone acting in concert with him, from 
copying or soliciting certain disputed secret cult literature, the Judge 
agreed to include language specifically ensuring that readers of 
alt.religion.scientology and others on the Internet have free, lawful 
access to all cult literature, including those claimed as a "trade secret" 
by the criminal cult of scientology. 
 
Given the background of physical raids on critics of the cult and the 
cult's proven criminality -- several top members of the cult including the 
founder's wife were sentenced to federal prison in the seventies -- Judge 
Whyte also specifically admonished the three law firms arrayed against 
Grady Ward not to abuse their privilege of discovery. In May of last year 
Grady Ward's 74 year old mother identified a criminal cult private 
investigator, Eugene Martin Ingram as the man who stole a photograph of 
Ward and his wife and children from her. According to the cult "scriptures"

penned by science-fiction L. Ron Hubbard, critics are to be 
 
"if possible, utterly destroyed. The purpose of a lawsuit is to harass, 
not to win." 
 
- -30- 

- --
fuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuck
f                                                      f
u       "When you can't say 'fuck,' you can't say      u
c       'FUCK THE CDA!' -- Lenny Bruce rephrased       c
k                                                      k
fuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuck

ObURL:  http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/erlich/defense-fund  

 [ For Public Key: finger [email-masked] ]

From co@ Sun Apr  7 09:29:17 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:6084
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!reptiles.org!ican.net!infoshare!istar.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!solace!nntp.uio.no!nntp.uib.no!nntp-bergen.UNINETT.no!nntp-trd.UNINETT.no!due.unit.no!!co
From: co@ (Chris Owen)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: ANDERSON REPORT: Chapter 6 - Hubbard, The Founder of Scientology
Date: 29 Mar 1996 20:26:24 GMT
Organization: Nettverksgruppa
Lines: 631
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: romeo-klive.nvg.unit.no

                              The Anderson Report

                                   CHAPTER 6
                       HUBBARD-THE FOUNDER OF SCIENTOLOGY

                                   Biography.

Lafayette Ronald Hubbard, the founder of scientology, was born at Tilden,
Nebraska, U.S.A., on the 13th March, 1911, the son of H. R. and Ledora May (nee
Waterbury). He claims to be descended from Count de Loup "who entered England
with the Norman invasion and became the founder of the English de Wolfe family
which emigrated to America in the 17th century." His father's family came to
America in the 19th century. His father's mother was a Scot; his maternal
grandfather was a cattleman in Montana, on whose ranch Hubbard was raised till
he was ten. In his later childhood and adolescence Hubbard travelled
extensively in Northern China and India with his father whose duties as a
United States naval officer took him to the Orient. His sojourn in the East
aroused in him an interest in Eastern philosophies and he learned something of
the Buddhist and other teachings from fakirs and yogis whom he met. His early
formal education seems to have been sporadic. One of his friends and early
tutors is claimed to have been a Commander Thompson, a doctor in the United
States Navy, who is said to have been a student of Sigmund Freud in Vienna.

>From 1930 to 1932 Hubbard was a student at the George Washington University
where he claims to have studied engineering and to have been one of the first
men to have studied nuclear physics. He has claimed, or allowed the claim to be
made and repeated frequently without denial by him, that he is a graduate of
that University in civil engineering, and he uses, and allows to be used in
relation to himself, the letters "B.S." and "C.E.", intending to convey the
impression that he has so graduated. In fact, he has no such qualification. He
claims other academic distinctions also - "many degrees" it is said - but the
only "university" degree which is identified is that of Doctor of Philosophy at
the Sequoia University, Southern California. The Board caused inquiries to be
made as to the identity of this university and was informed by the Australian
Consul-General in San Francisco that the Sequoia University was a privately
endowed institution which was not accredited, that is, not registered with the
Western Association of Schools and colleges, which is the accrediting body for
the west coast of America.

This somewhat suspect degree and a self-bestowed doctorate of scientology
enable Hubbard to describe himself and be described as "Doctor" Hubbard. Though
he writes extensively on medical matters, there is no basis for regarding him
as a doctor in the medical sense.

Between 1932 and 1941 he travelled extensively in Central America and developed
as a prolific writer of books of fiction, travel, science fiction and fantasy,
finding time "to write seven million words of published fact and fiction". In
dianetics and scientology it is evident that his output of science fiction has
continued unabated. He finds his early reputation as a science fiction writer
irksome, and in biographical information disseminated to scientologists his
science fiction proclivities are sometimes discreetly omitted.

During World War II he served as an officer in the United States Navy and
appears to have been seconded to the Royal Navy for a period.

As early as 1935 he appears to have been formulating some of the "axioms" which
later bloomed into 57 scientology and nearly 200 dianetic "self evident
truths". It is said that he wrote in 1938 a never-published work called by the
code name Excalibur, on the subject of the basic principles of human existence.

Both before and after World War II he studied hypnosis, and, as his writings
indicate, he practised it for some time. Out of the hotchpotch of his
experiences, his imagination and hypnosis he developed the theories which led
to the publication in 1948 of his first book on dianetics, entitled Dianetics,
The Original Thesis. His theories found little or no acceptance in orthodox
medical or psychological circles, but his extravagant ideas found some targets
on the fringe of learning and his writings appealed to some who accepted
uncritically and without proof the astonishing claims which he made. In 1950,
he wrote his first major book on dianetics, entitled Dianetics: The Modern
Science of Mental Health. This book he claims to be of 300,000 words, but it is
less than two-thirds that size, and his boast is that it was written in three
weeks. He claims that it was an instant success, a best seller, which over the
years has reached the million copy mark. The nature of dianetics is dealt with
later in this Report. A definition of the word has crept into Funk and
Wagnall's New Standard Dictionary in these terms, "A system for the analysis,
control and development of human thought evolved from a set of co-ordinated
axioms which also provide techniques for the treatment of a wide range of
mental disorders and organic diseases: the term and doctrines introduced by L.
Ron Hubbard, C.E., D.Scn., American engineer". Other books on dianetics
followed, the next substantial volume being Science of Survival, first
published in 1951, which deals extensively with the "dynamics of behaviour" and
"dianetics processing".

In about 1951 Hubbard established the Hubbard Dianetic Research Foundation in
California, but he appears to have had disputes with its board of management,
largely if not entirely because of his desire to explore advanced theories
which he had developed concerning the thetan and its past existence.
Accordingly, he severed his association with the Research Foundation in about
1952 and proceeded to found scientology which is the burden of this Report. The
development of dianetics into scientology and the continued close association
of both of these "sciences" with one another is dealt with later in this
report.

The first scientology book appears to have been Scientology: A History of Man,
published in manuscript in 1952 under the title of What to Audit and
subsequently reprinted several times under the first mentioned title,
Scientology: 8-80 also appeared in 1952, Scientology 8-8008 in 1953,
Scientology; The Fundamentals of Thought in 1956. Several other small books
appeared between 1952 and 1956, one of them being Self Analysis in Scientology
in 1954. Since 1956 no substantial definitive book on scientology has come from
Hubbard's pen though he has written many hundred of bulletins, letters and
directives and dozens of books and booklets on specific aspects of scientology
practice. He has further disseminated his ideas by a great number of tape
recordings, containing an estimated 30 million words.

In addition to his books, he has produced or inspired the production of several
scientology magazines in several countries, e.g., Great Britain, U.S.A.,
Australia, South Africa and New Zealand, with such titles as Ability,
Certainty, Reality, Affinity, Communication. For several years these magazines
have provided a very effective means of disseminating Hubbard's teachings
amongst his followers and advertising his books, courses and congresses. His
bulletins and other communications are frequently reproduced in these
magazines. Communication magazine is "The Official Periodical of Dianetics and
Scientology in Australia".

After Hubbard withdrew from the Hubbard Dianetic Research Foundation, it
experienced certain difficulties, the nature of which did not clearly emerge,
but seems to have been at least partly financial. In about 1954, Hubbard
"acquired" the Foundation and in 1955 the "Unification" Congress was held to
celebrate the occasion. Now that dianetics was once more his own, he wrote a
book, Dianetics 1955, described as "The Text Book of Human Communication,"
which dealt with dianetic techniques. Hubbard, however, had long been impatient
with the slowness of dianetic techniques. Further, dianetics claimed to
alleviate or cure man's mental and physical ailments. As a "science" claiming
to cure illnesses, Hubbard feared that dianetics was likely to be vulnerable to
scrutiny by civil authorities. Scientology, which officially did not claim to
cure, ran no such risk, so Hubbard felt, and, furthermore, it covered a wider
canvas and afforded better and more rapid methods of exploiting the gullible.
Hubbard accordingly proceeded actively to promote scientology, ostensibly
allowing dianetics to fade into the background. There is, however, a close and
continuous link between the two "sciences," and, notwithstanding attempts at
the Inquiry to assert the contrary, dianetics, if not in name, at least in
reality is still very actively engaged in by scientologists. Many of their
processes are virtually indistinguishable in essence. Dianetic and scientology
techniques are frequently hypnotic and of a kind which are potentially harmful
to mental health.

Hubbard had his headquarters in the U.S.A. for some years but about 1958 he
transferred them to England and he now operates from Saint Hill Manor, East
Grinstead, Sussex, England.

He has conducted congresses in various countries, visiting Victoria for that
purpose in 1959. These congresses are an important source of revenue for
Hubbard. A congress held in America in 1958 returned 800 dollars per head from
at least 140 people. "The Games Congress," held in America in 1956, was
attended by about 450 people.

By frequent and repeated reference to his qualities Hubbard has built up for
himself in the eyes of his followers a mighty image. The adulation and
obeisance which they offer him is almost unbelievable. Scientology students are
specifically taught that he is not God, lest they think he is. He himself
insists in The Creation of Human Ability, that preclears must be taught that he
is only a man. He poses as a benign father to his scientology family. He
stresses that he is always available to his flock. He is very approachable, and
he encourages preclears to write directly to him, facilities for such
communications being provided at the HASI. Frequently such communications are
of a confessional nature, as Hubbard suggests they should be, and on this
account his control over his followers becomes stronger.

In appearance he seems to be a solidly built man, perhaps a little over average
height with sandy or red hair, thick but receding slightly, and a broad face
and ruddy complexion. A larger than life bronze bust of Hubbard stands in the
reception office of the Melbourne HASI, little the worse for the damage done by
an assault on it by a disturbed scientologist. An important requirement by
Hubbard is that a weekly report on the processing of each preclear should be
forwarded to him at Saint Hill. His condescension in considering each
preclear's processing report is stressed as an indication of his magnanimity
and the preclear is suitably impressed, not realizing until it is too late that
he is very effectively acquiring domination over the awe-struck preclear.

He makes for himself, and allows others to make for him, the most exalted
claims, He repeatedly asserts that he has perfected the techniques necessary to
audit preclears to clear and beyond, and he complains that it is the fault of
auditors who are unable to audit and use the E-meter that preclears have not
yet become clear and OT. Jack Horner, the author of Summary of Scientology,
writes of Hubbard, "I wish to state that L. Ron Hubbard is, in my opinion, one
of the great geniuses of the 20th century, and that his discoveries will make
possible a new era of living for Man." Such eulogies are not infrequent and are
not discouraged by Hubbard. In the eyes of his followers he is infallible.
Their attitude fervently expressed, is, "Ron is right," " What Ron says goes,"
whatever he says or does. His mighty stature is heightened by permitting, and
indeed encouraging, his followers to address him as "Ron". Everyone is on
first-name terms with him.

His manor house at Saint Will is the Mecca of his followers. The optimum state
in scientology, that of being operating thetan (or OT), is said to be
attainable only through the portals of Saint Hill or, at the very least,
through processing by a graduate of Saint Hill.

He resides and presides at the manor house, a Georgian building of perhaps
eighteen or so rooms, attended by a domestic staff consisting of a butler,
housekeeper, two cleaners, a butler's assistant, tutor for the children, a
nanny, and an estate staff which includes a chauffeur and maintenance staff.

He claims to be a man of substantial private means, making no charge, so he
says, for the use of Saint Hill by the organization for conducting advanced
courses and for experimental and administrative purposes. He claims that he
does not benefit financially from the 10 per cent. of all gross takings which
the HASI's throughout the world are required to pay as a levy to scientology
headquarters. Nor does he benefit financially, so he claims, from the fees
which advanced students pay for the courses they attend at Saint Hill. He says
that his own means are provided by the proceeds of the sale of property in
America and of a yacht.

He married his present wife, Mary Sue, in 1950. She is as enthusiastic about
scientology as he is. It is said that when Hubbard works out a new auditing
process, she first of all tries it out on him. It is certain that at least on
several occasions she has been his auditor. Psychiatric evidence which the
Board heard was to the effect that preclears tended to become dependent upon
and under the domination of their auditor, because of certain undesirable
features of scientology processing techniques. The extent to which Hubbard has
become dependent on and under the domination of Mary Sue has not clearly
appeared. That she is a person of considerable misdirected ability seems
evident. Her contribution to scientology is substantial.

Hubbard is a man of restless energy, with tremendous enthusiasm in everything
he undertakes. He is constantly experimenting and speculating, and equally
constantly he confuses the two. He has acquired in a frenetic but superficial
way a smattering Or knowledge of many subjects. In very many instances,
however, his knowledge is fragmentary and inaccurate and sometimes positively
incorrect, yet it serves as the foundation for pretentious and completely
misleading pronouncements on scientific matters of which he is ignorant. In
other instances where he has not even "enough of learning to misquote," he
gives full rein to his imagination to produce incomprehensible and absurd
results.

All that he writes and says is either accepted by his followers or, at the very
least, it is not rejected. They are taught that they are entitled to question
his pronouncements, but they are conditioned to the belief that whatever he
says is right.

He has revised the calendar by renumbering the years, starting with the year
1950, the year in which he founded dianetics. Thus, "AD 10" means in the tenth
year of dianetics and scientology, or 1960 to those who have not "cognited" on
his "sciences".

To keep the illusion of greatness and condescension, he purports to establish
what in effect is a Hubbardian dynasty by instituting the International Council
of Dianetics and Scientology which is "legalized by the legal structure of HCO
Ltd and by my will of December 26, 1960" to which (amongst others, including
Williams and his wife), are appointed two quite young children, both surnamed
Hubbard, as inheriting members for whom various properties may be held in
trust.

On his birthday in 1963, in HCO Bull. of the 13th March, he aspired to almost
regal dignity in his "Amnesty," which read -

     "On my birthday and on achieving my own fourth goal in clearing, and
     in celebration of the first Eight first goal Clears by 3M, I hereby
     extend and direct all the organizations, officials and staff of
     Scientology Organizations to grant all Dianeticists and
     Scientologists penalized before this date a complete amnesty . . .
     Any and all offences of any kind before this date, discovered or
     undiscovered, are fully and completely forgiven. Directed at Saint
     Hill, on March the thirteenth, 1963, in the 13th year of Dianetics
     and Scientology.
     L. Ron Hubbard".

His condescension is further evidenced by newsy circulars which he periodically
distributes, telling of the busy life he leads, with barely sufficient time for
his Pepsi-cola in the afternoon, and how he is improving on the organ which
Mary Sue gave him as a present.

Despite his apparent graciousness, he is intolerant of opposition and is
autocratic and harsh in his treatment of the dissident. By the imposition of
many extra hours of auditing he disciplines the unfortunate who is out of step.
He excommunicates the rebellious or threatens that they will be denied further
auditing. These threats to an indoctrinated preclear are terrifying.

He is governing director of Hubbard Association of Scientologists
International, the operative company of the HASI, over which he exercises
complete and autocratic control.

In what passes for research in scientology circles, he is constantly claiming
major "breakthroughs," each "discovery" being hailed by him as the ultimate and
accompanied by the most extravagant promises (none of which is realized), only
to be superseded by his next remarkable "discovery".

Some of his claims are that he has a cure for radiation burns, that he has been
up in the Van Allen Belt, that he has been on the planet Venus where he
inspected an implant station, and that he has been to Heaven. He even
recommends a protein formula for feeding non-breast fed babies, stating that he
"picked it up in Roman days".

He has an insensate hostility to psychiatrists and "medical doctors,"
psycho-analysts, psychologists, and those in other similar professions whose
field of study and practice is the human mind. His writings about such
professions are quite rabid at times. They are, in his estimation, frauds,
charlatans, butchers, and neurotics, and their techniques are, he says,
antiquated 19th century practices based on discredited continental procedures
and not since developed. By contrast, he offers the pure lily that is
scientology.

Hubbard is not concerned with logic as the following passage from Dianetics:
MSMH, shows,

     "Aristotle's syllogism in which two things equal to the same thing
     are equal to one another simply does not begin to work in logic . . .
     It is an abstract truth that two and two equal four. Two what and two
     what equal four? There is no scale made, no yardstick or caliper or
     microscope manufactured which would justify the actuality, for
     instance, that two apples plus two apples equal four apples. Two
     apples and two apples are four apples now if they are the same
     apples. They would not equal four other apples by any growth or
     manufacturing process ever imagined".

On his own admission he is not a philosopher. In Scientology, issue 15H,
copyright 1953, he wrote,

     "I am not, and never will pretend to be, a philosopher. The task of a
     philosopher is to go off and philosophise. Philosophers normally
     philosophise all the years of their lives, and in the books of
     philosophers all the absurdities and wisdom can be found. My entrance
     into this field of better minds was a forced one; I had a feeling
     that man ought to progress. It was with astonishment that I
     discovered that man, for all his prate of science, psychotherapy, all
     his yap of mysticism and philosophy in general, did not even vaguely
     know how to improve himself".

However Hubbard may appear to his devoted followers, the Board can form no
other view than that Hubbard is a fraud and scientology fraudulent. In forming
these conclusions, the Board has considered both the oral evidence and the
great volume of Hubbard's own writings; the following pages of this Report will
reveal that the conclusions at which the Board has arrived in relation to
Hubbard are based almost entirely upon his own writings.

One further appraisal of Hubbard, based on his writings, has been made. Expert
psychiatric opinion is that the many books, pamphlets. articles. bulletins, and
the like which bear Hubbard's name indicate in their author symptoms of
paranoid schizophrenia of long standing with delusions of grandeur. This aspect
is more fully dealt with later in this Chapter.

At an early stage of the Inquiry, Hubbard indicated that he did not intend to
come from England to give evidence before the Inquiry, being, as he said, quite
satisfied with the way Williams was handling the matter. Later, an application
was made to the Victorian Government and to the Board that Hubbard's expenses
be paid to enable him to give evidence. Such application was made, knowing it
would be refused - as it was. It was made for the purpose of providing a basis
of criticism of the report of this Board, which Hubbard knew by that time must
be hostile to him and to his "science". Hubbard had no intention of attending
the Inquiry. His dilemma was that if he were to repudiate his writings his
deceit would be confessed; and unless he repudiated them he stood condemned by
their content. The Board has been conscious of the fact that Hubbard did not
attend and give evidence but the decision not to attend lay with him, as also
did the decision in the closing days of the Inquiry to withdraw the legal
representation of the HASI before the Board.

The falsity of Hubbard's claims concerning himself and his "science" will be
examined later in this Report.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                Hubbard's Morbid Preoccupation with Perversion.

Much of Hubbard's writings show a morbid preoccupation with matters relating to
abnormal behaviour of women, sex, rape, abortions, and similar topics.
Especially in his books on dianetics, which are still recommended reading
without which it is said one cannot succeed in scientology, he shows a prurient
and distinctly unhealthy attachment to abortions, rape, perversion, and similar
matters. This attachment, however, is by no means limited to his dianetic
writings; there are several such references in his scientology writings also.

In Dianetics: MSMH and elsewhere, Hubbard declares that the engram and only the
engram causes aberration and psychosomatic illness. An engram is a moment of
"unconsciousness" containing physical pain or painful emotion. Most engrams
were prenatal, so Hubbard taught, and he goes to fanciful and quite ridiculous
lengths to illustrate how a prenatal engram is caused. There is no medical or
other rational justification for his wild theories, and most of them are quite
contrary to medical knowledge and to reason. Their ridiculous nature is perhaps
best illustrated by using his own words, for to paraphrase his writings on this
subject may give to them a suggestion of rationality which they certainly do
not possess.

In Dianetics: MSMH he writes,

     "Mama sneezes, baby gets knocked 'unconscious'. Mama runs lightly and
     blithely into a table and baby gets its head stoved in. Mama has
     constipation and baby, in the anxious effort, gets squashed. Papa
     becomes passionate and baby has the sensation of being put in a
     running washing machine. Mama gets hysterical, baby gets an engram.
     Papa hits Mama, baby gets an engram, Junior bounces on Mama's lap,
     baby gets an engram. And so it goes.

     People have scores of prenatal engrams when they are normal. They can
     have more than two hundred. And each one is aberrative. Each contains
     pain and 'unconsciousness'.

     Engrams received as a zygote are potentially the most aberrative,
     being wholly reactive. Those received as an embryo are intensely
     aberrative. Those received as the foetus are enough to send people to
     institutions all by themselves."

In the same book he writes:

     "The prenatal child can, of course, experience terror. When the
     parents or the professional abortionist start after it and thrust it
     full of holes, it knows fear and pain . . . however . . . Being
     surrounded by amniotic fluid and dependent for nutrition on its
     mother, being in a state of growth and easily reformed physically, it
     can repair an enormous amount of damage and does."

The Board heard expert medical evidence to the effect that the foetus could not
know fear and that, if thrust full of holes, it most certainly would not
survive.

The following ridiculous statement appears in the same book:

     "A large proportion of allegedly feeble-minded children are actually
     attempted abortion cases, whose engrams place them in rear paralysis
     or regressive palsy and which command them not to grow but to be
     where they are forever.

     However many billions America spends yearly on institutions for the
     insane and jails for the criminals are spent primarily because of
     attempted abortions done by some sex-blocked mother to whom children
     are a curse, not a blessing of God . . .

     The case of the child who, as this is read, is not yet born but upon
     whom abortion has been attempted, is not hopeless. If he is treated
     with decency after he is born and if he is not restimulated by
     witnessing quarrels he will wax. and grow fat until he is eight and
     can be cleared, at which time he will probably be much startled to
     learn the truth. But that statement and any antagonism included in it
     will vanish with the finishing of the clear and his love of his
     parents will be greater than before".

The chapter from which the above extracts are taken concludes:

     "All these things are scientific facts, tested and rechecked and
     tested again. And with them can be produced a clear on whom our
     racial future depends."

All this, of course, is untrue and is nonsense. The Board heard evidence from
an impressive body of expert medical witnesses which completely negatived
Hubbard's pretentious nonsense, including the passages quoted and many others
in Dianetics: MSMH. No good purpose would he served in painstakingly dealing
separately with every incorrect statement of Hubbard and illustrating precisely
how it was wrong. Such procedure would be too flattering to Hubbard's writings,
which are largely self-condemnatory, and if they are to be commented upon,
deserve no more comment than is sufficient to condemn them for the dangerous
nonsense that they are.

In Dianetics: MSMH Hubbard writes:

     "And in the case of the ulcers, here was baby poked full of holes
     (Mama is having a terrible time trying to abort him so she can
     pretend a miscarriage, and she uses assorted household instruments
     thrust into the cervix to do it) and some of the holes are through
     and through his baby's abdomen and stomach : he will live because he
     is surrounded by protein and has a food supply and because the sac is
     like one of these puncture-proof inner tubes that seals up every
     hole. (Nature has been smart about attempted abortion for a long,
     long time.) . . . Grandma lives next door and she comes over
     unexpectedly, shortly after the latest effort to make baby meet
     oblivion. Grandma may have been an attempted abortionist in her day
     but now she is old and highly moral."

In this book Hubbard tells of other cases:

     "A standard class of prenatal engram has as its content the worry of
     the parents that the child will be feeble-minded if not now aborted
     in earnest. This adds an emotional overload to such engrams and it
     adds, as importantly, an aberrative condition in the now grown
     patient that he is 'not right,' 'all wrong,' 'feeble-minded,' and so
     forth. The difficulty of aborting a child is nearly always
     underestimated: the means used are often novel or bizarre: the worry
     because the child has not come out of the womb after the abortion
     attempt is acute, and the concern that he is now damaged beyond
     repair all combine to make severely aberrative engrams."

Again:

     "Fathers, for instance, suspicious of paternity, sometimes claim
     while trouncing and upsetting mothers that they will kill the child
     if it isn't like Father. This is a very unhappy type of token to say
     nothing of being, usually, a bad engram; it can go to the extent of
     remodelling structure, of making noses long or hair assent; it may
     compel an aberree into a profession he does not admire and all out of
     the engramic command that he must be like the parent."

And again:

     "It is very noisy in the womb. A person may think he has sonic and
     yet hear no 'womb' sounds, which means that he does not have sonic
     but only 'dub-in'. Intestinal squeaks and groans, flowing water,
     belches, flatulation and other body activities of the mother produce
     a continual sound. It is also very tight in later prenatal life. In a
     high blood pressure case, it is extremely horrible in the womb. When
     mother takes quinine a high ringing noise may come into being in the
     foetal ears as well as her own - a ringing which will carry through a
     person's whole life.

     Mother gets morning sickness, has hiccoughs, and gets colds, coughs
     and sneezes. This is prenatal life.

     The only reason anybody 'wanted' to 'return to the womb' was because
     somebody hit mother and yelled 'Come back here!' so the person does."

And again Hubbard writes:

     "The standard attempted abortion case nearly always has an infanthood
     and childhood full of Mama assuring him that he cannot remember
     anything when he was a baby. She doesn't want him to recall how handy
     she was, if unsuccessful, in her efforts with various instruments
     .... In the normal course of work the auditor will have his hands
     full of Mama screaming objections about her grown son's or daughter's
     entering into therapy because of what they might find out: Mama has
     been known, by auditors, to go into a complete nervous collapse at
     the thought of her child's recalling prenatal incidents. Not all of
     this, by the way, is based on attempted abortion. Mama often has had
     a couple of more men than Papa that Papa never knew about; and Mama
     would very often rather condemn her child to illness or insanity or
     merely unhappiness than let a child pursue the course of the
     preclear."

The interpretation which Hubbard seeks to put upon the mother's objection to
her child's undergoing auditing is that she fears that her guilty secrets will
be revealed; this is in line with his frequent assertion made in his pamphlet,
Why some fight scientology (see Chapter 26) and elsewhere that families and
friends of preclears oppose their interest in scientology because they have
some shameful secret which they fear will be revealed to the preclear.

Again, in Dianetics: MSMH, Hubbard writes,

     "Engrams, particularly in the prenatal area, are in chains"

and he lists a number of such chains which include coitus chain, father; coitus
chain, lover; constipation chain; contraceptive chain; attempted abortion
chain; masturbation chain. He explains that these chains are series of
incidents of similar types, and the burden of his writing is that the unborn
child records and remembers them, being able to distinguish each particular
kind of event. It would seem, from Hubbard's notes, that the child can
distinguish between the father and the lover because the father is either drunk
or sober and the lover is always more enthusiastic.

In the same book, he writes;

     "It may be that a patient is urgent in her insistence that her father
     raped her when she was nine and that this is the cause of all her
     misery. Large numbers of insane patients claim this. And it is
     perfectly true. Father did rape her, but it happened she was only
     nine days beyond conception at the time. The pressure and upset of
     coitus is very uncomfortable to the child and normally can be
     expected to give the child an engram which will have as its content
     the sexual act and everything that was said."

The Board heard expert medical evidence that an embryo nine days old, hardly
visible to the eye, does not possess an ear, is not capable of being aware of
anything and has no nervous system or brain capable of recording anything or of
having an understanding, intelligent or otherwise, of anything said or done.
Further, Hubbard's assertion that the embryo records and understands what has
been said involves the embryo being capable of intelligent understanding of
language which the child, after birth, would not attain to for several months
or even years.

In Scientology, issue 28-G, 1954, Hubbard gives three case histories selected
at random. In the first;

     "The basic consisted of a severe quarrel between his mother and
     father with several abdominal blows being received by the mother. The
     mother was protesting that it would make her sick all of her life. At
     the same time the mother was coughing from a throat blow. The father
     was insisting that he was master in his own home and that people had
     to do what he told them. This quarrel occurred at about four and a
     half months after conception and resulted in the temporary paralysis
     of the preclear's right side."

The second case was of an eighteen-year-old girl in a condition of apathy
"bordering upon a break and worsening."

     "The basic proved to be a mutual abortion attempt by the mother and
     father. The mother said she would die if anyone found out.... The
     father said the baby was probably like her and he didn't want it.
     Eighteen penetrations of the head, throat and shoulders with a long
     orange-wood stick - probably in third month. Several similar
     incidents completed this chain. Coitus followed each attempt at
     abortions. Another incident proved to be basic without a chain and
     with innumerable locks: an attempted abortion by a professional
     abortionist who used some form of needle and scraper."

The third case related to a male negro who had convulsions when audited on
prenatal life.

     "The convulsion proved to be twenty engrams nearer birth than the
     basic which lay on another chain and which was discovered by dream
     technique. The convulsion was caused by the dramatization of an
     engram involving the injection of turpentine into the uterus by the
     mother in an attempted abortion. The main engramic chain consisted of
     the mother's efforts to abort herself. From engramic content it was
     gathered that the mother was a prostitute, for as many as twenty
     experiences of coitus succeeded two of these abortion attempts. . .
     The basic chain contained many quarrels about money between the
     mother and her customers. . . The basic incident. . . was found to
     lie about twenty days after conception, when the mother first
     discovered her pregnancy."

This man's IQ was stated to be "about eighty-five"; the auditor's was not
stated.

Hubbard is particularly concerned to show that the act of sexual intercourse
while the woman is pregnant is likely to cause an engram to the unborn child,
and he considers that intercourse only a few days after conception could have a
highly aberrative effect on the barely existing embryo. Hubbard's theories
involve the embryo at that early stage being aware of and registering in an
aberrative way conversation between the parties to an act of intercourse. On
several occasions he actually sets out the conversation between the parties;
not infrequently the conversation is between the mother and her paramour and
the topic of conversation is in one case at least the conveniently absent
husband.

In Dianetics: MSMH, Hubbard writes,

     "Attempted abortion is very common. And remarkably lacking in
     success. The mother, every time she injures the child in such a
     fiendish fashion, is actually penalizing herself. Morning sickness is
     entirely engramic, so far as can be discovered, since clears have not
     so far experienced it during their own pregnancies. And the act of
     vomiting because of pregnancy is via contagion of aberration. Actual
     illness generally results only when mother has been interfering with
     the child either by douches or knitting needles or some such
     thing.... Morning sickness evidently gets into a society because of
     these interferences such as attempted abortion, and, of course
     injury."

Comment would be superfluous.

-- 
|        Chris Owen       |  New Mansion House, Lancaster Gate, London W2   | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    WORLD'S BIGGEST SPECTRUM ARCHIVE -- http://www.nvg.unit.no/sinclair    |
| "Piltdown Man was always biting his wife": another gem from L.Ron Hubbard |

From co@ Sun Apr  7 09:41:44 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:6582
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.compulink.com!news1.toronto.fonorola.net!news1.toronto.istar.net!news.toronto.istar.net!theglobeandmail.com!news.north.net!worldlinx.com!milliways.hartco.ca!worldlinx.com!clio.trends.ca!innuendo.tlug.org!gvc.gvc.com!news1.io.org!winternet.com!newsfeed.concentric.net!news.texas.net!news1.best.com!news.aimnet.com!news.ossi.com!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!solace!nntp.uio.no!nntp.uib.no!nntp-bergen.UNINETT.no!nntp-trd.UNINETT.no!due.unit.no!!co
From: co@ (Chris Owen)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: ANDERSON REPORT: Chapter 9 - Dianetics
Date: 29 Mar 1996 20:32:04 GMT
Organization: Nettverksgruppa
Lines: 258
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: romeo-klive.nvg.unit.no

                              The Anderson Report

                                   CHAPTER 9
                                   DIANETlCS

Dianetics is described by Hubbard as "the modern science of mental health". He
explains that its derivation is from two Greek words, "dia" meaning "through"
and "noos" meaning "mind". An examination of the content of dianetic teaching
suggests that its derivation would more aptly be from Diana, the moon goddess,
and that a word with a Latin root but much the same meaning would have been
more appropriate.

Hubbard wrote a number of books about dianetics and it has been the subject of
a substantial number of articles in scientological publications. Before
discussing dianetics in the light of the evidence placed before the Board some
excerpts from the books all articles written by Hubbard can conveniently be
referred to for an idea of the fanciful claims which Hubbard made for it.

The word "dianetics" is said to be "a term employed to embrace the science of
thought and including a family of subsciences by which the individual
collective activities of mankind may be understood and bettered".

Hubbard writes that dianetics is "a sub-subject of scientology and covers the
anatomy of the mind rather than the brain"; it is "that branch of scientology
that covers mental anatomy"; it is "a form of science of thought applicable to
psychosomatic ills and individual aberrations". Its purpose is "to pass man
across the abyss of irrational, solely reactive thought and to enter a new
stage of constructive progression to the ultimate goal."

The goal of dianetics is "a world without insanity, without criminals and
without war". It looks for a simpler course to the achievement of its aims than
through the conventional therapies. In Science of Survival, which was first
published in l95l, Hubbard wrote

     "It took four to twelve years to get an inkling of these
     [conventional] therapies and all evidence to hand, carefully
     compiled, shows that they do not work, that the problems of
     criminality, insanity and war still remained, with these systems of
     'therapy' far out of control."

He then claimed that dianetics was a simpler solution, which did not require
twelve years of schooling and practice to learn, but which provided "an
understanding of life, man, and mind operation which could resolve the
19,000,000 insane, our millions of criminals, and international madness".

Dianetics is, wrote Hubbard in Dianetics: MSMH,

     "actually a family of sciences .... With the techniques presented in
     this handbook the psychiatrist, psycho-analyst and intelligent layman
     can successfully and invariably treat all psychosomatic ills and
     inorganic aberrations. More importantly, the skills offered in this
     handbook will produce the dianetic clear, an optimum individual with
     intelligence considerably greater than the current normal, or a
     dianetic release, an individual who has been freed from his major
     anxieties or illnesses. The release can be done in less than twenty
     hours of work and is a state superior to any produced by several
     years of psycho-analysis, since the release will not relapse."

The principal books on dianetics are Dianetics: MSMH, Science of Survival, and
Dianetics 1955. These books contain an exposition of the principles of
dianetics and instructions for the practice of dianetic therapy as well as a
large number of instances of the alleged beneficial application of dianetics.
Fundamental to dianetics is "survival", towards which all activity should be
directed. "The dynamic principle of existence is "survive!". The first axiom
is: survive. "We do not know", writes Hubbard, "to what end we are surviving
and in our field of the knowable and in our choice of only the workable axioms
we do not know and have no immediate reason to ask why".

Survival, considered as a single and sole purpose, is said by Hubbard to
subdivide into four dynamics.

     "Dynamic One is the urge of the individual towards survival for the
     individual and his symbiotes. ['Symbiotes' means all energies and
     entities which aid survival.]

     Dynamic Two is the urge of the individual towards survival through
     procreation; it includes both the sex act and the raising of progeny,
     the care of children and their symbiotes.

     Dynamic Three is the urge of the individual towards survival for the
     group or the group for the group and includes the symbiotes of that
     group.

     Dynamic Four is the urge of the individual towards survival for
     Mankind or the urge toward survival of Mankind for Mankind as well as
     the group for Mankind, &c., and includes the symbiotes of mankind."

The mind of an individual, so dianetics teaches, has really three parts. They
are the analytical, the reactive and the somatic.

The analytical mind, sometimes referred to as the conscious mind, is that
portion of the mind which perceives and retains experienced data to compose and
resolve problems and directs the organism along the four dynamics. It thinks in
differences and similarities.

The reactive mind is that portion of the mind which sites and retains pain and
painful emotion and seems to direct the organism solely on a stimulus-response
basis. It thinks only in identities.

The somatic mind is that mind which, directed by the analytical or reactive
mind, places solutions into effect on the physical level.

Williams understood the "somatic mind" as a term used to describe

     "that package of information or data appertaining to the automatic
     function of the body, and automatic responses of the body. The
     somatic mind, functionally, would include such things as the
     automatic heart beat and breathing and this sort of thing."

In Dianetics: MSMH, Hubbard wrote that

     "the hidden source of all psychosomatic ills and human aberrations
     has been discovered and skills have been developed for their
     invariable cure."

The goal of dianetics being to cure psychosomatic illness and remove
aberrations, dianetics was therefore dedicated to "running out" and so removing
what Hubbard said was the cause of all the trouble, the engram. According to
dianetics, psychosomatic ills are caused by engrams, the engram being the
single source of psychosomatic ills and aberrations.

     "The engram and only the engram causes aberrations and psychosomatic
     illnesses."

Aberrations include all deranged or irrational behaviour. Moments of
"unconsciousness", when the analytical mind is attenuated in a greater or
lesser degree, are the only moments when engrams can be received. The engram is
a moment of "unconsciousness" containing physical pain or painful emotion and
all perceptions and is not available to the analytical mind as experience.

Hubbard declared that all psychosomatic illnesses,

     "which constitute 70 per cent. of man's illnesses, can be positively
     cured by dianetic processing".

This, he said, was effected by auditing the preclear or sufferer and thereby
discovering and running out the engram. The source of the aberration was said
to be the reactive mind which acted more or less irrationally and fed
information to the conscious mind and body, without the knowledge or consent of
the individual, save that sometimes the individual might perceive that he was
acting irrationally in relation to some matter, but could not understand why.
An individual, according to Hubbard, thus possessed two minds; the analytical
mind, which is the conscious mind which becomes aware of things learned by
actual experience and functions logically; and the reactive mind, which is the
unconscious mind and which operates irrationally or irresponsibly and is the
cause of all aberrations. The problems of life are complicated by the
functioning of the reactive mind, and it is the cause of ill-health and mental
troubles.

The reactive mind, so Hubbard claims, received engrams in the past. Initially,
the "past" was earlier in the life of the individual concerned but quickly
Hubbard propounded the theory that many engrams, perhaps most, were incurred in
the prenatal period, i.e., during the pregnancy of the mother; and at this
period the reactive mind of the unborn child became aware of events happening
and words spoken at a time when it, the unborn child, received some injury,
e.g. by the father hitting the mother in the stomach, or much more frequently
by an injury received by the embryo or foetus during intercourse between the
parents, the embryo being aware of and suffering injury and remembering such
incidents and accompanying words from as early as eight days after conception.
As these theories further developed, Hubbard claimed that engrams could be
experienced by the individual even before conception! All of this, of course,
is nonsense, and a large body of expert evidence was called to prove that it
and much more fantastic theorising was nonsense, However, Hubbard, disdaining
to admit such theories as fantasy, boldly asserts them to be scientifically
proven facts.

An attempt was made by scientology witnesses at the Inquiry to show that
dianetics is now, in effect, in abeyance, but that is clearly not so; it was
the forerunner of scientology, and out of it scientology developed; and it is
claimed by Hubbard that dianetics is part of scientology. Hubbard has
consistently maintained that an understanding of his book, Dianetics: MSMH, is
essential to an understanding of scientology, and he has repeatedly, right up
to very recent times, directed that every effort be made to sell this book, a
million copies, so he claims, having already been sold. Its present price is £2
3s. 6d.

In dianetics Hubbard considered that

     "The entire physical pain and painful emotion of a lifetime, whether
     the individual 'knows' about it or not, is contained, recorded, in
     the engram bank. Nothing is forgotten. And all physical pain and
     painful emotion, no matter how the individual may think he has
     handled it, is capable of reinflicting itself upon him from this
     hidden level, unless that pain is removed by dianetic therapy."

Hubbard writes in Dianetics: MSMH,

     " 'Dianetic therapy', may briefly be stated. Dianetics deletes all
     the pain from a lifetime. When the pain is erased in the engram bank
     and refiled as memory and experience in the memory banks, all
     aberrations and psychosomatic illnesses vanish, the dynamics are
     entirely rehabilitated and the physical and mental being regenerate".

Hubbard claimed that in dianetics had been discovered the method of refiling
pain and that

     "wide awake and without drugs an individual can return to any period
     of his entire life providing his passage is not blocked by engrams".

The technique or therapy is done by what is called "dianetic reverie", and is
applied by an auditor, who

     "directs the attention of the patient to the patient's self and then
     begins to place the patient in various periods of the patient's life
     merely by telling him to go there rather than remember. All therapy
     is done, not by remembering or associating, but by travel on the time
     track. Every human being has a time truck. It begins with life and it
     ends with death, It is a sequence of events from portal to portal as
     recorded".

That many of the processes used in dianetics were hypnotic is evident both from
their nature and their operation but Hubbard either ignores or denies this
fact. In these processes the processing was towards clear, which was at the
time said to be the optimum state attainable by man. In such a state, all
illness and aberrations fell away. An intermediate stage was the release.

     "In a release, the case is not progressed to the point of complete
     recall. In a clear, full memory exists throughout the lifetime, with
     the additional bonus that he has photographic recall in colour,
     motion, sound, &c., as well as optimum computational ability".

Dianetics taught that past experiences were recorded,

     "that the engram recording was probably done on the cellular level,
     that the engram bank was contained in the cells", that "the engram is
     a recording like the ripples in the groove of a phonograph record".

Hubbard was emphatic in pointing out that what were impinged on the cell were
not memories but actually prenatal engrams or recordings, and that these
recording at a cellular level were capable of being made from the earliest
stage of prenatal development onward; even at the zygote stage. The most
prolific source of engrams was, so Hubbard considered, in the prenatal period,
and his dianetic writings are cluttered to a degree which is obsessive with
examples of how the prenatal engrams were experienced by the embryo, sometimes
only a few days after conception, and by the foetus, as a result of violent
assaults on or other physical injury to the mother, attempted abortions and
intercourse which is often described as promiscuous. In Chapter 6, aspects of
prenatal engrams and Hubbard's morbid preoccupation with abortion and sexual
perversion are dealt with.

About 70 per cent. of the physician's "current roster of diseases", so Hubbard
claims, falls into the category of psychosomatic illness. "Psychosomatic
illnesses", Hubbard explained, "are those which have a mental origin but which
are nevertheless organic". Hubbard writes,

     "Arthritis, dermatitis, allergies, asthma, some coronary
     difficulties, eye trouble, bursitis, ulcers, sinusitis, &c., form a
     very small section of the psychosomatic catalogue. Bizarre aches and
     pains in various portions of the body are generally psychosomatic.
     Migraine headaches are psychosomatic and, with the others, are
     uniformly cured by dianetic therapy. (And the word cured is used in
     its fullest sense.)"

-- 
|        Chris Owen       |  New Mansion House, Lancaster Gate, London W2   | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    WORLD'S BIGGEST SPECTRUM ARCHIVE -- http://www.nvg.unit.no/sinclair    |
| "Piltdown Man was always biting his wife": another gem from L.Ron Hubbard |

From [email-masked] Fri Apr 12 00:03:14 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:7053 misc.legal.computing:1536
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.compulink.com!news2.toronto.istar.net!news1.io.org!ki.net!winternet.com!newsfeed.concentric.net!news2.acs.oakland.edu!news.tacom.army.mil!marge.eaglequest.com!oxy.rust.net!news.cais.net!news.jsums.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!csn!news-1.csn.net!decwrl!amd!netcomsv!uu4news.netcom.com!netcomsv!uu3news.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!sthomson
From: [email-masked] (shelley thomson)
Subject: **Biased Journalism**V2no7 Ward Dep./Henson Sued/more
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Keywords: 
      **Biased Journalism** : a net magazine designed to compensate for 
      the shortcomings of the professional news media.          
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 04:45:10 GMT
Lines: 1503
Sender: [email-masked]

      Copyright 1996 Shelley Thomson; all rights reserved.  

      Mail, articles and comment may be directed to <[email-masked]>.  
      Netiquette will be observed with all communication, except for the
      following:  harassing or threatening mail will be posted to the
      net immediately.        

**Biased Journalism**  Volume 2, issue 7   April 8, 1996.  

Contents:  Bulletin! Grady Deposed; Keith Henson Sued; Re: the
           Lawsuit against Henson; Not A Good Day For The Church
           (Henson's Response); The Complaint; Bite Me RTC;
           **BJ** publisher makes the hit list.

Read at your own risk.  This is **Biased Journalism**!

1.    GRADY DEPOSED:  BULLETIN FROM THE FRONT LINES

        At this moment the citizens of cyberspace wait to hear
what happened during the depositon of net citizen Grady Ward by
lawyers representing the church of scientology.  As reported in
our previous issue, Ward made a practice of taunting the church
for its failure to stop the publication of the sacred scriptures
by SCAMIZDAT.

        The Religious Technology Center [an arm of the church]
obtained a Temporary Restraining Order against Ward and were
granted discovery.  Ward received a detailed discovery request;
his tart reply is below (item 5).

        It is not difficult to guess that the deposition may have
proved an 'unprofitable chat' from the Plaintiff's point of view.

At this point we were graced with a BULLETIN from Netizen Ward:

Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 19:49:41 -0700
From: Grady Ward <[email-masked]>

Subject: Re: deposition

Brutal, but interesting.  Boy I was beginning to believe *their* case
after eight hours of solid question and answer... but I came through
all right.  Now they want to do a full day tomorrow, but I only
agreed to nine hours, so it may have to be brought before
Magistrate Infante tomorrow after an hour and a half.

The entire audio can be downloaded from my web site.
http://www.northcoast.com/~grady/Welcome.html

Grady
(end Bulletin)

        Some interesting events led up to it.  The Plaintiff had
asked to examine some of Grady's office equipment, including his
shredder and his scanner.  On Friday the church offered to save
Ward some trouble by inspecting these items at his house.  He
declined the offer, but agreed to meet a small delegation
at the airport in Arcata to show them the requested items.

        The meeting did not happen as planned.  Grady Ward told our
 correspondent:

GW: I spoke on speakerphone with Hogan, McShane, and Kobrin Friday
    morning.

BJ: I thought you were delivering some things to Hogan in person?
    the shredder, scanner, etc. -- what happened with this?

GW: They decided at the last minute not to fly up when they realized
    most of the responses were "none" and the only material I have is
    indices from free_agent newsreader and other rather random stuff.

    I think they were wetting their pants hoping to get even a single
    admission of copyright or trade secret violation in order to drop
    all the other allegations and ask the judge for summary judgement.

    Without this, we are having to go to trial, whenever that will be.
    And I will be getting in *my* discovery  and interrogatories, in
    that event.

    Hogan threatened several times to go before Magistrate Judge
    Edward Infante with my refusal pursuant to E.C.P.A., but I told
    him I welcome all opportunities to have a judge present in dealing
    with them.

        A telephone conversation took place on Friday instead of the
planned inspection.  This is Ward's account:

GW: What happened today was rather interesting. It was like a
    minideposition.

    Hogan and Kobrin and McShane talked to me on a speakerphone for
    about 45 minutes.

    Hogan wouldn't take the answers as I had written them.

    He would say questions that assumed facts not in evidence such as
    "Are you saying that you got rid of the OT documents so that you
    don't have them now?" or "What exactly was your response after
    you posted the OTIII documents?"

    My answers were insistent that the answers were correct as they
    stood.

    He would repeat the "admission built into the question" over and
    over, again and again.

    I would repeat over and over again and again. "Do you understand,
    "none"?

    Kobrin would pipe in with a legal opinion that since I wasn't
    under oath I could say whatever I wanted.

    Uh huh.

    Thanks for the taste of what I going to get from the criminal cult
    Monday.

    But then I will be recording it for immortality on the net. Use
    your argumentation, your fallacies, your browbeating.  Make it good.
    Judge Whyte will love to hear you disobey him.

    Grady
        
    [end]

        Ward's answer to the discovery request is published later in
this issue.  Readers will note that it contains a list of names of
persons whose correspondence Ward is asked to furnish to RTC.  Ward
declined, citing the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.

------------------------------        
2.  KEITH HENSON IS SUED

        On Friday night, April 5, Good Friday and the third night of
Passover, Keith Henson answered the door and received the following
documents:   Ex Parte Application For Leave To File Expanded Request
for Temporary Restraining Order, Ex Parte Application for Temporary
Restraining Order, Order To Show Cause Re: Preliminary Injunction,
and Order for Expedited Discovery; Verified Complaint For Injunctive
Relief and Damages; and a bundle of supporting material.

        He was being sued.

        The documents consist in large part of boilerplate recycled
from the Erlich, Ward and Lerma cases.  There are signs that it was
prepared in haste.  The new paperwork, specific to Henson, apparently
takes up some 50 pages.  

        The package is too long to quote here.  What we will do
instead is to quote and comment upon interesting passages.  At the
end we will publish the entire text of the Verified Complaint.

      Henson's crimes were so extensive, and the situation so
dire that the church [in the person of Religious Technology
Center, holder of the Hubbard copyrights, henceforth known as
"RTC"] requested permission to file an expanded request for
a Temporary Restraining Order, Injunction and Expedited
DIscovery.  The rules limit such filings to five pages; RTC
asked leave to file twenty-two pages.  Such requests are routinely
granted.

        In the last episode, net citizen Henson wrote a letter to
Judge Ronald Whyte, who had just granted the church a TRO and
discovery against Grady Ward.  In the letter Henson quoted the
full text of one of the NOTS documents.  On March 29 Henson
attended the hearing for the Grady Ward case and asked whether
the Judge considered Ward's TRO to apply to Henson.  Was Henson in
contempt of court?   He was told that he was not a defendant.  On
March 30  he posted the letter, including NOTs 34, to alt.religion.
scientology.  Church attorney Helena Kobrin quickly sent him an
indignant email message.   

        Henson "flagrantly rebuffed the cease and desist letter..."
the RTC attorneys complained.

        '"Mr. Henson told Mrs. Kobrin that he was
        "going to put it a little nicer than Grady [Ward] would, but you
        can take your demand, fold it till it is all corners, and stick
        it where 'the Sun don't shine."' 

       "He then said he was *again* asking for NOTs or any other
        Scientology 'AT' [Advanced Technology] materials, acquired by
        legal, or *illegal* means, further announcing his intention to
        "post this material in the public interest." (McShane Dec. 6 7,
        and Ex. H to Complaint and Ex. 3.)

        Henson promptly posted this email to the net.

        The arguments the church used to obtain a Temporary
Restraining Order, Order for Expedited Discovery and so forth
rely upon claims of copyright infringement and trade secret
misappropriation.  Judge Whyte earlier ruled that the trade secret
issue was inapplicable.  THe church does not raise this issue
against Henson with respect to the six published NOTs (although
it reserves the right to do so later), but with respect to the
46 unpublished NOTs.   It asks for a restraining order to
prevent their publication by Henson, his servants, agents,
attorneys, etc..

        In the Ex Parte Application for Temporary Restraining
Order, RTC stated:

       "This application is necessitated by the imminent and credible
threat of defendant Keith Henson to post or to cause to be posted to
the Internet, hundreds of pages of heretofore unpublished, copyrighted,
confidential materials of plaintiff Religious Technology Center (RTC),
known as New Era Dianetics for Operating Thetans, or "NOTs" materials,
which are maintained as trade secrets. (1) The NOTs materials are a
series of 55 separate works (e.g., NOTs Series 1, 2, etc.). The trade
secret status of these works was recognized in Bridge Publications.
Inc.. et al. v. Vien, 827 F.Supp. 629, 633 (S.D.Cal. 1993).

       "While the majority of the works within the NOTs Series have
never appeared on the Internet, six of these works were posted without
authorization on the Internet by Dennis Erlich, the defendant in the
related case of Religious Technology Center v. Netcom On-Line Comm.
Servs.. Inc., 1995 U.S. Dist. Lexis 16184 (ND. Cal. Sept.22, 1995)
("Netcomt"). In that case, Judge Whyte preliminarily enjoined Erlich
from further copyright infringements of those six NOTs Works at issue
there, but declined to enjoin Erlich under the California Uniform Trade
Secrets Act as to those Works in part because of their limited posting
to the Internet.

       "While Netcom and other cases have preliminarily ruled that when
trade secret materials have been posted onto the Internet, the owner
cannot move for relief under the trade secret laws, plaintiff continues
to contest those rulings on the ground that they do not correctly
reflect the factual and legal consequences of such rulings. The
situation which has arisen recently, and which exists in this case is
entirely different."

      --We read on with interest, but the RTC attorneys never actually
explained why the trade secret issue should be looked at differently
in Henson's case.  With reference to trade secrets, the plaintiff
argues on the one hand that without immediate judicial relief, RTC
will suffer "extreme and irreversible harm," to wit, the loss of its
intellectual property rights.  Judge Whyte has already ruled, in
effect, that when the NOTS were posted to the net they lost their
trade secret status.

        But later on, in the Request for Temporary Restraining Order
and Expedited Discovery, the church wrote:  "Of the 55 separate works
comprising the NOTs Series, at least 49 have never even arguably been
made public. [McShane Declaration]  Whether, in fact, the fleeting
presence of the six that have been posted on the Internet divested
them of trade secret status is a matter that has been ruled adversely 
to the plaintiff...[RTC v. Netcom, September 22, 1995]  The
ruling invited the plaintiff to reapply, and they did.  "A hearing
on the alternate test for the preliminary injunction is set for
May 24, 1996 at which time plaintiff intends to demonstrate that
there is a serious question going to the merits on the issue of
whether, in fact, the postings terminated the trade secrecy of the
six NOTs works posted by Dennis Erlich."

        RTC intends to try to persuade the Judge to change his
ruling and attach trade secret status to the published NOTs.  Roger
Milgrim, author of a famous text on intellectual property rights,
was presumably added to the RTC side of the case for this purpose.

        We concluded that in charging Henson with trade secret
violations the church was trying to have its cake and eat it too.
If Henson, by merely posting the NOTs, could have destroyed their
trade secret status, then his letter could not have destroyed
RTC's rights to NOTs 34 because it had already been posted to the
net.  In fact, it had been posted multiple times and was on alt.
religion.scientology at the time this article was being written.

        If postings to the net are ephemeral and do not affect the
status of trade secrets, Henson's posting of the NOTs document
could not have injured the plaintiff's property rights.
       
        The church takes its intellectual property rights seriously.
Plaintiffs said: [Ex Parte Application for TRO & Expedited Discovery]
      -
       "RTC derives substantial revenue from the delivery by its
        limited group of licensees to select parishioners of services
        utilizing Mr. Hubbard's unpublished literary works containing
        the Advanced Technology. (McShane Dec., 6 20.) The informational
        content of the works also derives independent economic value,
        actual and potential, from not being generally known to other
        persons who can obtain economic value from their disclosure or
        use. Plaintiff and its predecessors have taken in the past, and
        continue to take, extraordinary efforts to protect and maintain
        the confidentiality and secrecy of the Advanced Technology,
        carefully limiting physical access to the materials.
      
         "The works in question in this case, known as New Era Dianetics
        for Operating Thetans, or "NOTs" materials, have never left the
        custody of RTC, its predecessors or authorized licensees except
        through a theft in Denmark in 1983, for which one of the
        co-conspirators was arrested, tried and convicted. (McShane
        Dec., 6 36.) In the past, competing churches have been set up
        to use those stolen works to deliver competitive services, and
        other groups exist today which are interested in similarly
        exploiting these works. Wd., 6 37.) Because the defendant's
        activities at issue here now jeopardize if not threaten to
        destroy plaintiffs valuable intellectual property rights, there
        could be no demonstrably greater need for immediate injunctive
        relief."

      --We read this passage several times.  The expressions
"competing churches" and "competitive services" bothered us.  Should
an organization be allowed to establish a monopoly under cover of a
tax exemption?  We tried out "First Church of Chevron, Inc."  How far
could this hypothetical entity go in suppressing rival filling
stations?  Could it claim the Sacred Pump Ceremony as a religious
rite, even though money is required before a parishioner can
receive service?  We resolved to read Roger Milgrim's book on
trade secrets, hoping to understand more about this fascinating
subject.

        The church does not quite accuse Henson of acting in concert
with Grady Ward, but comes _very_ close in the following passage:

       "Henson also suggested that he was not acting in concert or
        participation with Ward.  His protestation rings hollow,
        however, in light of his involvement with Ward in other
        activities, such as a trip to the Church of Scientology in
        San Francisco to harass the Church and its members.
        (McShane Dec., 6 9.)" [Ex Parte Application for TRO and
        Order to Show Cause Re: Preliminary Injunction]

        With respect to copyright infringement, in the Ex Parte
Request for Temporary Restraining Order, etc., RTC attorneys
stated

       "The RTC copyright that Henson has infringed has been
        registered as part of a  collection under 37 C.F.R. [few
        bits lost in scanner] 202.03(b)(3)(B).  Each of the
        separate works included in such a collection is protected
        individually and has been infringed by defendant's
        wholesale reproductions and/or transmissions.[citation]
        Likewise, Henson's copying, and threat to post, the
        entirety of the NOTs series is infringement, not
        fair use."

        The first part of this passage is confusing.  Do the
Plaintiffs mean to imply that Henson's publication of one NOTs
document is a simultaneous infringement of the remaining 54?  The
question is important, because when it comes to asking for damages
RTC is requesting $100,000 per incident.  Further, Henson has
apparently published only one of the NOTs:  RTC attorneys imply
that he has engaged in wholesale copying and/or transmissions
of the entire group of NOTs.

        We wondered whether the RTC had evidence to support the
suggestion, or whether Henson is merely a generic suspect in the
search for the anonymous posters of church documents to the net.

        We noted that RTC attorneys once again avoided discussing
the issue Henson raised in his letter to Judge Whye.  Henson
stated that NOTs 34 consituted a series of instructions in unlawful
activity.  The document, which he quoted in full, describes how
to use an e-meter to cure physical illnesses and prevent their
return.  Henson believes that the use of an e-meter for this
purpose constitutes practicing medicine without a license; he argues
that because the document is an instruction in a criminal act,
the public interest allows its disclosure.  When he solicited
NOTs, he limited his request to documents which showed criminal
or fraudulent activity.   

        The issue of the *content* of NOTs 34 is not addressed by
RTC attorneys.  Instead, Henson is charged with deliberately and
wilfully attempting to destroy the property rights of the Plaintiff.
Relief is asked for with reference to the entire NOTs collection.
We surmised that the church may have other controversial documents
among the NOTs.      

---------------

3.  RE: THE COMPLAINT AGAINST HENSON 

        In the following document, which contains what is
colloquially known as a lawsuit, the Plaintiff claims that the
Works, which include the NOTs, were "wholly original with Mr.
Hubbard."  We noted that the RTC does not acknowledge any
contributions by David Mayo.  We surmise that this may become
an issue if the case goes to trial.

        RTC requests an injunction against Keith Henson, and all
his agents, servants, employees (etc.), of essentially the same
form as the requested injunction against Grady Ward.  Tucked
away near the end is the provision that Henson must turn over
to the Plaintiffs not only any copies of the Works that he
may have, but "all articles in any media, electronic or
otherwise, by means of which such copies may be reproduced."

        Taken literally, as we assume it is intended, this
includes Henson's computer, printer, scanner, system backup tapes,
floppy disks, and assorted software.

        Damages are requested in the sum of $100,000 per infraction,
plus legal fees (in the course of a trial this figure may become very
large) and other relief as the Court may decide.

--------------------------------------------
4.   Not A Good Day For The Church

        Keith Henson reflected on the subject and wrote the following
letter to Judge Whyte:

H. Keith Henson
799 Coffey Ct.
San Jose, CA 95123
408-521-0614 (beeper)

Case No. C 96-20271 RPA

Hon. Ronald M. Whyte, Federal Judge
Northern District of California
San Jose, CA 95113

Hand delivered, April 8, 1996

Dear Judge Whyte:

Please excuse the use of a letter instead of the proper form, but I 
want to give everyone the maximum time to adjust schedules. 

I request that you recuse yourself from this case.  

It is *not* for improper behavior or prejudice, but because (as stated 
in several places in the RTC's filing) you and your clerk have been 
involved, at least as witnesses, in the events which led up to this 
lawsuit.  

I am not well versed in the law, but I am nearly certain that it is 
improper for a Judge or his clerk to be called as a witness at a trial 
over which he is presiding. 

I am willing for the TRO hearing to be held at the time set if that is 
convenient for another Judge, or the TRO hearing may pushed back up to 
one week, and I will consider myself to be bound by the TRO until the 
hearing. 

Thank you very much for your consideration of this matter,

Very Truly Yours,

H. Keith Henson

cc by email to Helena Kobrin ([email-masked])
Posted 

[So much for accelerated discovery, our observer said dryly.  It is
 likely that the Judge will recuse himself, and a new hearing date
 may be set.]

-----------------------------------

5.   And Your Computer, Too:  The Complaint In Full

Thomas R. Hogan, SBN 042048
LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS R. HOGAN
60 South Market Street, Suite 1125
San Jose, CA 95113-2332
(408) 292-7600

Roger M. Milgrim
William M. Hart
PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER
399 Park Avenue Thirty-first floor
New York, New York 10022-4697
(212) 318-6000

Helena K. Kobrin, SBN 152546
7629 Fulton Avenue
North Hollywood, CA 91605
(213) 960-1933

Attorneys for Plaintiff
RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

		~	~ ~ I   flflA
RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER,~ )   ~ j', ' I nr~

California non-profit corporation,
	Plaintiff,	)	VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR
                )       INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DAMAGES
		)	FOR: (1) COPYRIGHT
	V.	)	INFRINGEMENT; AND (2) TRADE
		)	SECRET MISAPPROPRIATION (CAL
	H. KEITH HENSON, an individual,	)	CIV. CODE ' 3426.1)

)
	Defendant.	)
)
)
ORIGINAL

FILED
APR ()4 1996

RiCHA~D W. WIEK~NG
CLERK US. DISTRICT COURT
NOR i~~flN ~DiSTRiCT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE
Plaintiff Religious Technology Center ("RTC") alleges as follows:

INTRODUCTORY AVERMENTS

        1.      Defendant H. Keith Henson ("Henson") has engaged in a
 scheme of infringing certain copyrights and misappropriating certain
 trade secrets belonging to plaintiff. Henson has posted portions of
 plaintiff's proprietary materials onto the international computer
 network known as the Internet without authorization from plaintiff
 and continues to do so despite warnings from plaintiff to cease and
 desist from his activities in violation of plaintiff's rights.
 Recent Internet postings by Henson indicate that he is now
 threatening and poised to engage in massive violations of plaintiff's
 proprietary rights, is publicly soliciting assistance to do so, and
 threatens impending copyright infringement and trade secret
 misappropriation of a host of works which have been judicially
 recognized as trade secrets and have not previously been posted to
 the Internet by Henson or anyone else. The need for injunctive relief
 as to such threatened unlawful undertaking is therefore critical.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

	2.	Subject matter jurisdiction of this action exists
 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. '' 1331 and 1338(a) and (b) and 28 U.S.C. '
 2201(a) in that this is an action for declaratory relief as to
 copyright infringement and for copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C.
 ' 501. This court has pendent jurisdiction over the trade secret
 misappropriation claims alleged herein, as unfair competition claims
 that arise out of the same transactions and occurrences.

	3.	Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
 ' 1391(b) in that events or omissions giving rise to the claims
 occurred in this district and the defendant resides in this judicial
 district.

THE PARTIES

	4.	Plaintiff RTC is, and was at all times relevant
 herein, a California non-profit religious corporation having its
 principal office in the City of Los Angeles, County of Los Angeles,
 State of California.

	5.	Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis
 alleges, that defendant Henson is a citizen and resident of the City
 of San Jose, County of Santa Clara, State of California.

GENERAL AVERMENTS

A.      The Copyrighted Unpublished Works of L. Ron Hubbard

	6.	L. Ron Hubbard, a United States citizen who died in
        1986, was a world-renowned philosopher and the prolific author
        of numerous original works on applied religious philosophy and
        spiritual healing technology, including training materials and
        course manuals of the Scientology religion (hereinafter the
        "Religion") of which Mr. Hubbard was the founder. Certain of
        Mr. Hubbard's original written and recorded works have been
        published and made generally available, while others have not.
        Among the unpublished works is a body of special works,
        sometimes referred to as "Advanced Technology materials,"
        which contains confidential and proprietary information
        ("the Advanced Technology") constituting trade secrets (the
        "Works").

        7.    Lists of the Works that were created by Mr. Hubbard
        and are relevant to this action are attached as Exhibits A and
        B, showing the titles of the works along with the numbers and
        dates of the applicable United States copyright registrations.
        Due to the imminence of the harm now threatened by defendant's
        acts with respect to the Exhibit B Works (which, except for
        six out of the 55 works, have never been the subject of any
        postings on the Internet), and in order to seek immediate
        judicial relief, RTC has not pleaded every Work which
        defendant may be threatening to infringe. RTC therefore
        reserves the right to amend this Complaint to add additional
        Works, and/or to add additional claims and/or parties at a
        later date and as a result of further factual developments
        and discovery.

        8.    In 1982, L. Ron Hubbard assigned to plaintiff RTC his
        entire right, title and interest (apart from copyrights) in
        and to the Advanced Technology, including all rights to use
        and to license the use of the Advanced Technology in the
        United States. This assignment includes the obligation to
        protect the confidentiality of the Advanced Technology.  A
        true and correct copy of this assignment is annexed as
        Exhibit C to this Complaint.

        9.    Following Mr. Hubbard's death in 1986, ownership of the
        copyrights in the Works passed to his Estate, which granted
        to plaintiff RTC, on September 17, 1987, an exclusive license
        in the copyrights pertaining to the Works, with the right and
        obligation to enforce all the copyrights in those works. A
        true and correct copy of this License Agreement is annexed
        to this complaint as Exhibit D.

        10.   All of the assets of the Estate of L. Ron Hubbard,
        including the copyrights pertaining to the Works, were
        distributed in 1993. The successor in interest to the
        copyrights affirmed RTC's September 17, 1987 copyright
        license.  A true and correct copy of this Assignment and
        Assumption is annexed to this complaint as Exhibit E.

        11.   The Works were wholly original with Mr. Hubbard and
        are copyrightable subject matter under the laws of the
        United States. Mr. Hubbard and his successors and licensees
        have complied in all respects with the copyright laws of the
        United States, have secured the exclusive rights in and to
        the copyrights in the Works, and have received from the
        Register of Copyrights Certificates of Registration of these
        copyrights. Attached hereto as Exhibit F are true and correct
        copies of the Certificate of Registration for the Works listed
        in Exhibits A and B.

        12.   The Advanced Technology contained in the Works is of
        immense value to plaintiff, which has taken in the past, and
        continues to take, extraordinary measures to protect the
        confidentiality of the Advanced Technology. Physical access
        to the materials has always been limited and carefully
        monitored and the materials made available only to a limited
        group of people for limited purposes. The efforts used to
        maintain such secrecy have always been more than reasonable
        under the circumstances including, but not limited to, storage
        in locked cabinets in locked rooms with access permitted only
        to select Scientology parishioners who have met stringent
        requirements, transport of any portion of the materials only
        in locked briefcases, the presence of security personnel and
        the execution of written confidentiality agreements.

        13.   RTC derives independent economic value, actual and
        potential, from the Advanced Technology, which is secret and
        of considerable value. RTC receives from the advanced Churches
        of Scientology which are licensed by RTC to use the Advanced
        Technology licensing fees equal to six (6) percent of the
        income received for delivery of Advanced Technology services.
        These licensing fees provide substantial financial support
        for RTC's operations.

B.  Defendant's Violations of Plaintiffs Rights

        14.   On March 29, 1996, this Court, the Honorable Ronald M.
        Whyte, United States District Judge, presiding, stated that
        he would issue a preliminary injunction against the defendant
        in the case encaptioned Religious Technology Center v. Grady
        Ward, and assigned case number 96-20207 RMW (the "Ward case").
        That injunction was issued by the Court on April 1, 1996, in
        response, inter alia, to plaintiffs showing that the defendant
        in the Ward case had made postings of RTC's copyrighted and
        trade secret material, was threatening additional postings of
        a similar, unlawful nature, and had solicited public
        assistance in that enterprise by soliciting copies of
        plaintiff's proprietary materials from anyone in possession
        thereof.  The Court announced in open court that a preliminary
        injunction would issue in a proceeding at which defendant
        Henson was present. Henson--with no prior relationship
        whatsoever to either RTC or Scientology--thereupon set out to
        duplicate the very conduct that justified the injunction
        against the defendant in the Ward case, justifying his
        conduct and intended conduct on the grounds that the Court's
        order did not apply to his own actions, and that in his view,
        the plaintiff is not entitled to exercise the very
        intellectual property rights underlying the preliminary
        injunction issued in the Ward case.

        15.   On or about March 30, 1996, Henson infringed RTC's
        copyrights in the Work listed in Exhibit A by reproducing
        this Work in its entirety and by electronically displaying
        or distributing it on the Internet.  Henson titled his
        electronic display or posting, "An Open Letter to Judge
        Whyte," and stated in the posting that he had read, in its
        entirety, the Temporary Restraining Order issued by
        this Court on March 21, 1996 in the Ward case against Grady
        Ward, "his officers, agents, servants, employees, and
        attorneys, and to those persons in active concert or
        participation with him." A true and correct copy of the
        Temporary Restraining Order is attached hereto as Exhibit G.
        The Temporary Restraining Order plainly prohibited the
        displaying or distribution on the Internet of a series of
        plaintiff's Works, including the Work displayed by Henson.
        In that posting, he also solicited copies of the Exhibit B
        Works to be sent to him.

        16.   On March 30, 1996, counsel for RTC notified Henson,
        via electronic mail, that he had violated RTC's copyright
        and trade secret rights and the Court's Temporary Restraining
        Order by posting the Exhibit A Work and soliciting the Exhibit
        B Works, and demanded that Henson "cease and desist from any
        and all further posting, reproduction, display, distribution,
        solicitation or acquisition" of the Work or any of the
        Advanced Technology works of the Scientology religion.

        17.   Henson responded to RTC's notice and cease and desist
        demand by:

        a.    Telling RTC's counsel that she could "take your demand,
        fold it till it is all corners, and stick it where 'the Sun
        don't shine.'

        b.    Reposting the Work identified in Exhibit A on the
        Internet;

        c.    Soliciting additional copies of the Exhibit B Works
        "acquired by legal, or *illegal* means" from any and all
        readers on the Internet;

        d.    Threatening to post some or all of these Works to the
        Internet.

        A true and correct copy of Mr. Henson's communication to
        counsel is attached hereto as Exhibit H.

        18.   No one has access to the Works without permission from
        plaintiff or unless they were obtained through illicit means.
        As the only way the Exhibit A and B Works have ever left
        authorized possession was through theft, Henson could only
        have obtained copies of these materials by having received
        stolen property or the fruits thereof from another.

        19.   Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis
        alleges, that Henson has copied and/or induced others to copy
        and has wrongfully acquired and now threatens to and intends
        imminently to post to the Internet the Works listed in
        Exhibit B hereto, in whole or in part, thereby causing
        serious, irreparable harm to RTC's copyright and trade
        secret rights, if not immediately restrained from doing so.
        The prayer for interlocutory relief below relates to the
        Works in Exhibit B only.

        20.   As a result of the foregoing, Henson has reproduced,
        displayed, and distributed RTC's Work listed on Exhibit A,
        all without the authorization of plaintiff. Henson has
        thereby infringed RTC's copyrights to the Exhibit A Work and,
        on information and belief, is threatening to misappropriate
        RTC's trade secrets and to infringe its copyrights in the
        Exhibit B Works.

        21.   Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis
        alleges, that at all times relevant herein, Henson knew or
        had reason to know that the Works listed on Exhibits A and B
        had been acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty
        to maintain their secrecy.

        22.   Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis
        alleges that, at all times relevant herein, Henson knew or had
        reason to know that the Works listed in Exhibit B had been
        acquired from or through a person who owed a duty to plaintiff
        to maintain their secrecy.

        23.   Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis
        alleges that, at all times relevant herein, Henson knew or had
        reason to know that the Works listed in Exhibit B had been
        obtained through improper means.

        24.   All copying and actual or attempted acquisition of the
        Works listed in Exhibits A and B has been unauthorized and
        constitutes or threatens copyright infringement and trade
        secret misappropriation, and the electronic display or
        distribution of the Work listed in Exhibit A has been
        unauthorized and constitutes wilful copyright infringement.

        25.   Upon information and belief, defendant has caused
        and/or induced others to participate in the aforesaid and
        threatened infringements and violations of plaintiffs rights,
        has provided the means and instrumentalities for doing so,
        has actively participated in the aforesaid and threatened
        infringements and violations, has the right, opportunity and
        means to supervise and control such activities and has
        exercised the same to plaintiffs severe detriment, and will
        continue to do so and has derived and will derive direct and
        indirect benefits from all of the foregoing activities, which
        defendant has engaged in knowingly, wilfully and with the
        intent to injure plaintiff and irreparably impair its rights.

        26.   Unless restrained by this Court, defendant will continue
        to engage in the acts complained of herein and will carry out
        the threatened acts complained of herein, and RTC will incur
        irreparable injury, for which there is no adequate remedy at
        law.

        27.   As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing acts
        of defendant, plaintiff has suffered and will suffer damages
        in an amount which cannot now be ascertained or computed.

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Declaratory Judgment of Copyright Infringement
17 U.S.C. ' 101 et seq. and 28 U.S.C. ' 2201(a))

        28.   Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations
        contained in paragraphs 1 through 27 above as though set forth
        fully herein.

        29.   The Works are protected under the Copyright Act of 1976,
        17 U.S.C. '' 101 et seq.

        30.   An actual case or controversy has arisen in which
        plaintiff contends that defendant has recently solicited and
        engaged in making unauthorized copies of RTC's copyrighted,
        unpublished Works and has also been threatening the posting of
        the Works listed in Exhibit B hereto, which threat is real,
        imminent, and likely to be carried out.

        31.   In light of defendant's pattern of behavior and his
        current activities, plaintiff contends defendant intends
        imminently to engage in massive infringements of RTC's
        copyrighted, unpublished Works listed in Exhibit B hereto and
        that, based upon the facts relevant hereto, plaintiff
        entertains a real and reasonable apprehension of infringement.

        32.   The acts, including the threatened acts set forth in
        paragraphs 1, 15, 17, 19, and 25 above are imminent and do
        and will infringe RTC's exclusive rights, inter alia to
        publish, reproduce, display, and distribute the unpublished
        Works listed in Exhibit B hereto, all in violation of RTC's
        exclusive copyrights under 17 U.S.C. ' 106. Such acts
        constitute copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. ' 501; and
        wilful copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. ' 504.
        
        33.   RTC seeks, pursuant to Rule 57 of the Federal Rules of
        Civil Procedure, a declaratory judgment that defendant has
        no right to engage in any such reproduction, distribution,
        display or other exploitation, by any means, of RTC's
        copyrighted unpublished Works set forth in Exhibit B, that
        plaintiff never authorized defendant to do so, but instead,
        repeatedly notified defendant that such acts would constitute,
        inter alia copyright infringement and that such acts,
        separately and together, constitute wilful copyright
        infringement of the Works set forth in Exhibit B pursuant to
        17 U.S.C. '501, et seq.

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Copyright Infringement of Unpublished Works
17 U.S.C. '' 101 et seq.)

        34.   Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations
        contained in paragraphs 1 through 27 and 29 through 33 above
        as though set forth fully herein.

        35.   The foregoing acts of defendant, as undertaken and
        threatened, infringe plaintiffs exclusive rights, inter alia,
        to publish, reproduce, distribute and display the Works listed
        in Exhibits A and B hereto, all in violation of plaintiffs ]
        exclusive copyrights under 17 U.S.C. ' 106. Such acts
        constitute copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. ' 501 and
        have contributed to infringement by others.

        36.   Defendant's unlawful acts set forth above constitute
        wilful copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. ' 504.

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Misappropriation of Trade Secrets)

        37.   Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations in
        paragraphs 1 through 27 above as though set forth fully
        herein.

        38.   By his aforesaid acts, defendant has wrongfully
        acquired, or is about to, and threatens imminently to
        disclose, all without authorization, confidential, trade
        secret information constituting portions of the Advanced
        Technology that are contained in the Works listed in Exhibit
        B hereto.

        39.   Defendant's acts, as undertaken and threatened, as
        aforesaid, were and are done with full knowledge that the
        Works contain confidential trade secrets information, and
        with intent to destroy that property interest in
        confidential information.

        40.   By his aforesaid acts as undertaken and threatened,
        defendant has misappropriated and threatens to further
        misappropriate RTC's trade secrets in violation of RTC's
        rights under California law, California Civil Code '
        3426.1 et seq.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays for the entry of judgment against
defendant as follows:

        1.    ON THE FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF:

        For a declaratory judgment in favor of RTC and against
        defendant that any publication, reproduction, derivation,
        distribution, display or performance of the Exhibit B Works
        by defendant constitutes copyright infringement, entitling
        RTC, inter alia to temporary, preliminary and permanent
        injunctive relief, to actual damages, a disgorgement of
        profits, and in lieu of such monetary remedies, should
        plaintiff so elect, for statutory damages for wilful
        infringement.

        2.    ON THE FIRST AND SECOND CLAIMS FOR RELIEF:

        (a)   For an order that defendant and all of his agents,
        servants, employees, partners, privies and attorneys, and all
        persons acting or purporting to act under his authority,
        direction or control, and all persons in active concert or
        participation with him, or acting on his behalf, having
        advance notice of this order, be enjoined from directly or
        indirectly, in whole or in part, publishing, reproducing,
        distributing, performing, or creating derivative works based
        upon, during the pendency of this action, the Exhibit B Works,
        or any of them, and permanently thereafter, any of the
        copyrighted works of L. Ron Hubbard including, but not limited
        to, the Works identified in Exhibits A and/or B, in any media
        now known or hereafter developed in any time, place or
        fashion, and in particular, from engaging in any such acts
        in, on, or in connection with any computer, database,
        information service, electronic bulletin board service,
        network, storage facility, or archives, or other electronic
        or computer device, service, network or facility, including,
        without limitation, the transmitting or loading of any such
        materials onto, or downloading any copies thereof from any
        such device, service, network or facility and that all such
        copies which defendant, his agents, servants, employees,
        partners, privies, and attorneys and those in active concert
        or participation with them have caused to be copied or copied
        onto any such device, service, network, or facility be
        removed;

3.	ON THE SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF:

        (a)   For an order impounding all copies made or used in
        violation of RTC's exclusive rights, and of all plates, molds,
        matrices, masters, tapes, film negatives, or other articles 
        in any media, electronic or otherwise, by means of which
        such copies may be reproduced including but not limited to
        all such copies and articles located in any so-called
        "off-site" storage areas, electronic or otherwise;

        (b)   For an award of plaintiff's attorneys' fees and costs
        pursuant to 17 U.S.C. '505.

        (c)   For an award of damages to plaintiff against defendant,
        according to proof at trial, and for all gains, profits and
        advantages directly or indirectly derived by defendant from
        his infringement of the copyrights of plaintiff in the Works;
        or in lieu thereof, should plaintiff so elect, for an award
        of statutory damages to plaintiff under 17 U.S~C. ' 504(c)
        (l) of $100,000.00 for each of the Works infringed by
        defendant, pursuant to 17 U.S.C. ' 504(c)(2); and

4.      ON THE THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF;

        (a)   For an order that defendant and all of his agents,
        servants, employees, partners, privies and attorneys, and all
        persons acting or purporting to act under his authority,
        direction or control, and all persons in active concert or
        participation with him, or acting on his behalf, having
        advance notice of this order, be enjoined:

        (1)   directly or indirectly, from engaging in the further
              unauthorized disclosure, or display of the Exhibit B
              Works (excluding only NOTs series 1, 24, 34, 35 and
              42, which are also the subject of other pending
              litigation), during the pendency of this action, and
              permanently of the Exhibit B Works, or portions
              thereof, and specifically from disclosing, displaying,
              transmitting or otherwise loading any of those Works,
              or portions thereof, in any media now known or
              hereafter developed in any time, place or fashion, or
              onto any computer, database, information service,
              electronic bulletin board service, network, storage
              facility, or archives, or other electronic or

        computer device, service, network or facility and that all such
        copies which defendant, his agents, servants, employees,
        partners, privies, and attorneys and those in active concert
        or participation with them have caused to be copied or copied
        onto any such device, service, network, or facility be removed;

        (2)   directly or indirectly, from engaging in the further
              unauthorized solicitation and/or acquirement, during the
              pendency of this action and permanently of the Exhibit B,
              and specifically from soliciting, acquiring, seeking to
              acquire, or otherwise downloading any of the Exhibit B
              Works, or portions thereof, from any media now known or
              hereafter developed in any time, place or fashion, or
              from any computer, database, information service,
              electronic bulletin board service, network, storage
              facility, or archives, or other electronic or
              computer device, service, network or facility and that
              all such copies which defendant, his agents, servants,
              employees, partners, privies, and attorneys and those in
              active concert or participation with them have caused to
              be copied or copied from any such device, service, network,
              or facility be removed;

        (b)   For an order directing defendant, and all of his agents,
        servants, employees, partners, privies and attorneys, and all
        persons acting or purporting to act under his authority,
        direction or control, and all persons in active concert or
        participation with him, or acting on his behalf, having
        advance notice of this order, to return immediately to counsel
        of record herein for plaintiff Religious Technology Center all
        documents in their possession, custody or control (including
        but not limited to those documents located in any so-called
        "off-site" storage facility, electronic or otherwise) that
        contain any of the Advanced Technology; and

        (c)   For an award of attorney fees under California Civil
        Code ' 3426.4.

5.      ON THE FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD CLAIMS FOR RELIEF:

        For an order that defendant and all of his agents, servants,
        employees, partners, privies and attorneys, and all persons
        acting or purporting to act under his authority, direction
        or control, and all persons in active concert or participation
        with him, or acting on his behalf, having advance notice of
        this order, be enjoined from:

        (a)   directly or indirectly destroying, altering or
        concealing, or in any way disposing of, any reproduction,
        copy, facsimile, excerpt, or derivative of any work of L. Ron
        Hubbard that is in defendant's possession, custody or control,
        in whole or in part, including, but not limited to, those
        materials located in any so-called "off-site" storage areas,
        electronic or otherwise, or otherwise despoiling or causing
        the despoliation, or alteration of any evidence, in whole or
        in part, in any form, place or media relating to defendant's
        conduct complained of in this action; and

        (b)   causing or inducing any other person to engage in any of
        the foregoing prohibited acts; and,

        (c)   filing with the Court, except under seal, any documents
        that contain any of the Advanced Technology.

6.      For such other and further relief as this Court deems just and
        proper.

DATED:	April 4, 1996

Thomas R. Hogan
LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS R. HOGAN

Roger M. Milgrim
William M. Hart
PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY
& WALKER

		-and-
Helena Kobrin

Attorneys for Plaintiff
RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER

-----------------------------------------

6.  Bite Me RTC:  Grady Ward's Response to the Request for
                  Production of Documents And Things

> Grady Ward
> In Pro Se
> 3449 Martha Ct.
> Arcata, CA 95521-4884
> [email-masked]
> http://www.northcoast.com/~grady/Welcome.html
> 
> UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
> FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
> 
> RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER, a      )     No. C 96-20207
> California non-profit corporation,  )
>                                     ) OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES
> Plaintiff,                          ) TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION
>                                     ) OF DOCUMENTS AND THINGS;
> v.                                  ) ACKNOWLEDGE NOTICE OF
>                                     ) DEPOSITION
> GRADY WARD                          )
>                                     )
> Defendant.                          )
> ____________________________________)
> 
> TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
> 
> PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT pursuant to written stipulation, Rule 30 of
> the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Court's order, plaintiff
> RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER does hereby notice the deposition of GRADY
> WARD to be taken at Crnich Deposition located at 626 "H" Street,
> Eureka, California 95501, commencing at 9:00 a.m. on April 8, 1996,
> and continuing from day to day thereafter, as approved by the Court,
> excluding Saturday, Sunday and holidays, until completed before a
> notary public authorized to administer the oath. The deposition will
> be recorded stenographically and may be recorded by sound and
> visually.
> 
> ACKNOWLEDGE AS PER COMPROMISE WITH JUDGE WHYTE THAT DEPOSITION WILL BE
> LIMITED TO ONE EIGHT HOUR SESSION, WITH AND ADDITIONAL HOUR GRANTED
> BECAUSE OF EUREKA LOCATION. THIS TIME MAY BE DIVIDED OVER TWO DAYS IN
> ANY PROPORTION DESIRED BY PLAINTIFF.
> 
> PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE THAT Mr. Ward is hereby requested, pursuant
> to Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, written
> stipulation, and the Court's order, to
> 
> produce at the Law Offices of Thomas R. Hogan, Esq., 60 South Market
> Street, Suite 1125, San Jose, California 95113, on April 6, 1996, or
> as otherwise specified herein, the documents
> 
> and things requested in Exhibit A attached hereto which are in the
> possession, custody, or control of Mr. Ward. Should the deposition be
> postponed for any reason, you will remain obligated to produce
> documents on this date.
> 
> UNCONTESTED DOCUMENTS AND THINGS WILL BE PRESENTED FRIDAY, APRIL 5,
> 1996 IN ARCATA, CALIFORNIA AS ARRANGED BY PLAINTIFF AND DEFENDANT.
> 
> Dated: April 4, 1996
> 
> Grady Ward
> 
> In Pro Se
> 
> ___________________________________
> 
> DOCUMENTS AND THINGS TO BE PRODUCED
> 
> 1. All copies of the OT III documents which were posted to the
> Internet in or about February, 1995 under the header attached hereto
> as Exhibit 1.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 2. All copies of NED for OTs Series 1 which was posted to the Internet
> in or about February, 1995 under the header attached hereto as Exhibit
> 2.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 3. Any and all documents relating to posting, reproduction,
> distribution, or display of works of L. Ron Hubbard, including but not
> limited to, the Works.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 4. Any and all documents relating to your solicitation from others of
> copies of works of L. Ron Hubbard, including but not limited to, the
> Works.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 5. All documents which you have received as a result of your
> solicitation of NOTs materials, OT materials, or other Scientology
> materials.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 6. All documents relating to posting of Scientology materials on the
> Internet, including without limitation, ftp sites, web sites, or
> newsgroups.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 7. Any and all documents relating to acquisition of any Advanced
> Technology documents.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 8. Any and all document relating to the identify of any individual who
> has posted any of the Advanced Technology to the Internet, either
> under that person's own name or via an anonymous remailer.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 9. Any and all documents relating to postings made by you, whether
> under you own name, a pseudonym, or anonymously to the USENET
> newsgroups entitled alt.religion.scientology, alt.2600, alt.activism,
> comp.org.eff.talk, or any other newsgroup relating to the Advanced
> Technology.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 10. Any and all documents relating to the posting of Advanced
> Technology documents to the USENET newsgroup entitled
> alt.religion.scientology, including, without limitation, copies of
> such postings or discussions of such postings, whether actual or
> planned.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 11. Any and all documents relating to postings of Advanced Technology
> materials, including, but not limited to, actual postings or
> discussions of such postings, whether actual or planned, made through
> the following servers:
> 
> a. freezone.remailer
> 
> b. nately.ucsd.edu
> 
> c. penet.fi
> 
> d. replay.comm
> 
> e. utopia.backtic.nl
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 12. All documents relating to communications between you and anyone
> regarding your posting of works by or alleged to be by L. Ron Hubbard,
> whether under your own name, a pseudonym, or anonymously, including,
> but not limited to, discussions prior to or following such postings.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 13. Any and all documents relating to communications with the
> following individuals relating to the Advanced Technology:
> 
> a. Alex DeJoode
> 
> b. Dennis Erlich
> 
> c. Steven Fishman
> 
> d. Johan Helsingius
> 
> e. Jeff Jacobsen
> 
> f. Keith Henson
> 
> g. Tom Klemesrud
> 
> h. Arnaldo Lerma
> 
> i. Peter Mante
> 
> j. Ron Neuman
> 
> k. Robert Penny
> 
> l. Felipe Rodriquez
> 
> m. Karin Spaink
> 
> n. Shelly Thomson
> 
> o. David Touretzky
> 
> p. Lawrence Wollersheim
> 
> OBJECT BECAUSE OF 18 U.S.C. 2700, et sqq. (E.C.P.A.)
> 
> 14. All documents showing the name, address, and/or telephone number
> of anyone to whom you have sent Advanced Technology materials, whether
> in hard copy or electronic form.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 15. All documents showing the name, address, and/or telephone number
> of anyone who has sent Advanced Technology materials to you, whether
> in hard copy or electronic form.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 16. All documents sent to you by Arnaldo Lerma related to the Advanced
> Technology, including, but not limited to, transmissions or
> discussions of such documents.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 17. Any and all documents relating to the licensing or customer
> agreement between you and any Internet access provider.
> 
> OBJECT BECAUSE OF NON-RELEVANCE; any event it would be identical to
> the customer agreement currently in force as on file with the
> provider.
> 
> 18. Any and all documents regarding Netcom On-Line Communication
> Services, Inc. or any other Internet access provider warning you
> regarding the posting of copyrighted materials on the Internet or any
> other activity by you through that access provider's facilities.
> 
> OBJECT BECAUSE OF NON-RELEVANCE
> 
> 19. Any and all documents relating to Netcom On-Line Communication
> Services, Inc. or any other Internet access provider taking
> disciplinary action against you regarding the posting of copyrighted
> materials on the Internet or any other activity by you through that
> access provider's facilities.
> 
> OBJECT BECAUSE OF NON-RELEVANCE
> 
> 20. Any and all documents relating to Scamizdat, including, without
> limitation, persons in active concert or participation with Scamizdat,
> acting on its behalf, or controlling its activities.
> 
> WILL PROVIDE GROUP INDICES TO USENET VIEWING APPLICATION, possible
> e-mails OBJECT BECAUSE OF 18 U.S.C. 2700, et sqq. (E.C.P.A.), for all
> other categories, NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED.
> 
> 21. Any and all documents relating to postings by Scamizdat on the
> Internet, including, without limitation, the posting themselves,
> predictions of such postings, and references to Scamizdat.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 22. All documents relating to the First Electronic Church of
> SCAMIZDAT.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 23. All documents on which you based your posting of August 1, 1995
> which stated that "SCAMIZDAT #10 is going to post the complete Fishman
> appendices, including all the OT levels I-VIII."
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 24. All documents upon which you based your "suspicions," as
> referenced in The Recorder of March 25, 1996, about the identity of
> SCAMIZDAT.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 25. Any and all documents relating to confidentiality agreements
> pertaining to the Works.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 26. All documents relating to communications you have received from or
> sent to any representative of Religious Technology Center or any
> Church of Scientology, including any attorney acting on their behalf.
> 
> WILL PROVIDE "Lanham Act" LETTER; "Service" LETTER
> 
> 27. All documents relating to your attempts to discredit Helena Kobrin
> as an attorney acting on behalf of Religious Technology Center in
> protecting its intellectual property rights.
> 
> OBJECT BECAUSE OF INCOMPREHENSIBILITY OF QUESTION and, without
> prejudice to the first objection, OBJECT BECAUSE OF NON-RELEVANCE
> 
> 28. All documents relating to telephone records from July 1, 1994 to
> the present.
> 
> OBJECT BECAUSE OF NON-RELEVANCE
> 
> 29. All documents concerning the use by you, or anyone acting directly
> or indirectly under your control or in concert or participation with
> you, of storage facilities away from your primary residence.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 30. All documents discussing your scanning of any writings by L. Ron
> Hubbard, including, but not limited to, Advanced Technology materials,
> books, policy letters, bulletins, and transcripts of any audio or
> video taped materials, or any other materials related to the Church of
> Scientology, on your computer.
> 
> NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 31. All documents relating to software programs which you have created
> regarding any of the following: anonymous remailers, USENET news,
> Internet access, scanning of documents onto computer media, uploading
> or downloading of documents onto computer media, encryption of
> computer transmissions or files, lexicons, Scientology materials, or
> copyrights.
> 
> WILL PROVIDE LEXICON SOFTWARE; otherwise, NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED
> 
> 32. All documents relating to software programs which you use
> regarding any of the following: anonymous remailers, USENET news,
> Internet access, scanning of documents onto computer media, uploading
> or downloading of documents onto computer media, encryption of
> computer transmission or files, lexicons, Scientology materials, or
> copyrights.
> 
> COMPUTER MANUALS, BOTH ELECTRONIC AND PAPER WILL BE PROVIDED ON
> FRIDAY, APRIL 5, 1996 FOR INSPECTION, AS PER APRIL 3, 1996 HOGAN
> CONVERSATION
> 
> 33. All documents relating to any works which you have written
> regarding any of the following: anonymous remailers, USENET news,
> Internet access, scanning of documents onto computer media, uploading
> or downloading of documents onto computer media, encryption of
> computer transmission or files, lexicons, Scientology materials, or
> copyrights.
> 
> LEXICON MATERIAL PROVIDED AS PART OF 31.; otherwise NO DOCUMENTS
> POSSESSED
> 
> 34. All shredders.
> 
> TO BE PROVIDED FOR INSPECTION; WILL BE PROVIDED ON FRIDAY APRIL 5,
> 1996 FOR INSPECTION, AS PER APRIL 3, 1996 HOGAN CONVERSATION
> 
> 35. All scanning equipment.
> 
> TO BE PROVIDED FOR INSPECTION; WILL BE PROVIDED ON FRIDAY APRIL 5,
> 1996 FOR INSPECTION, AS PER APRIL 3, 1996 HOGAN CONVERSATION
> 
> 36. All locks which you place on any cabinet or other container in
> which you have placed Scientology materials.
> 
> NONE SATISFY REQUEST
> 
> 37. All documents relating to procedures for shredding documents,
> either hard copy or in electronic form.
> 
> EXCEPT FOR USER'S MANUAL, NO DOCUMENTS POSSESSED

----------------------------------------- 

7.     **Biased Journalism** MAKES HIT LIST

        The publisher of **Biased Journalism** wrote the following
letter to Judge Whyte:

Shelley Thomson
236 Stanford S/C, Suite 142
Palo Alto, CA 94304

Hon. Ronald M. Whyte, Federal Judge
Northern District of California
San Jose, CA 

April 4, 1996

No. C 96-20207 RMW

Hand Delivered Letter to Judge Whyte

Dear Judge Whyte:

       I am the publisher of **Biased Journalism**, a news/humor 
magazine covering issues of interest to citizens of cyberspace.  Among 
other events the Journal has covered a series of hearings now taking 
place in your courtroom.    

       I was shocked to see my name on the list of documents demanded by 
Plaintiffs from Mr. Ward.  The relevant selection from the Notice of 
Deposition of Defendant Grady Ward and Request for Production of 
Documents And Things is the following:

>13. Any and all documents relating to communications with the following
>individuals relating to the Advanced Technology:

>a. Alex DeJoode
>b. Dennis Erlich
>c. Steven Fishman
>d. Johan Helsingius
>e. Jeff Jacobsen
>f. Keith Henson
>g. Tom Klemesrud
>h. Arnaldo Lerma
>i. Peter Mante
>j. Ron Neuman          
>k. Robert Penny
>l. Felipe Rodriquez
>m. Karin Spaink
>n. Shelly Thomson  ***
>o. David Touretzky
>p. Lawrence Wollersheim

**Biased Journalism** has carried many stories about scientology.  As
a journalist, I strongly protest the inclusion of my name on this
list.  The exposure of my private communication would have an extreme
chilling effect upon my ability to gather and publish news.  It is an 
infringement of my rights under the First Amendment.  Moreover, it
might expose third parties to harm.  

With reference to the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (section 
2700-2707 of Title 18 USC), it is my understanding that lawful access
to stored electronic communications requires a warrant or a court
order.

Even if the ECPA were disregarded, I suggest to Your Honor that the
right to privacy of Mr. Ward's correspondents should be protected.  I
believe that at minimum, Plaintiffs should be required to show cause
for their request for each person's correspondence individually.  

I request such a hearing on my own behalf, so that I may explain to
the court why my correspondence with Grady Ward should not be
delivered to the Plaintiffs.    

                               Sincerely yours,

                               Shelley Thomson
                               publisher, **Biased Journalism**

        The Judge has not replied.

                               The End

From [email-masked] Sat May 11 21:15:22 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:11526 misc.int-property:389 misc.legal.computing:1663
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.internet.media-coverage,alt.journalism,alt.news-media,alt.privacy.anon-server,alt.religion.scientology,alt.society.civil-liberty,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property,misc.legal.computing
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!dragon.solect.com!tor-nn1.netcom.ca!ix.netcom.com!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!noring
From: [email-masked] (Jon Noring)
Subject: NEWSFLASH: Remaining Scientology Secret Scriptures Posted to Usenet
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Followup-To: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 15:29:33 GMT
Lines: 114
Sender: [email-masked]

[Carefully note that followup discussion has been set to the newsgroups
alt.religion.scientology and comp.org.eff.talk, so subscribe accordingly if
you are at all interested in following this thread.]

Last last week, a series of anonymous postings were made to the Usenet
newsgroup alt.religion.scientology.  Contained in these postings were the
complete NOTS materials (NEDs for OTs), the last remaining, and highest
level, secret materials ("scriptures") of the Church of Scientology (CoS).

Late last year, the OT materials, a related set of high-level secret
"scriptures" were similarly posted to Usenet.  This action destroyed what was
left of CoS' claims the OT materials were "trade secret" and may have cast
doubt on the validity of the copyrights to some of them.  Copies of the
Fishman affidavit, a Federal court document which includes the OT materials
as exhibits, can be read via several Web sites in the Netherlands, where the
Dutch courts ruled earlier this year the Fishman affidavit could be maintained
on Web pages there.  The court ruling is being appealed by CoS and even if
CoS gets the ruling overturned (unlikely), the trade secret status of the OT
materials is all but lost, with ramifications for ongoing litigation here in
the U.S. between CoS and several critics.

The NOTS are considered even higher level than the OT materials, and CoS
has gone through extraordinary lengths to try to suppress their dissemination
on the Internet.  In the last few months, Ms. Helena Kobrin, a Scientology
attorney representing the Religious Technology Center, who defends the
intellectual property rights to all the AT ("Advanced Technology") materials
for the owner, the Church of Spiritual Technology, legally threatened any
person who simply posted a *request* to purchase a *legal* copy of the NOTS
materials!  Her threats enraged the Internet community, and probably led
someone who happened to possess the NOTS to scan and anonymously post them
in order to end the egregious and unwarranted harassment of ordinary users.

What is interesting about both the OT and the NOTS materials is that they
are, as a whole, quite boring, even though there are a few glimmers of
"excitement" here and there, such as in OT3 which depicts a "space opera"
(Xenu, the Marcabs, hydrogen bombs, etc.) and in the OT8 (which CoS disputes
is a forgery) which says that Jesus was a pederast.  However, the value of
these materials to CoS is obviously monetary;  for a person to advance to
these levels requires them paying hundreds of thousands of dollars or serving
as a slave to the organization for many years.  This is in contradiction to
nearly all legitimate religions which essentially teach their spiritual
"truths" for free or for a very nominal fee to cover expenses.  The
ramifications to CoS are obvious if their "secret" AT materials are
disseminated and commented upon in public.

Thus, it is clear by CoS' actions, as well as comments from former high-
level Scientologists, that (from CoS' perspective) the posting of the NOTS is
a disaster of the first magnitude, comparable to the impact on the tobacco
industry by the recent leak of the "tobacco papers", and the impact on the
Federal Government by the leak of the "Pentagon papers" during the Vietnam War.

Following the posting of the NOTS, the infamous "CancelBunny" appeared, a
throwaway account at Netcom used to cancel the NOTS posts (such cancellation
is probably a violation of Federal Law).  Thus, the NOTS postings have been
cancelled and are no longer available at many sites except at those sites
which do not honor cancels.  However, if past experience with the OT levels
is any indication, the NOTS might be reposted over and over again to minimize
the actions of the "CancelBunny."  No doubt tens of thousands of copies of
the NOTS have already been downloaded and are sitting on computers all around
the world.  Pandora's box has been opened and public access and commentary of
the NOTS in the public interest can no longer be stifled.

The next few days and weeks should be watched very closely.  It has been
predicted that the anonymous remailers in the Netherlands (through which
the NOTS were posted) may be put under extraordinary legal pressure to try to
shut them down since they are the easiest means for a person to anonymously
repost the NOTS (which CoS is deathly afraid of).  Also look for CoS to get
a court order to access the logs/records for all anonymous remailers in the
U.S. in the hope (a long shot at best) of finding the person who posted the
NOTS (they may have used a chain of remailers to post the NOTS), and possibly
to help with discovery in other related litigation they are now involved in.
Another benefit of such a court order is that it simply puts more pressure
on anonymous remailers, and may cause many of them to simply "throw in the
towel."

It's also been suggested that CoS may accelerate their long-anticipated
filing of a RICO suit against scores of net.critics, attornies, journalists
(such as Leiby at the Washington Post) and other non-net.critics.  The hope
behind this RICO suit, which will ultimately fail since it has absolutely no
merit, is that it will shut down, even if temporarily, critical discussion of
CoS on the Internet.  CoS has shown themselves by their actions to be a
paranoid and schizophrenic organization who cannot tolerate or ignore even
one word of criticism.

I urge everybody reading this post to become familiar with what is occuring
and to keep a close eye on events.  Ron Newman maintains a wonderful Web page
describing what's happened in the Scientology vs. Internet war in the last
18 months, and has links to many other sites, including Scientology's (while
Scientology refuses to link to Ron's page in a show of good faith).  It will
give a good background as to what is currently happening.  The URL to Ron's
page is:  http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/home.html

The integrity of the anonymous remailers, an important component of cyber
liberties, is being gravely threatened.  And many people on the Internet who
are exercising their Freedom of Speech to comment and criticize the Church of
Scientology may come under severe attack -- if CoS can get away with this,
then other groups who also cannot tolerate any criticism or public
exposure will be encouraged to follow in CoS' footsteps, with grave
ramifications to the integrity of our net.freedoms.

I urge the Internet community to closely monitor the unfolding events and to
become active should CoS overstep the bounds of accepted decency and attempt
to bully their way around the Internet.  Read Ron's Web page, read the Usenet
newsgroup 'alt.religion.scientology'.  Become involved!

Jon Noring

-- 
OmniMedia Electronic Books | URL:  http://www.awa.com/library/omnimedia
9671 S. 1600 West St.      | Anonymous FTP:
South Jordan, UT 84095     | ftp.awa.com  /pub/softlock/pc/products/OmniMedia
801-253-4037               | E-mail:  [email-masked]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join the Electronic Books Mailing List (EBOOK-List) Today!  Just send e-mail
to [email-masked], and put the following line in the body of the message:
     subscribe ebook-list     

From [email-masked] Sat May 11 21:19:12 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:9928
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news3.idirect.com!news2.toronto.istar.net!news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.telebyte.net!usenet
From: [email-masked] (Zane Thomas)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: NOTS SOLICITATION
Date: Sat, 04 May 1996 06:04:57 GMT
Organization: Telebyte North West Silverdale, Wa
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.53.162.222
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99d/32.182

Ed,

Further reading for you:

http://www.sky.net/~sloth/sci/sci_index.html
http://mail.bris.ac.uk/~plmlp/scum.html
http://www.snafu.de/~tilman
http://www.primenet.com/~lippard
http://amazing.cinenet.net/scientology.html
http://users.aimnet.com/~jdiver/scieno.htm
http://www.tezcat.com/~tina/pages.me/sci/
http://copper.ucs.indiana.edu/~sgoehrin/scientology/home.html
http://www.algonet.se/~teodor/cult/welcome.htm
http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/
http://www.eff.org/pub/Censorship/CoS_v_the_Net/
http://www.webcom.com/~dtobias/sosueme.html
http://www.well.com/user/jerod23/clam.html
http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/scientology.html
http://home.pacific.net.sg/~marina/welcome.htm

To name a few.  Should I go on?

Zane --- Taking out the trash.

From [email-masked] Sat May 11 21:22:25 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:9853
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news3.idirect.com!news2.toronto.istar.net!news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!trenite.easynet.de
From: Koos Nolst Trenite <[email-masked]>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: RI-280i  How Tyrant L. Ron Hubbard Thinks He Aids Survival
Date: Thu, 02 May 1996 15:25:34 GMT
Organization: trenite.de
Lines: 443
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: trenite.easynet.de
X-Broken-Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 17:18:19 +1:00
Comments: Authenticated sender is <[email-masked]>
X-Confirm-Reading-To: [email-masked]
X-pmrqc:       1
Return-receipt-to: [email-masked]
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.01)
X-Mail2News-Path: hera.easynet.de!trenite.easynet.de

                                                  5 October 1995
                                         issued on 26 April 1996

  RI-280i  'How Tyrant L. Ron Hubbard Thinks He Aids Survival'

from Ambassador for Mankind (Ron's Inspector)

Message # RI-280i for Internet

Confessional on L. Ron Hubbard, on 5 October 1995, 10:31 GMT,
ordered by Ambassador for Mankind.
(Reported per HCOPL 'Confessionals - Ethics Reports Required')

[Auditor:] How would
           'BEING A TYRANT'
            aid your own survival? F

[LRH:] "It's a very irrational aberrated computation
 that 'being a tyrant' aids own survival.

"In an aberrated way
 it is supposed to aid survival:
  >I will not be slowed down
    by others who do not grasp what I want
    and why [I want it] and what the use of it is.
   I ORDER them to do it!<
  >I do not have to listen
    to their considerations or problems
    with or about doing what I want to have done,
   I do not have to figure out:
    How is HE thinking? WHAT is a problem?
    How do I understand another?
    How do I make another understand me?<

"As a tyrant,
 >I issue orders, and that's it!<
 >And I will be very evil and punish everyone around,
  if my order is not executed.<

">I will never have a team that I can rely on.
  I will never have a team that shares my goal.
  I have to push them again and again that they do what I want.<

        [Note by Koos:
         In order to "solve" this, LRH created the Sea Org.]

"I will have made people into MEST [material things].
 MEST only moves when pushed or otherwise acted upon
  and stops [its] motion as soon as not pushed anymore.  LFBD

"But it does not aid survival (not mine nor others)
  to live amongst people
   who have no ARC [Affinity, Reality, Communication] for life,
   who have given up considering that it's THEIR life too, and
   who have become apathetic about OWNING anything in life.

        [Note by Koos: This IS the Sea Org.]

"They wouldn't do anything
  with [out of, because of own] responsibility.

"And they would do it badly,
  because they wouldn't want to really do it,
  what the tyrant orders them to do.  LFBD

"So the tyrant,
  who does not want to listen
   to the
    interests,
    wishes,
    problems,
    goals,
    ARCX's [upsets],
    of those he dominates and orders around,
 is very badly served by them.

"They do not aid his survival,
  although it might seem
  that he is very successful
   in getting compliance and his intentions executed.

        [Note by Koos:
         The Sea Org, and Miscavige and his RTC,
          were supposed to be very successful
           in getting compliance for LRH and
           in getting his intentions executed.
          In fact they destroyed LRH,
           and destroyed most of the CofS.]

"A tyrant wants to destroy life
 - and, that destroys him too.

"He is really forcing others to destroy him."  LFBD

 (see RI-288i 'The Main Evil Purpose' of 15 Oct 95,
  on how LRH forced others to destroy him.

[Auditor:] How would 'being a Tyrant'
            hinder the survival of others?

[LRH:] "A tyrant does not include in his computations
 the survival of others.

"He destroys, and he forces others to destroy, survival.

"They want to stop him from doing that,
  if they are not yet completely apathetic.
 He punishes them for THAT,
  and this hinders their survival."  LFBD

[Auditor:] How would 'being a Tyrant'
            hinder the survival of others?

[LRH:] "If I would shut someone up
  who wants to give me survival advice,
 this would hinder the survival of others.

"Or if I would otherwise punish him for that, or
  destroy his life, or
  take his possessions away, or
  destroy his comm lines, or
  throw him out of the group or country,
  or any other destructive punishment,
 this
  will hinder the survival of him and others.

        [Note by Koos: This is the Guardian Office,
         and later the OSA and RTC at their daily work,
         covered up by an "International Justice Chief"
          and "Ethics".]

"It wouldn't aid my own survival either.  LFBD

"I have done this to Koos.  LFBD

"Suppressive Persons from the former Guardian Office
  have done this to Koos.

"AOSHEU [Copenhagen] Suppressive Persons
  have done it to Koos,
  and have pulled in others to be evil.  LFBD

"Koos's Ethics Reports
  have been stamped to be
   'natter [destructive criticism] and enturbulation'.

"And when he insisted in keeping his reports up,
  the Ethics Reports were stamped
   to have been made out of suppressive intention
   and he was declared suppressive.

"That's the action of a tyrant."  LFBD

[Auditor:] How would 'being a Tyrant'
            hinder the survival of others?

[LRH:] "One characteristic of a tyrant is
 to react heavily
  when someone wants to 'put his ethics in'
    [bring him back towards a survival course of action],
  when someone points out a non-survival intention
   or action.  LFBD

"He [the tyrant] SHOULD duplicate and understand what was said
  and the intention with it.

"He [the tyrant] SHOULD thank the person who communicated to him
  about how he could improve his ethics.

"But what does a tyrant do?

"He wants to destroy the communication,
 he wants to destroy the one who communicates.  LFBD

        [Note by Koos: This is what LRH has done
          and is doing continuously right up to this minute.]

"In Scientology Organizations,
  Knowledge Reports
   SHOULD be taken up immediately locally
   and handled satisfactorily
    - that is, so that ARC [understanding] is established
      and life can go on:
       a student continuing his course,
       a PC continuing his auditing,
       a staff producing on post again.

"THIS is survival
 - and not
    the felony of rejecting communication
    and punishing someone for communicating."  LFBD

        [Note by Koos: But the 'STANDARD' 'NORMAL' way
          of operating in Scientology Organizations since 1966,
           is, to reject and punish.]

[Auditor:] How would 'being a Tyrant'
            aid your own survival?

[LRH:] "As a tyrant I can enforce to be right.  LFBD

"Then he IS right and it's AGREED that he is right.

"It's agreed under heavy duress,
  but the tyrant doesn't mind.
   As long as he is CONSIDERED to be right
   and as long as no one dares to say the opposite.

"The tyrant CAN'T evaluate himself
  as having been wrong or being wrong.

"He HAS to be right compulsively.
 And, he thinks, if he admits being wrong,
  he will lose ALL respect.

        [Note by Koos:
         This is the current state of mind
          of the being L. Ron Hubbard.
         When I issued the official expulsion
          of LRH from Scientology, on 17 April 1996,
           he considered himself near extinction as a being.]

"How much [respect] did he have to begin with?

"He thinks
  that he will be punished for being wrong,
  that he will be thrown out, deserted,
 because he assumes others handle life [in the SAME way]
  as HE does."  LFBD's

[Auditor:] How would 'being a Tyrant'
            aid your own survival?

[LRH:] "At times it might be assisting survival
 to PLAY being a tyrant,
  so that someone, whom I want to [get to] do something,
   is 'getting it that I really mean it'.

"That's a bit a via and in a sense dangerous
  because it can restimulate too much case [evil intentions], like:
    having been a tyrant,
    having been subjected to tyranny,
    having been made into a slave,
    having committed overts [crimes]
      on those Flows [of being cause or effect of something].

"And I might get,
  instead of a sudden readiness to act, from the person,
 a complete unwillingness to act
  for fear of committing overts again.

"Much better is just plain TONE[Level-]40:
  'Intention without reservation'.
 Also for your own sake.
 Why play tyrant, when you can as well be also yourself?  LFBD

"AND PLAYING A TYRANT
  TO GET EASIER COMPLIANCE WITH YOUR ORDERS,
  CAN PRETTY MUCH HANG YOU UP  LFBD
   IN ANOTHER VALENCE [identity]
   OR IN AN OLD VALENCE [identity] OF YOURS."  LFBD
 [Emphasis added]

[Auditor:] How would 'being a Tyrant'
            aid your own survival?

[LRH:] ">I wouldn't have to change anything.<  F

">I could go on using the same old solutions.<

">I could be stubborn to be right.<

        [Note by Koos: This is called "Keeping Scientology Working",
          by LRH, since 1965.]

"I could insist that this aids my survival, which it doesn't.

"'Being a tyrant' keeps somebody fixed on himself,
  a self-centered idiot
  who demands all attention and gives none.  LFBD

"Unless
  he has some ARC [Affinity, Reality, Communication],
   and then increased ARC
   for an increased number of Dynamics [areas of life],
  he will stay dominated,
 and [by] trying to escape domination
  he will dominate others.

"A tyrant is the most dominated, unfree, being there is!
 But that doesn't hinder him from dominating others."

        [Note by Koos: LRH is currently dominated
          by having to insist
           that all he wrote and did was right,
          by needing a tremendous amount of admiration
           to confirm that all he did and wrote was right, and
          by having to squash or destroy anyone
           who exposes the things in which he was not right.]

[Auditor:] How would 'being a Tyrant'
            aid your own survival?

"As a tyrant I would answer:
  >it helps me to not be slave<.  LFBD
 As if there were only two possibilities:
  either slave or tyrant.
 (see RI-543i 'Dictators' of 22 July 1994,
      issued as RI-543i on 2 May 1996)

">As a tyrant I can't be made into a slave.
  No one would dare!<

"But the poor guy can't even sit and listen
 to his fellowmen,
 and make plans
  which involve
   THEIR survival,
   THEIR interests,
   THEIR likings,
   THEIR best.

"It doesn't aid my survival,
 it doesn't aid anyone else's survival
  to be a tyrant,
  or let someone else be a tyrant!  LFBD

"Also, it's the opposite
  of what I want to achieve with Dianetics and Scientology.

        [Note by Koos: He means, but does not dare, to say:
          "It's the opposite of what I wanted originally
           to achieve with Dianetics and Scientology, before 1966."]

 LFBD-F/Nind

                 L. Ron Hubbard"

This tyranny is precisely
 what L. Ron Hubbard has been doing
  since he went Clear himself, since August 1965.

He refuses to admit it, though,
 which resulted in his Expulsion from Scientology on 21 March 1996,
 made official per
  RI-538i 'Official Expulsion of the being LRH from Scn'
   of 17 Apr 1996

                                   Total session time: 02:58 min

                Highly specialized LRH OT HCO Sec Check Auditing
            at 1,400 US $ per hour, makes 4,153 US $ total cost.

(The abbreviations F(Fall), LF(Long Fall), LFBD(Long Fall Blow
 Down) and F/N(Floating Needle) designate reactions on the
 E-meter, indicating mental charge (F, LF, LFBD) and release of
 charge completed (F/N).
 "LFBD-F/N" = truth found out. "ind" = indicated to the person)

Koos Nolst Trenite - Ambassador for Mankind

Copyright 1995, 1996 by Koos Nolst Trenite

 references:
  RI-278i  'How Tyrant L. Ron Hubbard is "Right"' of 3 Oct 95
  RI-278i-A'How Tyrant L. Ron Hubbard is more "Right"' 4 Oct 95
  RI-279i  'How Tyrant L. Ron Hubbard Dominates Others' 4 Oct 95
  RI-281i  'How LRH could make up for his tyranny' of 7 Oct 1995

  RI-538i  'Official Expulsion of the being LRH from Scn' 17 Apr 96
  RI-538i-A'Official Expulsion of the being LRH from Scn - Add' 29 Apr 96
  RI-538i-B'Official Expulsion of the being LRH from Scn - Add B' 29 Apr 96

  RI-302i  'More Suppressive Acts of L. Ron Hubbard' 20 Oct 1996
  RI-303i  'Suppressive Acts of LRH on "Quicky Grades"' 21 Oct 95,
  RI-304i  'Suppressive Acts of LRH on Ray Mithoff' of 21 Oct 95

  RI-295i  'LRH on How He Committed Suicide in Jan 1986' 17 Oct 95
  RI-290i  'How LRH Contributed to Quentin's Death' of 16 Oct 95
  RI-291i  'Fake Ron's Journal 38 tape still sold by Church' 16 Oct 95

  RI-317i  'LRH is "RIGHT FOREVER"' of 25 Oct 1995
  RI-336i  'LRH since 1966: 'POLICY IS SENIOR TO PEOPLE' 4 Nov 95
  RI-39i   'SEC CHECK on LRH - Extremely Important Data' 18 Dec 95
  RI-29i   'Koos, LRH, Miscavige - the Truth' of 7 Dec 1994

  RI-10i   'Confronting a Suppressive' of 12 Oct 1994
  RI-53i   'Past Life Criminals and Scn Ethics' of 29 July 1994
  RI-58i   'Fair Game Series - Treatment of Enemies' of 1 Jan 95
  RI-269i  'How to Handle Irresponsible People' of 26 Sept 1995
  RI-514i  'Confessionals and Blackmail -...IMPORTANT' 16 Mar 96
  RI-535i  '"An Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend" = INSANE' 10 Apr 96
  RI-541i  'Correct and Joyful Confessional Procedure - Part I' 20 Apr 96

  RI-50RQi 'RI-xxxi series Archive - Contents and Use' 28 Dec 94
             Revised and Replaced on 6 March 1996

These and other RI-Bulletins can be obtained

    (with WWW-browser) at
       ftp://thetics.europa.com/outgoing/adams/RI
    (with ftp) at
       thetics.europa.com/outgoing/adams/RI

From [email-masked] Sat May 11 21:24:15 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:9906
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!news.nevada.edu!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.gil.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email-masked](STEVEN FISHMAN )
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Come See Cult Pimp Eugene Ingram's Florida Arrest Warrant!
Date: 30 Apr 1996 23:44:05 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftl-fl5-18.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Tue Apr 30  6:44:05 PM CDT 1996

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Dear alt.religion.scientology,

Come see Eugene Ingram's Florida arrest warrant at Jim Lippard's web
site!

The URL is http://www.primenet.com/~lippard/fl_warrant.jpg

and the web site which is the official Eugene Ingram page is at:

http://www.primenet.com/~lippard/pis.html

Please make links to this in all of your web pages, so that the whole
world
can finally see what the cult's head pimp looks like and what his
Florida
warrant contains.

He also has a warrant for his arrest in Oklahoma for carrying a
concealed weapon.

I shall be endeavoring to obtain a copy of it, and I will forward it to
Jim Lippard to put on the Ingram web site.

I am trying to convince Florida to extradite him now based upon the
additional warrant in Oklahoma, and I will be contacting the Oklahoma
State Attorney as well.

With Best Wishes,

Steve Fishman

From [email-masked] Sat May 11 21:25:00 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:9924
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news3.idirect.com!news2.toronto.istar.net!news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.roundabout.org!news.demon.co.uk!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!trenite.easynet.de
From: Koos Nolst Trenite <[email-masked]>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: RI-542i  Correct and Joyful Confessional Procedure - Part II
Date: Fri, 03 May 1996 19:30:45 GMT
Organization: trenite.de
Lines: 268
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: trenite.easynet.de
X-Broken-Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 21:18:43 +1:00
Comments: Authenticated sender is <[email-masked]>
X-Confirm-Reading-To: [email-masked]
X-pmrqc:       1
Return-receipt-to: [email-masked]
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.01)
X-Mail2News-Path: hera.easynet.de!trenite.easynet.de

                                                      2 May 1996

 RI-542i  'Correct and Joyful Confessional Procedure - Part II'

from Ambassador for Mankind (Ron's Inspector)

Message # RI-542i for Internet

In Part I we have looked at

Step 1.  "WHICH NON-SURVIVAL ACT OF YOURS
          WOULD YOU LIKE TO CONFESS, NOW?"

         (For simplicity we consider a non-survival omission to act
          also a 'non-survival act',
           like the act of not interfering, of not speaking up,
           of not informing, etc.)

Step 2. "TELL ME ABOUT THAT ACT OF YOURS
         TILL YOU YOURSELF ARE SATISFIED WITH DESCRIBING IT TO ME
         AS A NON-SURVIVAL ACT."

        Repeat step 2.
        If NO satisfaction can be achieved by repeating step 2.,
         then say that it would be better to work together
         on finding another non-survival act to confess to.
        Go back to step 1.]

We looked at
 how we achieve mutual understanding and help
  with a correct and joyful confessional procedure, in Part I.

We looked at
 what we need to understand about confession
 and what are the things to avoid.

With step 1. and 2.
 we arrived at a statement by the confessant
   of what non-survival act he wants to confess to, and
 we achieved a mutual understanding
  and desire to be helped and a desire to help,
   from the confessant, and
   from the confessor (who hears the confession),
     respectively.

So now we can really go to work on the non-survival act
 the confessant wants to confess to.

We asked him what he likes to confess to,
 in step 1.

Then we asked him to describe that AS A NON-SURVIVAL ACT,
 in step 2.

And we established understanding about it,
 and the desire to help and be helped.

On step 3. and step 4.
 we fulfill that desire,
 we carry these intentions to help and to be helped out,
  through the confession,
 and
 then the confession of THAT non-survival survival act
  is complete.

What could one expect at completion of confession
 about one non-survival act?

It could be that the confessant has
 achieved a release (becoming free),
  of compulsions,
  of "unavoidability",
  of "can't fully trust myself about the non-survival act",
  of "must not be reminded of it",
  of propitiation when accused,
  of making self small,
  of "must avoid doing actions which are reminding of it",
  of "can't stand up to others who demand that he does it again",
  of feeling uneasy when the subject of his act is talked about,
  of compulsively having to admit or describe his act to everyone,
  of explaining his present condition
      "because he once committed this non-survival act",
  of having to "crusade against everyone who committed such an act,
  of "having his attention on it all the time",
  of "having to deny to others that he did it",
  of "having to say or think it was different than it really was",
  of "blaming it all on himself"
      and refusing to see what others did in it,
  of assigning cause to circumstances or events
      rather than to the individuals
      who caused these circumstances or events,
  of apathy about "being forced to do it",
  etc. etc.

Such a release can be
 temporary, longer lasting, or maybe permanent,
 and it can be on any or several of the things mentioned above,
  to a lesser or greater extent, or completely.

Again, people are VERY DIFFERENT.

People have very different goals,
  also for what they want to achieve by confessing,
 they have very different interests,
  and they set their importances accordingly,
   knowingly or unknowingly.

To give you an example,
 I once, as a boy, attended a violin concert.
  At the end of the concert, I refused to applaud the soloist
   who gave a good performance
   but who interrupted his solo-part when he made a mistake.
  He looked at me when I did not applaud and he felt upset.
 I considered
  that I had committed a non-survival act on him
   by refusing to acknowledge his excellent performance
    of the rest of the concert.

People have VERY DIFFERENT goals
 they want to achieve with their confession.

What one person considers very bothersome for himself,
 another could not even begin to see as something
  he would like to confess to,
 or as something he would like to
  be released from being bothered by.

So we just do the steps 3. and 4.

First we do
 step 3. of the confessional on the non-survival act,
  till the confessant is released of something.

Only he can really tell you what he is released from.
 But you can see it when it happens, because he brightens up.

That is the release:
 he brightens up,
 he has a realization about it,
 he has achieved a new viewpoint about the non-survival act, and
 he is happy about his new viewpoint on it.
That is the end of the step.

And then we do step 4. on the non-survival act,
 and there we again see the same thing happening.
 We also do step 4. till
  he brightens up, till
  a release occurs.

There is nothing complicated about this.

You do step 3. till
 he brightens up, till
 there is a release for him.
And then you do step 4. till
 he brightens up, till
 there is a release for him.

And that's ALL.
 No discussions, no complications, no sermons, no psychology,
 just a confessant who has brightened up.
One time on step 3.
And again, another time, on step 4.

And that is the end of the confession for that non-survival act.

At another day
 you might like to do another confession,
  and you can start with step 1. and step 2. again,
   to find another non-survival act,
  and you do step 3. and step 4. on that non-survival act.

And another day
 you might again like to find the next non-survival act,
  and do the confessional procedure on that one.

And so on, till, one day,
 you have a very very bright person in front of you,
  who is ready to take on his life and the world
   with a smile and great confidence,
 and you have won a big friend,
 and the confession is fully completed.

And if he wants to come back for another confession
 after some months or some years,
  well, that's fine,
 because life is going on,
  and there are probably other things he wants to look at
   with a correct and joyful confessional procedure.

I promised to tell you step 3. and step 4. in Part II,
 which is this Bulletin.
 But, as you see, then this Bulletin would become too long.
  So we have to do this in Part III.

Continued in
 RI-545i 'Correct and Joyful Confessional Procedure - Part III'.

Koos Nolst Trenite - Ambassador for Mankind

Copyright 1996 by Koos Nolst Trenite

 references:
  RI-541i  'Correct and Joyful Confessional Procedure - Part I' 20 Apr 96

  RI-537i  'The Right to Demand Awareness' of 15 Apr 1996
  RI-514i  'Confessionals and Blackmail -...IMPORTANT' 16 Mar 96
  RI-84i   'Ron's Inspector Order to OSA' of 5 Feb 1995

  RI-83i   'The Right to Study and Apply Scientology' 16 June 94
  RI-269i  'How to Handle Irresponsible People. (GOLD!)' 26 Sept 95

  RI-0i    'Current Ethics' of 30 June 1994
  RI-288i  'The Main Evil Purpose' of 15 Oct 1995
  RI-543i  'Dictators' of 22 July 1994

  RI-242Ri 'Being There - Freedom to Act' of 22 July 1995
  RI-235i  'Handling people with Understanding' of 14 July 1995
  RI-471i  'Two Ways of Analyzing Life-situations' of 30 Jan 96

  RI-217i  'Choosing Sides - As Ethics' of 24 June 1995
  RI-263i  'Two Responses to Being Helped' of 20 Aug 1995
  RI-391i  'Cleaning up the Internet further' of 24 Sept 1995

  RI-58i   'Fair Game Series - Treatment of Enemies' of 1 Jan 95
  RI-487i  'Dialogue: On Enemies and Hostility' of 20 Feb 1996
  RI-444i  'The Practice of "SP-declares"' of 5 Jan 1996
  RI-535i  '"An Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend" = INSANE' of 10 Apr 96

  RI-50RQi 'RI-xxxi series Archive - Content and Use' 28 Dec 94
               Revised and Replaced on 6 March 1996

These and other RI-Bulletins can be obtained

    (with WWW-browser) at
       ftp://thetics.europa.com/outgoing/adams/RI
    (with ftp) at
       thetics.europa.com/outgoing/adams/RI

From [email-masked] Sat May 11 21:26:08 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:9925
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news3.idirect.com!news2.toronto.istar.net!news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.roundabout.org!news.demon.co.uk!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!trenite.easynet.de
From: Koos Nolst Trenite <[email-masked]>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: RI-544i Church of Scientology Owes Koos Three Million US Dollars
Date: Fri, 03 May 1996 19:25:18 GMT
Organization: trenite.de
Lines: 128
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: trenite.easynet.de
X-Broken-Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 21:18:43 +1:00
Comments: Authenticated sender is <[email-masked]>
X-Confirm-Reading-To: [email-masked]
X-pmrqc:       1
Return-receipt-to: [email-masked]
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.01)
X-Mail2News-Path: hera.easynet.de!trenite.easynet.de

                                                      3 May 1996

RI-544i  'Church of Scientology Owes Koos Three Million US Dollars'

from Ambassador for Mankind (Ron's Inspector)

Message # RI-544i for Internet

This is showing the start and the end of the list
 of
  all session dates and times and total hours
  of auditing delivered
   for the Church of Scientology,
   to its Founder, L. Ron Hubbard,
   by Ambassador for Mankind (Ron's Inspector).

The FULL list is published, for those who are interested,
 in RI-544i-A 'CofS Owes Koos Three Million US Dollars - Full List',
  which is available from the RI-Bulletin FTP-site;
   its address is listed below.
 The full list is published separately due to the size,
  which is approximately 80 kilobytes.

    Date:           Start Of Session-time:   Total Hrs: Min:
                    All times CET
                    (Central European Time)

    18 June 1994              00:15                 0 :27
    18 June 1994              00:34                 0 :35
    18 June 1994              11:52                 0 :40
    18 June 1994              14:51                 0 :42
    18 June 1994              17:33                 0 :22
    18 June 1994              18:43                 0 :48
    18 June 1994              20:11                 0 :11
    18 June 1994              21:23                 0 :05

   (...)

   (See
     RI-544i-A  'LRH Owes Koos Three Million US Dollars - Full List'
     for
      full list of session date and time and total hours
      (80 kilobytes of data).

     Available from the RI-Bulletin FTP-site,
      address listed below.)

    (...)

    Date:           Start Of Session-time:    Total Hrs: Min:
                    All times CET

    10 March 1996              15:50                 2 :04
    10 March 1996              20:00                 4 :21
    11 March 1996              19:09                 4 :08
    12 March 1996              20:10                 4 :15
    13 March 1996              22:44                 0 :36
    13 March 1996              01:38                 2 :39
    14 March 1996              23:38                 2 :06
    14 March 1996              01:16                 4 :30
    15 March 1996              22:13                 1 :20
    16 March 1996              19:08                 2 :13
    16 March 1996              21:51                 5 :05
    17 March 1996              21:33                 5 :45
    18 March 1996              20:04                 5 :32
    19 March 1996              12:58                 5 :57
    21 March 1996              13:39                 2 :17

TOTAL HOURS :                               2,272 hrs 16 minutes

TOTAL COST at 1,400 US $ per hour:          3,181,173 US Dollars
                                            *********

Koos Nolst Trenite - Ambassador for Mankind

Copyright 1995, 1996 by Koos Nolst Trenite

 references:
  RI-538i  'Official Expulsion of the being LRH from Scn' 17 Apr 96
  RI-538i-A'Official Expulsion of the being LRH from Scn - Add' 29 Apr 96
  RI-538i-B'Official Expulsion of the being LRH from Scn - Add B' 29 Apr 96
  RI-538i-C'Official Expulsion of the being LRH from Scn - Add C' 2 May 96

  RI-536i  'A talk with Koos on L. Ron Hubbard's secrets' 12 Apr 96

  RI-529i-A'What the being LRH is doing NOW - Addition' 22 Apr 96
  RI-529i  'URGENT - What the being LRH is doing NOW' 6 Apr 1996
  RI-532i  'Confessional on LRH's Destructive Control' 6 Apr 96
  RI-534i  'Justifying "Source" LRH's evil intentions' 8 Apr 96

  RI-421i  'The Charges against LRH' of 21 Dec 1995
  RI-486i  'How Scientologists destroy(ed) LRH' of 17 Feb 1996
  RI-488i  'Very able people at serious risk in Scn' 23 Feb 1996
  RI-493i  'How LRH makes Scientology fail utterly' of 25 Feb 96

  RI-511i  'How "Source" LRH Treats His Friends' of 14 Mar 1996
  RI-513i  'LRH: KSW is a False Purpose' of 15 Mar 1996
  RI-517i  'LRH: "All I want is validation, no looking"' 17 Mar 96
  RI-518i  'Mary Sue and L. Ron Hubbard's justifications' 17 Mar 96

  RI-50RQi 'RI-xxxi series Archive - Content and Use' 28 Dec 94
               Revised and Replaced on 6 March 1996

These and other RI-Bulletins can be obtained

    (with WWW-browser) at
       ftp://thetics.europa.com/outgoing/adams/RI
    (with ftp) at
       thetics.europa.com/outgoing/adams/RI

From [email-masked] Sat May 11 21:32:37 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:10067
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!con-nntp-gw!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!nntp.news.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!lippard
From: [email-masked] (James J. Lippard)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: WANTED: Eugene Martin Ingram
Date: 29 Apr 1996 16:48:04 -0700
Organization: Primenet (602)395-1010
Lines: 52
Sender: [email-masked]
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
X-Posted-By: [email-masked]

WANTED:

EUGENE MARTIN INGRAM
DOB 02/24/46
AGE 50
RACE WHITE
SEX M
HAIR BRO
EYES GRN
HGT 5' 9"
WT 195
DL# M0251286 CA

NEWKIRK, OKLAHOMA:

  Kay County District Court Case CRM-89-298
  Warrant issued: 14 September 1989

  Carrying a concealed weapon (21 O.S. 1289.8)
  Violation of the Private Investigator's Act of the State of
     Oklahoma (42A O.S. 1750.1 et al seq.)

TAMPA, FLORIDA:

  Hillsborough County Circuit Court, case 94-12262
  Warrant issued: 3 October 1994

  Falsely impersonating officer

TACOMA, WASHINGTON:

  Case number 95-1530374

  Criminal impersonation

-----

For more information see

   http://www.primenet.com/~lippard/pis.html

A scan of the Florida warrant may be found at

   http://www.primenet.com/~lippard/fl_warrant.jpg

A photo of Ingram may be found at

   http://www.primenet.com/~lippard/ingram.gif
--
Jim Lippard    lippard@(primenet.com ediacara.org skeptic.com)
Phoenix, Arizona  http://www.primenet.com/~lippard/
PGP Fingerprint: 35 65 66 9F 71 FE 50 57  35 09 0F F6 14 D0 C6 04

From [email-masked] Sat May 11 21:42:33 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:10736
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!KEY.globalx.net!jolt.pagesat.net!netserv.com!news.ossi.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!sgigate.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news.ner.bbnplanet.net!das-news2.harvard.edu!casaba.srv.cs.cmu.edu!dst
From: [email-masked] (Dave Touretzky)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Playboy exposes Travolta lunacy
Date: 6 May 1996 04:40:38 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu

You have to give those folks at Playboy credit.  It takes balls to go up
against John Travolta, who is after all a New OT V and could probably kill
them with a thought.  Nonetheless, Playboy had the temerity to publish
the following letter on p. 13 of the June 1996 issue, in response to the
Travolta interview they ran in the March issue:

  ----------------
        Travolta credits Scientology for his mental stability.  As a
  graduate of some of the most advanced levels of Scientology training,
  Travolta is required to believe that he is possessed by the spirits of
  murdered space aliens.  Does this sound like mental stability to you?

                                David Touretzky
                                Pittsburgh, Penn.
  ----------------

A big win for the jokers and degraders here on ARS!  I expect to be awarded
a clam cluster for this successful dissemination action.

-- Dave Touretzky, KoX (SP4++):  let the lawsuits begin.

From [email-masked] Sat May 11 21:47:00 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:10982
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!laslo.netnet.net!en.com!in-news.erinet.com!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.coast.net!oleane!jussieu.fr!news.belnet.be!news.be.innet.net!INbe.net!xs4all!utopia.hacktic.nl!not-for-mail
From: [email-masked] (Anonymous)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,nl.scientology
Subject: NOTs: ned4.html
Date: 7 May 1996 03:18:34 +0200
Organization: Hack-Tic International, Inc.
Lines: 1323
Sender: [email-masked]
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: utopia.hacktic.nl
X-XS4ALL-Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 03:18:38 MET DST
Comments: Hack-Tic may or may not approve of the content of this posting
Comments: Please report misuse of this automated remailing service to
Comments: <[email-masked]>

[hilarious copyrighted(?) clam "technology" redacted 2004-02;
 see http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/NOTs/]

From Xenu Sat May 11 21:49:42 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:11478
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.crocker.com!calweb!news.campus.mci.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Xenu
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: NOTs file 5/7
Date: 9 May 1996 18:03:25 -0700
Organization: Fuck the CofS in the ass
Lines: 1278
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: info.umd.edu

[hilarious copyrighted(?) clam "technology" redacted 2004-02;
 see http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/NOTs/]

From [email-masked] Sun May 19 17:08:22 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:12188
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!usenet.etri.re.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!news.dacom.co.kr!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.voicenet.com!goodnews.voicenet.com!omni2!rkeller
From: [email-masked] (Rod Keller)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: A.r.s Week in Review - 5/12/96
Date: 12 May 1996 18:25:54 GMT
Organization: Voicenet - Internet Access - (215)674-9290
Lines: 831
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: omni2.voicenet.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Alt.religion.scientology
Week in Review Volume 1, Issue 4
5/12/96
by Rod Keller [[email-masked]]
copyright 1996

Alt.religion.scientology Week in Review summarizes the most significant
postings from the Usenet group Alt.religion.scientology for the preceding
week for the benefit of those who can't follow the group as closely as
they'd like. Out of thousands of postings, I attempt to include news of
significant events, new affidavits, court rulings, new contributors,
whatever. I hope you find it useful. Like many readers of a.r.s, I have a
kill file. So please take into consideration that I may not have seen some
of the most significant postings. 

The articles in A.r.s Week in Review are brief summaries of the articles.
Many include an excerpt, and all include message IDs for the articles I
cover. This may or may not be useful to you, depending on how long your
site stores articles in the newsgroup before expiring them. 

Free A.r.s Week in Review subscriptions are available, just email me at
[email-masked]
It is archived at:
        http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/ars-summary.html
        http://www.eecs.nwu.edu/~mallen/scn/arswr/ars-summary.html
        http://www.amazing.com/scientology/ars-summary.html
        http://users.aimnet.com/~jdiver/scieno.htm
        http://www.thur.de/religio/publik/arsfaq.html

#####

> NOTS Posted

A nearly complete set of the NOTS (New Era Dianetics for OTs) processing
levels were anonymously posted to a.r.s on May 6th through the hacktic
remailer in the Netherlands. They were subsequently reposted in HTML form
through hacktic, and following their cancellation by the cult, reposted
again through the Zippo system. The reaction across the net has been
tremendously fast. Helena Kobrin, or a cultist using her name, mailed a
series of requests/legal threats to attempt to remove the documents from
several storage locations. The letter to Homer Smith, sysadmin of
Lightlink was the most polite. 

"Last weekend, someone posted anonymously a number of the works contained
in the NOTs Series. From some of the traffic on alt.religion.scientology,
it appears possible that you may have those postings on the lightlink
system. 

"I know in the past you did not permit such postings on your system, so I
am contacting you to ask that you verify whether this is true. (The
message IDs are at the end of this message.) If it is true, I assume you
will want to remove them. Please do so and let me know ASAP." 

The messages were subsequently removed from Dejanews and Alta Vista, sites
that archive Usenet messages in searchable form. Before their removal, a
URL for easily retrieving the articles was made available by Sherilyn
(Tony Sidaway) at http://www.icon.fi/~marina/sherilyn/

"The URLs on this page no longer work, presumably because AltaVista and
DejaNews have accepted the forged cancels. If anyone finds a public gopher
or nntp link to a server that contains the NOTS posts, please email me and
I will add it to my page." 

The operator of Zippo copied his correspondence to a.r.s. after receiving
a standard threat from Kobrin. 

"We received several, which I assume were suppose to be threatening, phone
calls today from Darlene Bright at 408-441-6661 and someone named Helena
Kobrin at 213-960-1933. The substance of the phone call is covered in
Helena Kobrin's e-mail message included in this post. 

"I am not familiar with the Church of Scientology. If I were to define
them by their representatives, I would believe them to be coercive,
obnoxious, oppressive, rude and hysterical. Both parties seem to suffer
from an overblown sense of self importance. My answer to them is as
follows -

"The person posting went through a public news server as in 'open to the
public' 'free' as in 'free speech without censorship' and 'Free of Charge'
as in 'no cost'. We do not provide Internet access services and, I would
think from all of your other attacks on sources of information, you would
know what an nntp posting host is. We carry no information on our web site
relative to the Church of Scientology as it is of no interest to us. I
would not waste the time writing anything that would promote or provide
visibility to your organization, as I do not believe in it's oppressive
and threatening presence. 

"The posts have been removed, as well as all other articles in the news
group. The news group is no longer open to posts We have no more
information as to who posted the articles than you do." 

On May 8th, Alex de Joode released a statement that the hacktic remailer
intends to cease operations, presumably because of the NOTS postings. 

"Due to recent events the Hacktic Foundation has decided to discontinue
its remailing operations, the remailer that is operated by the Hacktic
Foundation will cease to exist May 20th." 

The message IDs for the initial posts:
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

The message IDs for the repost in HTML format:
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

The message IDs for the Zippo reposting:
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

The message IDs for articles quoted in the article above:
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Keith Henson

Following Keith Henson's deposition by the cult, Dave VanHorn announced
Real Audio files available for anybody to listen to the proceedings. 

"The grand total as about 22 meg in eight files. I haven't got any
descriptions yet as to content in any specific file, but it's there
nonetheless. 

"http://www.cedar.net/users/dvanhorn/grady/grady.html" 

An amusing transcript of a portion of the deposition was posted, involving
an anonymous FTP site. An edited transcript: 

"CULT: Do you know who Patrick Volk is? Patrick J Volk, V O L K. 

"HENSON: Not at first. At least I can't think.. Did he go by any other
name on the Net? To the best of my knowledge I never heard of this person.
If you give me a little more background maybe I can... 

"CULT: I'll try and do that. <aside> Number 94... ??? 

"HENSON: <laughs> I'm sorry. This is a great troll. 

"CULT: You find this amusing? 

"HENSON: Yes. It's an in joke. 

"CULT: It's a posting dated April 6th 1995 to ARS from Keith Henson. It
quotes a posting by Patrick [?] Volk V O L K which states, among other
things 'screw the court' and also says that he has an FTP site for all the
OT materials. 

"<Henson laughing>

"CULT: Mr. Henson is laughing hysterically about this posting, for reasons
that we don't yet understand, and umm, obviously uhh... Let me ask you
this, sir. 

"CULT: So when he said I have an FTP site for all the OT materials, he is
saying he has all the OT materials on an FTP site which people can access,
is that right? 

"HENSON: That's right! 

"CULT: OK. Were you aware of Patrick Volk's FTP site, to the best of your
recollection? 

"HENSON: Well... You see right after the colon, it says F T P colon
one-twenty-seven point zero point zero point one? That's a loop back
address. 

"CULT: That's a what? 

"HENSON: Loop back. 

"CULT: What does that mean? 

"HENSON: You don't actually go out of your own machine at all, it loops
right back into your own machine. This is what's known as a troll, on the
Internet. 

"CULT: So the idea here was to make the church think that this person had
an FTP site, and to take action against him, and in fact he didn't have
it, is that the intent? 

"HENSON: It's really humorous, and I picked up on it instantly, and added
something to extend the troll. Extending the trolls like this is an art
form of the highest order. 

"CULT: Um Hmm. You find this all kind of amusing, though. 

"HENSON: Oh, this is screamingly funny. 

"CULT: You find it amusing to make Helena Kobrin and the church go after
you or other people, for this sort of thing, whether you had other
materials or not, is that right? 

"HENSON: It's a great game. 

"HENSON: I mean anybody in the computer business instantly would have
spotted this. <laugh> In fact, it even says 'troll' in here. In fact this
is cross posted from... 

"CULT: There's no question pending. Hold your comments. <aside> Let me see
number 96. 

"HENSON: I'm sorry, this is just too funny." 

Keith also posted a document he submitted to Judge Whyte this week: 

"I. Defendant respectfully seeks the judgment of the court in two matters,
and the issuance of orders on two motions. 

"Defendant requests a hearing and a ruling or preliminary ruling on the
substance of 'NOTs 34' as quoted within defendant's letter of March 26,
1996 to the Court. 

"For purposes of planing defendant's case, defendant needs a judgment by
the Court on the substance of the contents of NOTs 34. Defendant contends
that the contents of NOTs 34 clearly contains instructions for the illegal
practice of medicine, but defendant concedes that the court may read NOTs
34 in some other way. 

"Defendant respectfully requests that the Court consider NOTs 34 in the
context of *plaintiff's* 1991 policy manual referenced at line 23 on page
2 of defendant's REPLY TO SECOND DECLARATION OF WARREN L. MCSHANE filed
May 2, 1996 and fully set forth over the next two pages of that filing. 

"II. Defendant seeks a ruling or preliminary ruling on defendant's
contention that because of the claims made in NOTs 34, NOTs 34 is a
violation of Judge Gesell's order reported at 333 FSup 357. 

"Defendant believes that Judge Gesell's order forbids the Church of
Scientology and all related organizations from claiming to heal using an
'E-meter.' Defendant is informed and believes that 'healing with an
E-meter' is the topic of NOTs 34. But defendant is not well versed in the
law, and the Court may read NOTs 34 in the context of Judge Gesell's order
to have another meaning. Defendant will be most interested in the Court's
reading of NOTs 34. 

"III. Defendant seeks a modification of the preliminary injunction to
permit defendant to responsibly exercise his First Amendment rights and to
better defend himself in the pendant case. 

"Defendant proposes that the Preliminary Injunction be modified so that
defendant can access (download) and store, but not distribute, publicly
available NOTs or other 'AT' material both in the context of preparing
defendant's case, and for fair use commentary. It should be brought to the
Court's attention that persons unknown to defendant posted to the Internet
what purports to be all or most of the NOTs material on, or about, May 6,
and that these documents, in spite of RTC's best efforts to get them
removed, are widely available with little effort. 

"Defendant proposes to use the following procedure before posting fair use
commentary on NOTs or 'AT' material. 

"1. Defendant will provide the Court and plaintiff's counsel with copies
of what defendant considers to be fair use at least 10 days in advance of
defendant posting such fair use commentary. 

"2. If plaintiff does not respond by the end of that time, defendant will
be free to post. 

"3. If plaintiff responds, defendant will abide by the opinion expressed
by the Court as to defendant's use of plaintiff's materials being 'fair
use' or not. 

"4. Defendant will submit no more than three postings per calendar month
to this process. 

"IV. Defendant requests an order for expedited discovery. 

"Defendant's case depends to a considerable extent on showing that
plaintiff and plaintiff's related organizations are pervasively involved
in criminal activity. 

"Some of the records defendant will be seeking, particularly certain
computer records, may expire and become non-available if defendant is not
permitted expedited discovery in advance of the case management
conference. 

"Dated May 10, 1996 Respectfully submitted, H. Keith Henson pro se" 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> AOL News

AOL member "Tashback" posted an update on the new "Former Scientologists" 
folder on America Online, and the posts of Alphohm, a cult member. 

"AlphOhm earlier responded to the creation of the Scientology Survivors
folder (the original name of the Former Scientologists folder) by creating
a 'Baptist Survivors' folder in an attempt to antagonize Sermoner, a
Baptist, into trashing the Former Scn folder. Sermoner, to his credit,
didn't fall for it. 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Flag's Basement

A message was posted this week by "craigory", with personal memories of
the basement of the Ft. Harrison hotel. This in the wake of cult member
Brian Anderson's denial that the building even has a basement. 

"I was there as a student in 1976, and several other times in later years.
At that time, there were dark, grungy rooms under the Fort Harrison which
I had frequent access to. They were used for folder archives, to store pc
folders that were not currently needed. 

"There were also doors into other rooms under the Ft. Harrison which were
constantly guarded, and access to which was closely monitored. Being the
curious sort, I asked a couple of staffers what was down there, and they
told me that people on the RPF were lodged down there while they did their
amends. 

"At least some of these basement rooms were later opened up and remodeled.
When I was last at the Ft. Harrison around 1983, those rooms were in use
as the internship courseroom, but the space used for the courseroom was by
no means as large as the entirety of the Ft. Harrison. So there was a lot
of space down there which was only partially taken up by the courseroom. 

"There were also other places in the Ft. Harrison where people could be
kept incommunicado. I have personal knowledge of a small storage room
(about 6' X 8' X6') off a stairway leading out of the galley in which a
sea-org member who had had a 'psychotic break' was kept for several weeks
while they hoped she would become sane enough that they could release her
to her family without causing too much of a flap. I was a close friend of
the lady who was assigned to bring the captive her food and spend a very
few minutes each day with her. She was not allowed ANY company at ALL,
except for these brief visits. I wasn't around long enough to know the
ultimate outcome of that particular instance of captivity, but from other
stories I have read, her period in the 'dungeon' was not so very unusual." 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Ingram's Location

Steve Fishman posted several articles concerning the ongoing intimidation
campaign agains him, and the behavior of a process server for the cult. 

"Two of my neighbors were visited by a tall man claiming to be from Ingram
Investigations today. 

"He asked my neighbors if they knew if and where I was working, whether
they knew what source of income I had, and whether they knew that I had
been to federal prison, and if they considered it to be a danger to have a
convicted felon living in the neighborhood. 

"The man also asked my neighbors for the names of prostitutes that were
seen around my house (not if there WERE any, but what their names were!)
and the names of known criminals I am associating with! 

"My neighbors said it was definitely NOT the same man as in the picture of
Eugene Ingram on Jim Lippard's web site, which is the best Ingram site on
the Internet, at: http://www.primenet.com/~lippard

"Meanwhile, the man claiming to work for Ingram Investigations (neither of
my two neighbors said that he claimed to actually be Ingram, just to make
that very clear) left Eugene Ingram's business card! 

"This is what it says:
EUGENE M. INGRAM
Private Investigator
Complex Litigation Investigations
International Investigations

"INGRAM INVESTIGATIONS
California License AA9387
Post Office Box 291280
Los Angeles, California 90029-9280

Steve also posted a submission to the Superior Court of Los Angeles
describing the behavior of a process server. 

"For the past three days I have been harassed by a process server hired by
attorney Edward A. Carhart 0f 2151 South LeJeune Road, Suite 202, Coral
Gables, Florida 33134 who represents Elliot J. Abelson, a Scientology
attorney who represents Jonathan W. Lubell and his firm Morrison, Cohen,
Singer and Weinstein, both of whom in turn have been attorneys for the
Church of Scientology. Elliot J. Abelson has sued my attorney, Ford
Greene, in Marin County, California. 

"On the evening of Tuesday, April 30, 1996, I received a call from a
process server who told me on the phone that he could not find my house. 
He asked me for directions. I declined to give him any, and then told him
I would confer with my attorney and that he could call back if he so
desired. 

"That evening at 7:30 P.M., the same process server knocked on my door and
asked whose house it is. My daughter, Elysia Nureyev, a minor, stated that
it is the Nureyev residence. The process server asked to speak to me, and
my daughter told him she had no information to give him. 

"He waited outside the house until 9:30 P.M. and then left. He blocked the
driveway so that no cars could get in or out of the carport on the side of
the house. 

"The following morning of Wednesday the 1st of May, the process server
returned at approximately 6:45 A.M. He waited outside the house, again
blocking the driveway until 8:45 A.M. During that time he banged on the
door six times with his fist loudly. He rang the bell constantly. I had my
answering machine on and he called twice during that time, saying I'm
still here, and Ill be back. 

"The next morning, on Thursday, May 2, 1995, the same process server
arrived at 6:40 A.M. and once again blocked the driveway to the carport on
the side of my house, and started ringing the bell and pounding on the
door. He also called the house at 7:10 A.M. and said I'm back on my
answering machine. At approximately 7:30 A.M. my father, Jack Fishman,
arrived to drive my daughter Elysia to school. The process server was very
rude to my father, who is 88 years old, and according to my father was
verbally abusive. When my father and daughter left the house together, the
process server tried to deny my daughter access to my fathers car and in
doing so attempted to serve the subpoena on her. My daughter calmly told
him that she was a minor, and asked him to step out of the way. 

"At approximately 9:45 A.M., the process server urinated on my front lawn.
Apparently he did not want to leave the front of my house to drive six
blocks to Wal-Mart where there was a public rest room. The process server
had white hair, and was a man about 40, tall, with a full build. 

"At 10:37 A.M., the process server began ringing the bell again. He being
agitated when I would not answer and began kicking the door with his foot,
and cracked the wood on the front door and it now has a small slit in it
which is about a foot in length. He went back to his car and kept his hand
on the horn for fifteen minutes, until 11:01 A.M.

"The following morning, I arrived at my fathers house at 7:20 A.M. and
left at 8:00 A.M. When I walked out of my fathers apartment, at 8851
Sunrise Lakes Boulevard, Apartment 116, Sunrise, two men drove up in a
late model white Eagle Talon or Mitsubishi Eclipse. One of the men served
me with the subpoena while the other man went around to the right side of
my car and took something from under the bottom of my car, which was a
small black box. I assumed it was a tracking device but I could not see it
because he put it in his pocket. The driver (the man who served me which
was NOT the same one who urinated on my lawn, but a different individual,
a heavy man with curly hair) refused to move his car, blocking my way out
of my fathers parking space, until he made a phone call on his cellular
phone. Five minutes later, he moved it and left. 

"I am requesting a protective order from the Court to stay discovery in
Abelson v. Greene until the Court determines whether this case has any
merit and whether the service of process was legal. 

"Respectfully Submitted, Dated: May 3, 1996" 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Grady Ward

A list of items Grady Ward submitted in his case was posted this week. 
The statements are things Grady believes to be true, and is asking the
cult to confirm or deny. Among them: 

"Plaintiff does admit that the investigator known as Eugene Martin Ingram
was in fact an agent, servant, employee, partner, privy or attorney, or a
person acting or purporting to act under the authority, direction or
control, or a person in active concert or participation with the Plaintiff
during a portion or all of 1995. 

"Plaintiff does admit that Eugene Martin Ingram did obtain photographs
from Rubye K. Ward in Tacoma, WA in May, 1995. 

"Plaintiff does admit that the poster known as 'Vera Wallace' was in fact
an agent, servant, employee, partner, privy or attorney, or a person
acting or purporting to act under the authority, direction or control, or
persons in active concert or participation with the Plaintiff during a
portion or all of 1995." 

[also 'Chris Miller', 'Andrew Milne', 'David Talbot', 'Cory Brennan',
'Helena Kobrin', Jeffrey George Quiros]

"Plaintiff does admit that it does not know with a reasonable certainty
whether the so-called NOTs in the Plaintiff's verified complaint against
Grady Ward have been published generally on the Internet or on portions of
it. 

"Plaintiff does admit that Helena Kobrin did in fact issue a RMGROUP
command to remove the Internet Usenet discussion group called
alt.religion.scientology. 

"Plaintiff does admit that one or more of the attached cancels were
accomplished by the Plaintiff during a portion or all of 1995. 

"Plaintiff does admit that it or Eugene Martin Ingram did impersonate
Grady Ward to obtain his telephone records during a portion or all of
1995. 

"Plaintiff does admit that was working in concert and participation with
the Church of Scientology when it signs were made, for example, calling
Grady a 'copyright terrorist' on March 9, 1996. 

"Plaintiff does admit that it did in fact forge the Usenet posting of the
OT3 and other 'Advanced Technology' documents that it has attributed to
Grady Ward in 1995. 

"April 18, 1996" 

An excerpt from another filing with Judge Whyte: 

"The plaintiff now is using the unequal discovery schedules to hinder the
defendant's own discovery into matters of torts committed by the plaintiff
which stem from multiple criminal acts by the plaintiff or those acting in
concert or participation with the plaintiff. These acts include trespass,
theft, and forgery of Usenet posts as described in my verified Answer and
Counterclaims. 

"Further, since the plaintiff is proceeding with their own discovery they
have no incentive to 'meet and confer' pursuant to FRCivP 26(d) and (f)
and Local Rules 16-3, 16-4. Thus while they aggressively and abusively (cf
my April 10th letter complaining about counsel Hogan's behavior) pursue
discovery on me, they are obstructing my own discovery into potentially
more serious criminal acts that I allege they have committed relating to
this litigation. 

"In fact a letter date April 22, 1996 from the plaintiff, they made it
clear that as far as they were concerned, they have 'no obligation to
respond and will not respond further' to the defendant's discovery
requests until a meet and confer session that may occur as late as June
19, 1996. 

"In all likelihood I will not be able to afford such powerful tools for
discovery as oral depositions, however I am asking for permission to
submit interrogatories, request for production of documents and things,
and request for admissions. And as the above citations show, I expect
excessive resistance to my lawful discovery requests causing time-delaying
appeals and motions to compel. 

"Given the vastly unequal positions of wealth and litigation experience of
the plaintiff and those working in concert and participation with the
plaintiff compared to the defendant, and given the admissible evidence
that defendant Grady Ward has provided with his verified Answer and
Counterclaims, there is no conceivable injury that the plaintiff will
suffer by the grant of expedited discovery. 

"To restore the discovery playing field to an even level (even though the
plaintiff's team still has a surfeit of members compared to the single
inexperienced defendant pro per), defendant's request for expedited
discovery should be granted. 

"Respectfully submitted, April 25, 1996"

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Lightning Picket

Lance Buckley posted a report on the lightning picket held several weeks
ago outside the London Org on Tottenham Court Road. 

"As we descended on the org, we couldn't help but notice that they knew we
were coming. In fact they had probably been set up quite a while. I
remember wondering at the time if they were getting bored waiting for us
to turn up. We had our own pair of police officers to make sure the three
of us didn't start a riot or something. It's nice to know someone cares.
We said our hellos to anyone who was interested, hoisted our signs high
and had at the leaflet distribution with a will. 

"As usual we were the centre of attention for 3 or more people with
cameras. Why can't they issue decent cameras to these people? All they
ever use are the 'point'n'shoot' models. 

"Since we like Jaques so much, we decided to tell him that one of the
signs the droidz was carrying had a slight typo. I can't remember the
context right now, but they had misspelled 'L Ron Hubbard'. This stunning
testament to the much vaunted study tech had written on her sign: 'P. Ron
Hubbard blah blah'! 

"'P'? How the hell can you misspell a single letter? Shit, 'L' doesn't
even -sound- like 'P'. We decided it had to be due to those seafood
engrams again. 'P Ron' sounds like 'Prawn' so for the rest of our stay our
favourite conman was referred to as 'Prawn Hubbard'. I don't think they
appreciated the joke. 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Jack Parsons Booklet

A new booklet is available on Jack Parsons, one of Hubbard's colleagues
during his "sex magic" days. 

"Paul Rydeen, one of the better researches in the world of fringe occult
culture, has written a little 77 page booklet on Parsons. About one third
of the work involves our favorite tubbalard, L. Ron Hubbard. 

"While Rydeen disputes that Parsons and Hubbard engaged in
full-penetration homosexual sex magick rituals, he does have documentation
of their engaging in wife swapping (at the time Hubbard had two wives, so
the man did like to share at one point in his life), masturbation in front
of each other and other practices. 

"Published by Wesley Nations. $5.00 on the shelf or $7.00 post paid from: 
Crash Collusion
PO Box 2237
Berkeley, CA 94702

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Paulette Cooper Clarifies

Paulette Cooper, author of "The Scandal of Scientology", and subject of
fair game harassment tactics, posted to clarify some impressions prevalent
on a.r.s. Some excerpts: 

"1. The main reason I was harassed was not because of my book

"Although some harassment was related to that, as well as to my later
lawsuits and counter-claims against them, the real reason for the 15 years
of harassment was because I was engaged in non-stop anti-Scientology
activities throughout that time, trying to expose Scn and help people
having problems with them. 

"2. Operation Freakout took place over at least 4 years--and part of it
lead to my arrest for forged bomb threats threats that they sent
themselves. 

"Although the book came out in 1971, it was late in 1972 that the
harassment became truly unbearable. We found that my phone had been
tapped. All the tenants in my building received disgusting anonymous smear
letters about me. So did my parents. There was a flower delivery for me
with a gun in it. And that's when the actual frame-up occurred, which I
believe was the early part of Operation Freakout. 

"3. I was never forced to settle--I wanted to. 

"The harassment was effecting my health, my emotional state of mind, my
social life, and I was upset because the Scientologists were harassing my
elderly parents, and had deposed 50 of my friends and editors, asking them
personal questions about me, etc. Even so, I continued my anti-Scientology
activities until the end of 1984, when I was assured that Scientology had
changed and harassment of critics was a thing of the past. 

"4. The Scandal of Scientology is weak now but it wasn't then. 

"I think I was the first writer to uncover the Foster (Anderson) report,
Hubbard's academic background and marital problems and status, potential
fears of blackmail, early auditing, Charles Manson, etc. Sure we know much
more now, but the material was very startling then. And I am very proud of
the investigative research job that I did. 

"5. Did I ever retract any part of 'The Scandal of Scientology'? 

"I agreed to *clarify* certain sentences in an affidavit that was supposed
to make it clear that I had gotten certain information from secondary
sources and had no personal evidence of the events. (For example, in my
book, I quoted the Anderson or Foster Report as saying something, but it
may not have been apparent to readers who couldn't figure out the
footnotes that I wasn't there to see it myself.)

"I've never considered my clarification to be a retraction--regardless of
what Scientology says--and I believe every word of my book to be correct
today. Just too weak. 

"6. I am not and never was an anti-Scientology writer. 

"My interest in Scientology has always been solely as an investigative
journalist, since I was never a former member. Although I got sidetracked
after my book came out for many years with my crusade, I have since tried
to go on with my life and write about other things. Indeed, I have written
a total of 8 books on other subjects, and probably around 1,000 articles. 

"7. I have no desire to ever return to writing/speaking against
Scientology. 

"I know some of you have expected me to do more, and some have written
asking me to do more. But I feel that I did more than my share, and I want
to continue to enjoy my harassment free life." 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Netherlands Schedule

Karin Spaink posted an update to the lawsuits filed in The Netherlands
concerning the large number of web pages containing the Fishman version of
the OT documents. Following the victory in court that allows the pages to
remain in place, the cult has continued its efforts. 

"Scientology has appealed this judgment, as they are wont to do. Their
Motion of Complaints was filed earlier in April. Today, our lawyer has
filed his reply. 

"The date for the court session has been set: it's June 18, 14.00. The
case will be brought before three judges, a so-called 'multiple court'
(meervoudige kamer). It is not known how long these three judges will take
to study the file and to pronounce judgment. 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Time Settles

Dow Jones reported on May 8th that Time Warner has settled its lawsuit
over legal fees with TIG Insurance. The case in question was the
defamation lawsuit by the cult over the Time Magazine article,
"Scientology, Cult of Greed and Power". 

"Terms of the settlement weren't disclosed. 

"As reported, Time Warner's Time Inc. unit had claimed in the suit that
TIG, the company's liability insurer, owed it millions of dollars in
reimbursements for legal fees Time incurred in contesting two lawsuits
against Time magazine. The suits arose over a 1991 cover story that was
critical of the Church of Scientology. 

"Time said it had incurred more than $7.3 million in legal fees in
fighting the Scientology suits, but TIG hadn't reimbursed Time for any of
that amount because of a disagreement over how the deductible on Time's
policy should be calculated, according to the suit. 
 
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> San Francisco Protest

Wayne Whitney continues his Saturday pickets of the San Francisco Mission,
and continues to post reports to a.r.s. 

"This is the second time that a staff member has come outside after I
arrived and started to disseminate right in front of me. One of the locals
told me that he's never seen any of them disseminating right outside their
front door before. This staff member (Tim) stayed out front the whole time
I was there, from about 1:00P to 6:00P (when they closed up shop for the
day). 

"Around 5:30 he was able to lure some guy inside. When the guy came out he
had some literature and their personality test in his hand. I walked by
and let him read my sign. I could tell by his reaction that he was really
affected by what he read. There were perhaps twenty people waiting for the
bus -- a captive audience. I walked up to him and just blurted out,' They
scammed me for $95,000. I've watched them scam so many other people. If
they did it to me they'll do it to you. You've been warned.'

"You should have seen the reaction of the crowd. They were shocked. Many
glanced over at the mission with a look that said, 'They do THAT in
there?' Tim came rushing up and threatened me with calling the police
saying that what I was doing was right on the borderline of being illegal.
I just walked away, being thrown a little off guard by this sudden threat.
I could tell that I had made a significant impact on that crowd. Once I
regained my composure from this new threat I assured myself that I had
done nothing wrong. I have just as much right to talk to people on the
street as he does. 

"Most of the locals know me now. I've become a common sight. All the ones
that I've talked to approve of what I'm doing. I've got many allies on the
street now. I'm not out there 'alone' anymore. If the clams try anything
I've now got friends to back me up." 

Wayne also posted a letter he has sent repeatedly to the cult in San
Francisco. 

"I DEMAND an immediate and complete refund of all the money that you
scammed from me PLUS all the interest I lost on my money. Here are some of
the reasons why: 

"I was promised that $cientology would definitely cure all the pain I was
in and yet after hundreds of hours of 'auditing' I was still just as sick. 

"I was promised that I would learn to communicate better yet $cientology
had exactly the opposite affect on me. It's no wonder, the 'communication'
course I was conned into paying for is nothing more than a series of
drills designed to train you to lie and disseminate $cientology. The Trs
are nothing more than a form of hypnotism designed to program you to
retreat from the world and become docile and obedient. None of this has
ANYTHING to do with real communication. I did not pay all my money to be
turned into a mindless robot like that. 

"I was promised that my IQ would dramatically increase and yet after
hundreds of hours of 'auditing' my IQ stayed exactly the same. 

"Do you realize how many people read my bright green fluorescent sign as I
make the long commute to your mission and back? You know the sign, the one
that says, 'in my opinion $cientology is a $CAM'. Many just smile and
shake their head in agreement. Many say something like, 'Ain't that the
truth.' Many even stop me and ask WHY I believe $cientology is a $cam. It
gives me the perfect opportunity to tell them what REALLY goes on inside
your 'mission.'

"As long as you have MY MONEY I'm going to keep making that long commute. 
I'm going to keep on proudly displaying my sign for the whole world to
see. 

"Chris, YOU'RE the one that is forcing me to do all these things. Just
remember that! I wasn't doing any of this until you refused to communicate
and return my money. I'd say that's down right suppressive of you. You
pull in what you can't confront. Remember, you came looking for me, I
never went looking for you. If you have a problem with me you only have
YOURSELF TO BLAME. Another thing to remember, what you seeing me doing
outside your front door is just a tip of the iceberg, I'm doing a hell of
a lot more to inform others about the REAL intentions of $cientology. 

"YOU WILL BE HEARING AND SEEING ME AGAIN CONCERNING MY REFUND." 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

From [email-masked] Sun May 19 19:13:13 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:13196
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!KEY.globalx.net!jolt.pagesat.net!pagesat.net!jump.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!xmission!news
From: [email-masked] (Deana M. Holmes)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: REPOST:  Original 127.0.0.1 troll by hkhenson
Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 18:52:48 GMT
Organization: Knights of Xenu, Intermountain Chapter
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc39.xmission.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Reposted at Keith Henson's request.

Deana Holmes
April 1996 Poster Child for Litigious $cientology Humourlessness
alt.religion.scientology archivist since 2/95
[email-masked]

==========

Path:news.xmission.com!news.cc.utah.edu!news.cs.utah.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland..reston..ans..net!
nntp.crl.com!decwrl!svc.portal.com!shell.portal.com!jobe.shell.portal.com!hkhenson
From: [email-masked] (H Keith Henson)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: OT Materials...
Date: 6 Apr 1995 19:35:38 GMT
Organization: Portal Communications Company -- 408/973-9111 (voice)
408/973-8091 (data)
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jobe.shell.portal.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Parick J Volk ([email-masked]) wrote:
:    Screw the courts....

:    I have an ftp site for all the OT materials...

:    ftp:127.0.0.1  /pub/texts/news/alt/religion/scientology

:    I don't know how long I'll have it up.

:    P J Volk

:    (alt.2600 lives! All hail the clams and trolls!)

Great stuff!  But don't you expect the 'ho to blow a gasket?
Ps, 14th file, 42 lines down on page 5, third word, there is an 'ei'
reversed.

From [email-masked] Sun May 19 19:14:59 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:13212
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!castlsys.demon.co.uk!news
From: [email-masked] (Steve A)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: RFC: SP Levels v1.01
Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 17:33:18 GMT
Organization: Castle Systems Ltd.
Lines: 255
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
NNTP-Posting-Host: steveatp.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: castlsys.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227

[these are published on behalf of the Awards Subcommittee of the ARSCC
Working Party on Critic Relations (USENET cabal) for comment and
ratification]

The Suppressive Levels v1.01.

Changes:

Jeff Jacobsen is now credited with the original SP levels concept.
They 
are in essence what has been used to draw up this list, although this 
list has been extended to cover the various supplementary awards that 
circumstances have deemed necessary.

??/5/96 - Order of the Chowder Spoon added.
17/5/96 - Order of the Barnacle added.

SP Levels

The "Church" of Scientology refers to individuals who criticise or
attack the cult as "Suppressive Persons".  Members of the cult who are
declared as such have an SP declare posted at their local org (cult
speak for "organisation"), and a declared Scientologist loses all
rights
to any church services until such time as they bring themselves back
into favour, usually achieved by "striking a blow at the enemy".

The inhabitants of alt.religion.scientologyhave adopted the label of
SP
as a mark of status - something to be striven for.  Accordingly, the
ARS
Central Committee has ratified a series of SP Levels, representing
grades to which SP's can rise.

One of the things which adherents of the cult appear to lose is any
semblance of a sense of humour:  the clamour among their critics for
SP
declares has evidently been a matter of some puzzlement to the
Scientologists who read alt.religion.scientology, and perhaps with
good
reason.  Read on to find out more about the SP levels.

These, then, are the Official ARS Central Committee SP Levels.  To
have
your level ratified, it is necessary to claim, with supporting
documentation, that some action by the cult has qualified you for that
level, by posting your claim to the <A
HREF="news:alt.religion.scientology">alt.religion.scientology</A>
newsgroup.  Since the ARS Central Committee, a faceless bureaucracy,
run
by we know not whom, but which no doubt contains a large number of
psychiatrists, reads every message posted to the newsgroup, your
message
will be noted and ratification should follow soon.

SP1

The SP1 grade is gained by criticising the cult openly.  This is
generally achieved by posting a message critical of the cult to
alt.religion.scientology, but can also be done by protesting outside a
Scientology location (this, generally, ensures automatic promotion to
SP2, thereby skipping a level, but beware:  it is considered bad form
to
skip too many levels at once).

SP2 SP2 can be earned by receiving an acknowledgement from a
Scientologist.  This generally takes the form of a response to your
message on the newsgroup, but in the case of protests, will generally
be
achieved by a Scientologist talking to you.  The response can be (and
generally is) completely inane - it is the fact that you have received
the response that counts, not the quality of the response.

SP3

One of the early senior levels, SP3 is earned by having one of your
messages cancelled by a forged cancel message from the pro-Scientology
cancelpoodle.  This level differs from many of the others by virtue of
the fact that cancel messages are logged to alt.religion.scientology
by
Lazarus.  Thus, if you have posted material that you consider likely
to
warrant a forged cancel, all you need do is check the newsgroup for a
Lazarus cancel notification of your message and claim your new level.

Individuals whose messages are cancelled by the poodle more than once 
are entitled to show adjuncts to their award, as described below.

SP4

SP4 is achieved by receiving a legal threat from the "Church" of
Scientology.  In the vast majority of cases, this has been via an
email
message from Helena Kobrin, the Scientologists' pet lawyer, but other
forms of service are equally valid (for the purposes of SP status:
email is certainly *not* a valid form of legal service, and you'd have
though a lawyer would have known that). 

-----BEGIN PROPOSED AMENDMENT-----

Individuals who receive their threat by normal ("snail") mail are
entitled to show a half-shell, as in SP4 (with clam cluster, etc.) _on
the half-shell_.

-----END PROPOSED AMENDMENT-----

It is regrettable that, thanks to Kobrin's recent antics, the status
of
SP4 has declined somewhat due to the number of individuals who have
received legal threats from her.  Indeed, since she once "served"
the entire newsgroup, an unprecedented action in legal history, some
potential suppressives argue that everybody is now SP4.  This is
clearly
not in the spirit of the SP awards, and it is my submission that a
prerequisite for SP4 should be the attainment of either SP2 or SP3
prior
to the legal threat, and the receipt of a personally addressed threat.

Like SP3, holders of SP4 rank can endorse their level in cases where
multiple threats have been received.

SP5

To attain SP5, you must be Fair Gamed, sued, or attacked by the cult.
To date, membership of SP5 is an exclusive club, held mostly by
martyrs
to the Suppressive Cause</A>.  It is possible, though unlikely, that
an
individual could go straight from being a non-SP to SP5 without
traversing intermediate levels (the glory of reaching SP5 at one
stroke
is sufficient to overcome any stigma at not progressing through the
levels in sequence).

SP6

SP6 status is achieved by making SP5, then successfully defending
yourself against their suit or causing them to cease their Fair Game
activities against you.  SP6 is, indeed, a lofty grade, and one
hitherto
achieved by very few.

SP7

To achieve SP7, it is necessary to instigate a legal action against
the
cult, or members of it.  In some ways, this makes SP7 easier to
achieve,
since experience suggests that it is nearly impossible to force the
cult
to cease attacking once it has started (necessary for SP6), while cult
members regularly provide SP's with cause to instigate a suit against
them.  Nonetheless, it takes a brave SP to do such a
thing.

SP8

A prerequisite for achieving SP8 is to havemade SP7:  SP8 requires
that
you win your lawsuit against the cult.

Note: winning a lawsuit against Scientology and
collecting the damages are two very different matters.

SP9

Comparatively few individuals have ever made it to SP9, which
requires that one not only makes SP7 by bringing a suit, but passes
through SP8 by winning it, then finally, to qualify for SP9,
collects the damages: the cult is quick to trumpet its
respect for the values of law, order, and justice when it is bringing
actions against other people, but when the law finds against them, the
response varies from accusations of duped judges through to a flat
refusal to pay.

The perseverance, moral courage and sheer determination in the face of

overwhelming odds (and some are VERY odd) ensures that those who
qualify
to become SP9's are indeed worthy individuals.

ADJUNCTS

With the exception of the SP1 and SP2 awards, for which it would be 
superfluous, SP awards can have adjuncts to symbolise multiple or 
extraordinary occurrences. The following are subject to ratification
by 
the Central Committee:

Second Occurrence of Award - where the activities leading to an SP
award
are repeated, the holder is entitled to a Clam Cluster.

Third and Subsequent Award - where an SP award is qualified for more 
than twice, the holder may sport a Clam Cluster with Bar.

The ARSCC will consider suggestions for the ratification of awards 
consisting of Clam Cluster and multiple Bars, but believes that such a

designation would be considered outre by the majority of SP ARSCC 
members.

SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES - where an SP award is received in special 
circumstances, such as by an author as a result of publishing a book, 
or, in the case of SP4, by receiving a legal threat via physical
media, 
the award may take the Half-Shell adjunct. The proper mode of address
in
these circumstances are SP ...... with ....... on the half-shell.

Honorary Levels

Where an individual has suffered at the cult's hands beyond the call
of
duty, it may, at the discretion of the Central Committee, be
acceptable
for that individual to claim an Honorary SP level.  Such claims must
be
submitted to the Committee for ratification on a case-by-case basis.

In general,Honorary SP status will go to individuals who have incurred
the wrath of the cult in the furtherance of SP goals outside Usenet, 
eg., authors of critical books, or ex-Scientologists.

Attorney Lieberman expressed great interest in Keith's SP level during

Keith's recent deposition and in fact, attested to it. Shelley
Thompson 
has remarked in the latest Biased Journalism that this deserves more
than 
the usual clam cluster. I agree.

Besides, Keith already has one clam cluster added to his SP5 as I
recall. 
Adding another cluster could have unanticipated consequences such as 
unauthorized spore reproduction. Let me suggest the following.

THE ORDER OF THE CHOWDER SPOON
This order could be awarded in those rare cases where the usual clam 
cluster is inappropriate: in particular, where the circumstances of
the 
award are exceptional or where the action leading to the award or
their
result represented a significant blow to the cult's own interests.

THE ORDER OF THE BARNACLE

SP's whose SP level is ratified by one of Scientology's lawyers are
entitled to wear the Order of the Barnacle with his SP level.

--
Steve A, SP4, Clam | "You're a sucker for them Russian constructivists, 
Cluster and Bar;   | Jack Duckworth."
A Mayett's Mutt    | I don't speak for Castle: they don't speak for me.

From [email-masked] Sun May 19 19:16:04 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:13380
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.inc.net!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [email-masked] (JAARobin)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: How Scientology stopped attacks in Spain
Date: 17 May 1996 23:07:24 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 118
Sender: [email-masked]
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked] (JAARobin)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Jeff Jacobsen made a post about the arrest of Heber Jentzsch and 68 other
Scientologists in November 1988 in Spain.  

>From Jeff
  " Unfortunately, I only caught the tail end of this news broadcast about

the arrest of Heber Jentzsch and 68 other Scientologists in November 
1988."

This is what Scientology did about it.

>From IMPACT  -  THE MAGAZINE OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
SCIENTOLOGIST  Issue 31    1990

This is a briefing given by Capt. Mark Rathburn

  "The second group I want to brief you on tonight is Interpol.  About a
year and half ago they were found to be behind the raids in Spain.  We
didn't limit it to just Spain -- we investigated them all over the planet.
 What we found was startling.  The degree of criminality and its extent
back from their very origin all the way up to present time is so shocking
that one of our biggest hurdles in actually handling this group and
getting them under inquiry has been that people's confront of evil is not
that high.  People think that this is a government organization.  Even
governments think that it is a government organization.  It is not.
  "In order to handle this problem of lack of confront on the part of the
people we need to go through to help dismantle this organization, the IAS
made a special grant to the Office of Special Affairs International to
produce a definitive, well documented booklet that proves that this
organization is firstly Nazi from its origin all the way up to present
time and secondly, that it is involved in the most heinous of crimes
across the world, and most particularly in the proliferation of drug
trafficking for profit.
  "This booklet is 45 pages long and is full of documentation,
photographs, graphs and charts.  It is fully indexed.  And it proves
beyond doubt the above two things.  The first printing is 100,000 and
these copies will be supplied to heads of state and government and law
enforcement agencies around the world, and to the heads of all the major
print and electronic media across the world.  It is also for like-minded
groups who might be able to raise their confront a little bit and work
with us to dismantle this organization.
  "This booklet is the item we needed to get a broad base of support from
those who have seen the light and who are willing to stand up to Interpol.
 We intend to get this booklet distributed and get this organization under
investigation in every country in the world and actually get it 
abolished."

On the front of the booklet the IAS sent out there is a photo of  Interpol
Secretary General Raymond Kindle presenting the then Panamanian dictator
Manuel Noriega with an award in praise of his anti-drug activities just
before Noriega was indicted in the United States for his role as a major
international drug trafficker.

>From the booklet PRIVATE GROUP, PUBLIC MENACE

  "During the war, Interpol was part of Nazi genocide machine and its
resourses were used to round up minorities...."
  "After the fall of the Nazi regime Interpol's president, Kaltenbrunner,
was hanged for war crimes in 1946."

It is an interesting booklet. 

This was in 1990 . Interpol was not abolished but shortly after this
booklet was published Interpol stopped harassing Scientology.

Also From IMPACT  -  THE MAGAZINE OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
SCIENTOLOGIST  Issue 31    1990

  "About a year ago we found out that the president of the Spanish
Psychiatric Association was a key player in the attack on the Spain orgs
and Narconons  in 1988.  We launched an investigation into this individual
and found that this man was taking sexual favors from his child patients. 
This was taken to law enforcement authorities and he was recently tried
for his crimes.  Tonight he is in jail"

>From THE HIDDEN STORY OF SCIENTOLOGY
By Omar V. Garrison
Page  81-82

 " Hubbard told organizations in as policy letter dated February 15, 1966.
" 
   "I speak from fifteen years of experience in this.  There has never
been an attacker who was not reeking with crime.  All we had to do was
look for it and murder would come out.
  "They fear our Meter.  They fear freedom.  They fear the way we are
growing. Why?"
  "Because they have too much to hide"

As Ron said "There has never been an attacker who was not reeking with
crime."
I have seen Scientology do this over and over.   When someone or group
attacks Scientology all Scientology does is look for the crime.  It's so
easy.   Interpol stopped  the attacks, in the case of the president of the
Spanish Psychiatric Association  he went to jail.  CAN ended up paying 
Jason Scott $4.8 million in damages.  Dr. Harry Bailey of  Chelmsford  in
Australia was charged with manslaughter and committed suicide, after CCHR
worked for years to expose his crimes.  In every case what Scientology did
was look for the crime.  It works every time. There is case after case of
this.

Anyway, thet's what happen in Spain and that's how Scientology handled it.

Harvey

From [email-masked] Sat May 25 15:41:46 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:15013 misc.int-property:401 misc.legal:13264
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal,misc.int-property,alt.usenet.kooks,alt.culture.usenet,comp.org.eff.talk
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!netrover2!news2.interlog.com!winternet.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.mathworks.com!newsgate.duke.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!henri
From: [email-masked] (henry)
Subject: Immediate Subpoenas on University of Maryland
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Siged: SigEd V1.3.1, Add .sig and PGP flexibility to posts.
X-Siged-Url: http://www.nyx.net/~pgregg/siged/
Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 03:08:56 GMT
Lines: 119
Sender: [email-masked]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

I have just received urgent email from Grady Ward regarding
the case against him by the cult of $cientology.  Apparently,
the depraved and insane cult of degenerates and reprobates
has decided that Grady Ward is responsible for the recent posting
of the NUTS scriptures, the final secret of the crime cult.

Many of these 'scriptures' are simply recipes for crime, including
how to practice medicine without a license and get away with it,
in defiance of Judge Gessell's order demanding that they cease that
fraud immediately.  Nevertheless, this demented nut-cult has 
demanded a third-party expedited subpoena to obtain the records
from the University of Maryland which they claim will prove their
preposterous allegations.  

Two unnamed anonymous remailers will also be harassed in this 
bizarre fashion, though news on that is sketchy.

The deranged and idiotic cult cites as 'evidence' of their ludicrous
allegation that Grady filed a Motion to Dissolve the injunction
against him after the NUTS pack was posted, on the grounds that it
was then moot.  This is the sole 'proof' they have.  Bullshit and
lies.

So the nut-cult intends to rape remailers with no evidence at all.

- From the criminal cult's filing:

". . .strong inference that defendant (1)is or is acting in concert
with SCAMIZDAT; (2) has made postings of Plaintiff's Advanced Technology
works; (3) may have made or been acting in concert with those who
made the May 6 postings of the NOTs works for the express purpose of
undermining the injunction entered herein.  Defendant certainly let
no grass grow under his feet in attempting to take advantage to [sic] those
postings by asserting the invalidity of the injunction four days later.

"As the collusion become more and more apparent with the latest
blatant attempt to destroy RTC's trade secrets, the need for complete
and expedited discovery of defendant becomes even greater."

Not a scrap of evidence is offered that Grady Ward had anything
to do with SCAMIZDAT, is SCAMIZDAT, or even knows who SCAMIZDAT is.
Just brazen lies, bizarre accusations, and increasingly shrill
and hysterical court filings, now even including sloppy grammar,
as the cult lawyers are obviously working without sleep, and possibly
under the influence of mind-altering drugs.

In further proof of Grady Ward's guilt, the clam-cult offers the
fact that Grady Ward has exchanged email with Alex de Joode, who
operated the now-defunct remailer at utopia.hacktic.nl.  Obviously,
anyone who would associate with such a nefarious remailer operator
must also continually post NUTS packs.

In more absurd claims of the cult, they actually have the gall to
accuse him of "taking advantage" of not having a lawyer while facing
a worldwide criminal organization which has retained dozens of lawfirms
simultaneously in order to fight its frivolous lawsuits against 
everything in existence.

They are claiming that Grady Ward is somehow at an advantage over
them because he doesn't even have a lawyer.  They are also claiming,
this cult which filed hundreds of lawsuits against the IRS alone,
to dodge their taxes, that somehow the net "tricked" them into 
suing everything in sight.

They also claim that Grady Ward (and everyone on the net) obviously
keeps huge archives of mail and news, because "it is inherently 
unbelievable that defendant retypes several paragraphs of identical
wording in message after message."

In short, what the cult is claiming is that quotes ">" in USEnet
followups prove that you keep huge archives.  Apparently, these
invidious cretins have never heard of the "F" key on a keyboard.
One wonders how they manage to type a single word.  "uck you you
motherucking uckhead" just doesn't have the same "zip" without 
an "f" in there now and again, does it?

They also accuse him of keeping huge archives, despite the fact
that he doesn't keep any, because he had a list of cancelled messages
that were feloniously cancelled with forged control messages, 
despite the fact that Ron Newman's web page at
http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/home.html
keeps a complete tally of all the forgeries.

The cult then tries to impugn all of Grady Ward's exhibits as
"unauthenticated and hearsay," because they're USEnet posts, 
while submitting as exhibits all of Grady Ward's posts, which 
by their own claims are ALSO "unauthenticated and hearsay."

In other words, they've blown their own case out of the water!

Well, their case is doomed, but it's still entirely possible
that this imbecilic cult of droolers could cause some damage to
remailers in their last dying thrashings.

h
- --
fuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuck
f                                                      f
u       "When you can't say 'fuck,' you can't say      u
c       'FUCK THE CDA!' -- Lenny Bruce rephrased       c
k                                                      k
fuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuck

ObURL:  http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/erlich/defense-fund  

 [ For Public Key: finger [email-masked] ]

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!HiWAAY.net!acara.snsnet.net!news5.crl.com!nntp.crl.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!grady Thu Aug 22 22:12:24 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:47638 misc.legal:16457
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!HiWAAY.net!acara.snsnet.net!news5.crl.com!nntp.crl.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!grady
From: [email-masked] (Grady Ward)
Subject: Criminal Cult rejects Final Settlement Offer from Grady Ward
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 1996 15:41:14 GMT
Lines: 36
Sender: [email-masked]

This morning (August 16, 1996), I received e-mail from Thomas R. Hogan,
chief counself for RTC in the RTC v Ward litigation before Judge Whyte
of San Jose, California soundly rejecting my final offer for settlement.

The cult and I have had two settlement meetings so far in which no
agreement was reached and in fact I felt that they were interpreting
my willingness to talk as capitulation rather than a good faith effort
to promote some kind of win-win situation.

So now I am in it for the long haul.

If anyone has any superannuated law books especially on discovery,
trial practice, appellate procedure, I could put them to good use.

If some has an old copy of Bender's forms or other procedural example
books such as paralegal's handbooks, I would appreciate taking it
off their hands.

Right now I own a few books from West and the Foundation Press on
various legal topics such as Evidence, Civil Procedure, Constitutional
Law and some "Nutshell" books on Trial Advocacy, Intellectual Property
and Pretrial Litigation.  If anyone could suggest other volumes
that might be useful for me to study, please write.

Also if some has collected on-point cases concerning trade secret vitiation
under California USTA, difficulties in compelling discovery, etc. please
sned or e-mail them -- all is more grist for this untutored mind.

Fourth class-mail is fine:

Grady Ward
3449 Martha Ct.
Arcata, CA  95521-4884

+1 707 826 7712
[email-masked]

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!gatech!news.mathworks.com!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!noring Wed Sep 11 22:38:34 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:50411 misc.legal:16949 soc.culture.german:4552
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal,swnet.general,swnet.media,swnet.politik,no.religion,soc.culture.german
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!gatech!news.mathworks.com!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!noring
From: [email-masked] (Jon Noring)
Subject: [Forward] Mr. Panoussis Raided and Sued in Sweden by Scientology
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 18:15:11 GMT
Lines: 87
Sender: [email-masked]

Mr. Panoussis just posted the following to alt.religion.scientology.  Please
forward where appropriate.

I had predicted he would be sued over a week ago, but I did not comment on
the raid since I am not familiar with what Swedish law allows.  Based on
Scientology's past record of liking to raid people's homes without good moral
cause (e.g., by stretching the truth with the courts so as to get that
remedy extended to them), I am not surprised, nor was Mr. Panoussis, who
states below that he foresaw something like that to happen and prepared
accordingly.

Jon Noring

*****************************************************************************

In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] writes:

CC: Helena Kobrin and Pär Leander, Dahlman Magnusson advokatbyrå.

When I returned home this afternoon, I found my apartment broken into.  The
hard disks were missing from my computer, as well as some diskettes and one
copy of the printed OTs.  On my bed-pillow was a message from the bailiff that
he had executed a decision by the primary court of Stockholm.  The decision
was attached and included the following:

The RTC has sued me for copyright infringment with regard to my electronic 
publication of OT II, OT III and the NOTs, as well as for my printed 
publication of the OTs and demanded that 

1. the court would interimistically forbid me at risk of fine of 50.000
   crowns (appr 8.000 US$) to further publish the materials in question
   until such day that the case is finally decided;

2. the court would decide that all material that is covered by RTC's
   copyright would be taken into custody pending a final decision in the
   case, whatever medium it may be on, including printed material, disks etc;

3. the court would decide that all material that has been used as an
   accessory to the infringment, including computer disks etc would also be
   taken into custody pending a final decision in the case;

4. the court would concede the above demands without offering me the
   opportunity to reply to them in advance, seen the urgency of the matter.

The court conceded demands 1, 2 and 4, but not 3. The decision can be
appealed against immediately (and will be).

Thus, the case is on and I will now begin to bang on the big drums of
publicity.  I expect the CoS to be hurt much more by that, than what it could
ever be hurt by some files circulating on the net.

I am (sometimes) a prudent nature.  Foreseeing the raid, I have not used my
computer for the storage or production or distribution of any material to
which the RTC claims copyright.  I count therefore on having my hard disks
back within a week.  Foreseeing the raid I have also spread the files in
question to a large number of untracable aquaintances, and instructed these
to spread them to their aquaintances in case I was raided.  This further
spreading is taking place right now, with the result that the RTC will NEVER
be able to cut me off from the material in question.  Foreseeing the raid I 
have also stored the printed OTs elsewhere than in my apartment (one single
copy was taken from my apartment, and one was missed and left back).  Their
distribution continues as usual, or rather MORE INTENSELY.

The case is handled by Stockholms tingsrätt, Box 8307, SE-104 20 Stockholm,
Sweden and has number T 7-866-96. All documents in it are public. If
interested (and can read Swedish or have it translated) you may ask for
copies by writing a simple informal letter in English to the above adress, by
phone at +46-8-6575000 asking for section (avdelning) 7 or by fax at
+46-8-6575295. Of course I will keep ars posted on the developments.

Z

---
oracle@everywhere: The ephemeral source of the eternal truth...

******************************************************************************
(end of forwarded post -- it was slightly reformatted to fix bad line
breaks and such.)

-- 
OmniMedia Electronic Books | URL:  http://www.awa.com/library/omnimedia
9671 S. 1600 West St.      | Anonymous FTP:
South Jordan, UT 84095     | ftp.awa.com  /pub/softlock/pc/products/OmniMedia
801-253-4037               | E-mail:  [email-masked]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join the Electronic Books Mailing List (EBOOK-List) Today!  Just send e-mail
to [email-masked], and put the following line in the body of the message:
     subscribe ebook-list     

From elastic!lethe!gts!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!noring Wed Sep 11 22:41:19 1996
Xref: elastic can.general:58554 can.legal:10546 misc.legal:17067 soc.culture.canada:34385
Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberty,misc.legal,soc.culture.canada,can.legal,can.general
Path: elastic!lethe!gts!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!noring
From: [email-masked] (Jon Noring)
Subject: [Forward] Scientology vs. Canada (Scientology in the News)
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 20:24:42 GMT
Lines: 65
Sender: [email-masked]

An anonymous person posted the following to alt.religion.scientology.
It's quite fascinating.  I plan to go over and read the Web site given
below.

It is obvious that Scientology is *desperate* considering what legal
maneuvers they are doing.  This is big-time desperate.

Jon Noring

************************************

In article <[email-masked] (John Anonymous MacDonald) writes:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Scientology vs. Canada (Scientology in the News)

The Monday, September 9th edition of the Montreal Gazette caries a report on 
the Co$' ongoing battles with the Canadian justice system. The Co$ is claiming
the Ontario Juries Act is contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms 
because jurors are required to be Canadian citizens.

The Co$ is also challenging provisions barring doctors, vetrinarians and 
coroners from juries. Success would mean that psychiatrists could be called 
for jury duty the next time the Co$ lands in court. Another Big Win!

While it certainly looks as though the Co$ is grasping at straws, it is 
interesting to consider if perhaps individuals or groups on the other side 
of a Co$ lawsuit might benefit from and utilise this strategy. Be kind of 
hard for the Co$ to use this argument here, then fight a similar argument 
in another lawsuit. I'm sure Canada (or specifically Ontario) is not the 
only jurisdiction which limits juries (or other officers of the court) in 
some way.

The text of the original article is available at:

http://www.southam.com/todays_news/08-09-1996-TheGazette(Montreal)-29.html

- - - Xenu The Happy Clown

"Hey Rocky! Watch me pull a body-theatan out of this hat!"

**************************
(end of forwarded post)

-- 
OmniMedia Electronic Books | URL:  http://www.awa.com/library/omnimedia
9671 S. 1600 West St.      | Anonymous FTP:
South Jordan, UT 84095     | ftp.awa.com  /pub/softlock/pc/products/OmniMedia
801-253-4037               | E-mail:  [email-masked]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join the Electronic Books Mailing List (EBOOK-List) Today!  Just send e-mail
to [email-masked], and put the following line in the body of the message:
     subscribe ebook-list     

From elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news3.idirect.com!n2tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!uniserve!news.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!basement.replay.com Wed Sep 11 22:53:26 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:50873
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news3.idirect.com!n2tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!uniserve!news.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!basement.replay.com
From: Anonymous <[email-masked]>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Andreas Ostertag, part 2 (by Martin Ottmann)
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 02:57:03 +0200 (MET DST)
Organization: Replay and Company UnLimited
Lines: 447
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: basement.replay.com
XComm: Replay may or may not approve of the content of this posting
XComm: Report misuse of this automated service to <[email-masked]>
X-Mail2News-Path: basement.replay.com

29 August 1996

ANDREAS OSTERTAG, PART 2

Some months ago I asked via the internet if anyone has informations
about the death of the German Scientologist Andreas Ostertag. This is
what Ive found out in the meantime:

A) Andreas Ostertags Beginnings

The Scientology-organization in Stuttgart, Germany, was founded on 7
October 1972 by Sybille Ostertag, the sister of Andreas and Martin
Ostertag. It was registered as a non-profit-association, the Dianetic
Stuttgart e. V..

On 10 October 1974 Andreas Ostertag became the official first
chairman of the association, while internally he was the Executive
Director of the Scientology mission Stuttgart.

In those days his brother Martin Ostertag became a spokesman for the
Scientology Church Germany in Munich.

In 1981 Ostertag wrote an official letter attached to the Way To
happiness-brochure, which was distributed to priests of various
churches. The texture of that letter sounds ironic if one keeps
Ostertags later fate in mind:

B) Ostertags Lament About The Morals in 1981

Dianetic Stuttgart e. V., Krefelder Str. 11, 7000 Stuttgart 50

Date: 10 Oct. 1981

Dear minister,

...

It is a fact, that the world of today is stuck in a far too big
potential of violent solutions, without having created a balance in
the field of morals. Such an unbalance can have disastrous
consequences.

Materialism and mechanism push away the spiritual values and create
through it a really dangerous situation. Man doesnt know moral values
anymore during a time, when he is able to execute unlimited power.

...

With best wishes

DIANETIC STUTTGART e. V.

[signature]

A. Ostertag

C) Bad Press In 1983

A critical article about the Scientology-organization, Dianetic
Stuttgart e. V., was published in the local newspaper Stuttgarter
Zeitung on 25 October 1983, page 19 with the title: Residents want
to turn out Scientologists.

It mentioned an initiative of residents which lived in the
neighbourhood of the Scientology-organization and who tried to get rid
of the Scientologists. It also referred to the problems of the
Scientologists with the city of Stuttgart being the owner of the
building in the Krefelder Str. 11 and simultaneously the landlord of
the Scientologists. An official of the office of real estates was
cited, who declared: If we are able to give (them) the notice, we
will do it.

The Scientologists had internal problems as well as the following
Scientology-document shows. Some portions of it are unfortunately
almost not understandable due to the bad German of the author. My own
remarks are included in square brackets.

D) The Eval Of Stuttgart Mission (Dianetic Stuttgart e. V.) in 1984

To: EXEC STRATA EXECUTION OFF
from: EUS/ANZO PROGRAMS CHIEF FB
regarding: Eval of the mission of Stuttgart

SEA ORGANIZATION

12. 9. 84

IES ORDER
INT MGMT
SMI INT
SMI EU
FLEU NEP
FOR DISSEMINATION TO THE STAFF ONLY
WHEN EXEC POSTS ARE ESTABLISHED

EVAL OF THE MISSION OF STUTTGART

Policy: Nothing in this eval may be interpreted so that HCO PLs or
HCOBs will be violated or altered. Every person, who pursues a target
by violating a HCO PL or HCOB is to be charged by a Comm Ev [Committee
of Evidence]. Every recommendation in this eval or alteration of
policy or tech must be clarified through the Watchdog Committee
(WDC),[.] [B]efore it [the recommendation] will be laid down in this
eval as target and from that resulting as a policy letter or a
bulletin, it must personally be examined by the founder. All data or
handlings must, where they relate to policies or bulletins, name the
policy or bulletin number, its quotes and the literal text.

LRH (HCO PL  26. 12. 79) Execution of Evaluations
HCO PL Finance Series 36. Exchange, Org Income and Staff Pay
HCO PL Executive Council Network Expanded
HCO PL Executive Council Network Disbanded - Ammended

Every advice for the delivery for missions from 1979
HCO PL 14 March 82 Financial Irregularities

Situation: The Tech Area of Stuttgart was allowed to divide itself up
to a point, where the mission is completely out of exchange with its
publics, which keeps the GI (Gross Income) down and worsens its
solvency.

Statistics:

Advanced Payments - rising since April the 19th, now 53.

Tech-Personnel - Danger on the 14th. Affluence broken on June 7th. 6
tech personnel got lost in the past 2 months. by statistics they
changed tech staffs with admin. Or tech staff got lost. The number of
tech personnel stayed level until July, when it went into Danger. The
tech/admin ratio was in an unproportionate relation. Obviously the
mission wasn't interested in delivery.

-2-

GBS [Gross Book Sales]: Started in Affluence in April. Broken on June
the 28th Danger and practically now in Non-Existence.

PS [Paid Starts]: Affluence since April broken on July 5th, currently
Danger. Even the normal range of reported PS isn't visible in the
statistics for the delivery.

GI [Gross Income]: Affluence since April broken down on June 7th.
Currently a normal but low range.

CGI [Corrected Gross Income = GI - (repayments + bounced cheques + 10%
management fees + RTC licence fees)]: in accordance with the above
datum, is approaching zero for two months, after Affluence was broken
as above. Just recently reverted.

FP No. 1 [Financial Planning No. 1 = a one time per year calculated
financial plan for the "ideal scene"]: almost 17,000 US Dollars per
week!!!!! A very expensive mission! Very unrealistic financial
planning.

Cash: practically none. Obviously they don't believe in reserves?

Bills: Rising. 160,000 Dollars reported by statistics. New
investigations report 750,000 DM (this is around 375,000 Dollars).
Treasury must be a madhouse.

[HCO] Book Account: Insolvent.

VSD [Value of Services Delivered]: Shortly started in Affluence on May
10th, breaks down on June 21st, very low range compared with GI and
GBS. Repayments? Anyway, they aren't delivering anything worth a
penny. currently in Danger up to 2,000 Dollars.

WDAH [Well Done Auditing Hours]: Crashing since April 12th.
[Currently] a 3 week Affluence [, the statistic] starts to recover by
a rising purif-delivery.

WDAH W/O [W/O = ?]: Crashing since beginning of February. Seems to
coincide with the down-trend of the tech personnel. Lost auditors? The
reports of the tech personnel are differing - probably falsified.

STP [Student Points]: Affluence broken over the last 2 weeks.

FSS [?]: Normal.

PRPS [Public Registrar Paid Starts]: Normal since April 19th.

Div 6 Completions [Completions of Scn-elementary courses]: Currently
in Affluence, some blew from courses, although recently an improvement
took place [sic!].

The mission owns SMI 30,000 Dollar on reserves because of bounced
cheques on overseas accounts.

Data: Recently an eval in the mission was executed and finished at the
beginning of June. The eval was sent to SMI INT, and then a production
telex was written and sent to the mission. The telex never really got
to the mission execs and

-3-

[they] didn't comply with it. The eval [also] went to SMI EU, but, as
reported, got ignored, as the staff didn't know what to do with it.
The correction by the mission holder, like it was ordered in the eval,
never took place.
The eval stayed not executed und is now no longer applicable. Although
in general most of the statistics start to recover since the mission
holder returned from Flag, the mission [stays] insolvent and delivery
isn't still recovered.

OMITTED EVAL, ADDED TIME
-SMI INT AND EU

The last upward-trend of the statistics starts when CO SMI INT
by-passes SMI EU and contacts via telephone directly the mission
holder and pushes the targets of the analysis for the mission and uses
these statistics to handle the production of the mission and to get
the mission holder, Andreas Ostertag, to play the birthday game. He
complies with it and starts to handle the production of his mission.
The GI improves as well as the delivery and the solvency of the
mission, although just gradually.

CORRECT SOURCE, CORRECT TARGET
- CO SMI INT
CORRECT INCLUDED AGREEMENT
- STUTTGART MISSION HOLDER

In the mission statistics-meetings with the D/HCO Sec Uli [I suppose
he means the D/HES, the Deputy/ HCO Executive Secretary, the junior of
the HES] took place at night, where the targets of the birthday game
were discussed [birthday game  = a competition between missions, orgs
and advanced orgs in honour to LRHs birthday on 13 March. The
organizations are measured in this competition by their GDSes, their
Gross Divisional Statistics, like GI, GBS or WDAH, etc. The birthday
game starts and ends with LRHs birthday. It is also divided in
quarters over the year.]. Uli wanted to collect the data about what's
going on, out-points were noted and the areas divided and arranged who
handles which area. The keyline (which was discovered in the previous
eval) for this mission is the Comm-Course-line, where a person gets
closely supervised and receives important wins, then advised by
supervisor and registrars, who keep a very tight line regarding these
publics, to sign them up for higher courses. This line was kept going
by Achim at that time. The Comm-Course I/C [In Charge] worked closely
together with the registrars. It existed also a line from Div. 2,
which regged persons from the public and some kind of a special
project (not known to the evaluator), which the ED [Executive
Director] (Kay) and a registrar was working on [sic!]. The then HES
(Name unknown) worked in Div 6 and made Div. 6 to sign up on the lines
[sic!]. The mission holder went to Flag, but the stats were further
up-trending with the above mentioned lines. With the rising GI,
regardless of the big expenditure, per its FP No. 1 graph the solvency
recovered.

INCLUDED CORRECT PRODUCTION
- MISSION HOLDER AND ED AND AFFECTED EXECS

Another thing what was pushed during that time was that the mission
holder pushed the 3. dyn. [dynamic], bypassing problems of the 1. dyn.
and the 2 dyn.. The income of the mission was raised to handle debts
of the mission and the staff, by selling books. 100 % control of the
finances

-4-

will be maintained, without bounced cheques, by the sole use of cash.
Also the birthday game was pushed by massive pressure on the staff.
And it was expected, that all the stats are [sic!] up, including
delivery.

CORRECT TARGET - MISSION HOLDER

Although the mission holder recently returned to the org and the GI
started to turn around, the other stats, especially in the
delivery-area, are still suffering under the broken Affluences. The
recent evals reported a lot of noise in the mission with wild
financial irregularities, false statistics, Out-2D [in general:
non-marital intercourse] between the highest execs, musical chairs
(frequent change of posts), admonishing creditors, who are screaming
for attention and threatening to distrain upon the property of the
mission. There were a lot of post-changes of key execs and staff since
the Affluence period. The mission is [now] reduced to 1 - 2 auditors,
per the new attached report and auditing-sales were prohibited by the
Ex-ED Kay Barre, because the mission couldnt deliver it.

FALSE TARGET, OMITTED ACTIONS
- MISSION HOLDER
INCORRECT INCLUDED OUT-ETHICS
- KAY (ED)

At those points [he obviously means points on a statistic], where
the delivery-statistics start to take an upward-trend, 4 auditors are
allowed to leave to mission, because they werent contracted and had
big debts, because of little or no pay during the last year (per the
payrolls) even during the previous time with a high GI of the mission.

CONFLICTING DATA-
PAYROLLS

If one investigates who gets paid, then [one will find out, that]
those are involved who make the money, not the delivery personnel. The
auditors, who arent under a contract and [who] are discontented and
[who] disseminate enemy lines of squirrel-groups, that the prices are
too high, are leaving, because they simply arent being paid. If one
compares the pay of an auditor with the pay of the mission holder -
the mission holder gets 74,579.36 DM (reports say that half of it
covers repayments of credits for Ostertag), while the OES [Org
Executive Secretary] gets 2,705.00 DM and the auditor gets 3,115.72
DM. These are salaries, which were paid within a year. [Handwritten
note:] The Treas[ury] Sec[retary] gets 14,669.95 [DM] during the same
period.

INCORRECT INCLUDING
FINANCIAL IRREGULARITIES
- MISSION HOLDER, TREAS SEC
OMITTED PAYMENT -
TECH PERSONNEL

If one investigates, why the mission simply didnt recruit und
re-built its tech-area and reinforced the exchange, one finds out,
that there exist little recruitment or staff-enhancement and it is
reported that just 4 staff are hatted only. HCO is out-ethics and the
execs above it are VERY out-ethics, with the attempts of the ethics
officer to get in ethics and standard schedules and policy in that
mission, who constantly get cross-orders by the mission holder and/or
the 

-5-

HES Kay Barre, who is only interested in GI and not in establishment
or any other functions of the area under him. Organizationally the
mission is a total mess with the Div 6 area in the center of the city,
the delivery area in a building at one end of the city and Div 6
courses and other Div 6 activities at the other end of the city.
Kilometers away in another building [sic!]. 2 of the buildings belong
to the city, who gave the leases a notice because of bad press or
non-payment of bills.

OMISSIONS HCO-HES AND D/HCO
SEC INCLUDING INCORRECT
OUT-ETHICS OMITTED ORG FORM
LINES ALTERED IN SEQUENCE
- MISSION HOLDER, HES, D/HCO SEC

Behind that scene, let alone the financial irregularities, which were
hidden, exist out-2D between the top execs of the mission, constant
shifting of accounts and illegal reg-cycles, public account-transfers
with the use of debits, favours for those who are looked at as
upstat by the ED without the enforcement of ethics. Out-ethics is
protected with the false datum of the mission holder that a person
would have been crazy to have out-ethics, if his stats are up
(because, when they are upstat, they arent out-ethics, no matter what
crime was involved). The mission holder prefers to send difficult
staff to Flag for auditing. The majority of these illegal things and
policy actions can be isolated around HES Kay Barre, who has a 25cm
thick ethics file, a time track with crimes, which includes theft,
misappropriation, shifting of accounts, forwarding of uncovered
cheques and transfers, violent assaults, brawls. The mission holder
has no attention for that general out-ethics scene, as he has the
opinion that he [Kay Barre] is upstat.

TOTAL OUTPOINTS:

FALSE TARGETS - 4                                   MISSION HOLDER
(ANDREAS OSTERTAG)
OMISSIONS - 2                                             - 10
INCORRECT INCLUDED DATA - 4           T/ED (NOW HES) KAY BARRE - 9
FALSE INFORMATIONS - 3                        T/MISSION HOLDER (SIGGI)
- 2
ALTERED SEQUENCE - 1                           TREAS SEC - 1
CONFLICTING DATA - 3
FALSE SOURCES - 2

TOTAL PLUSPOINTS:

CORRECT SOURCES - 1                              CO SMI INT - 2
CORRECT TARGETS - 2                              MISSION HOLDER - 3
CORRECT INCLUDED DATA - 2                T/ED AND STAFF - 1

THE WHY:

...[illegible] of off-policy-execs justify a system of criminal
..[illegible], which keeps the mission off delivery and recovery of
solvency or real success.

THE ETHICS WHY:

-6-

An organizational rang was used to follow false purposes and to
justify financial irregularities, bad conduct of executives and
squirrel-admin in connection with violations of registered marks of
the church.

WHO:

KAY BARRE, HES STUTTGART, ANDREAS OSTERTAG, MISSION HOLDER

IDEAL SCENE:

STUTTGART MISSION ABLE TO KEEP UP AFFLUENCE WITH THE SUCCESSFUL
MISSION-PROCUREMENTACTIONS AND PROPER DELIVERY-LINES WITH EXECS, WHO
WORK ON-POLICY, APPLY STANDARD FINANCE-POLICY AND IN EXCHANGE WITH
THEIR PUBLICS!

Andrew Stevens
Exec Strata SMI Evaluator

Authorized by
AVC EVAL AUTH INT

for
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY
INTERNATIONAL
BDCS:AVCI:ADS:

E) Bad Press In 1985

On 26 March 1985 another critical article about the Dianetic e. V.
was published in the Stuttgarter Zeitung: Drawn like X-mas geese.
An ex-member of Scientology came to word, who mentioned how she got
manipulated by the Scientologists to pay several thousands of D-Mark
for courses and auditing.

The article also spoke about the repeated problems of the
Scientologists to pay their rent, which had finally led to the notice
of the tenancy agreement by the city of Stuttgart in 1984.

Andreas Ostertag was mentioned too: Insider say that the former head
Andreas Ostertag was put on ethics in the cult center in
Florida/USA, which is a redefinition for mobilization of labour for
punishment. The Munich cult-spokes woman Maria Stoffel denies that
accusation: That has nothing to do with punishment, he probably went
for advanced training to America, such an allegation could only be
originated from the other side.

F) Ostertags Death

Andreas Ostertag obviously died in Clearwater in 1985. Nothing is
really known about the circumstances of his death.

Nevertheless he stayed registered as chairman of the Dianetic
Stuttgart e.V., although he was dead, until 4 September 1987, when
the Director of Special Affairs Jrgen Schwarz, became the official
first chairman of the association.

Martin Ottmann, Stuttgart, Germany

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!torn!news.bconnex.net!news.abs.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!in2p3.fr!swidir.switch.ch!01-newsfeed.univie.ac.at!Austria.EU.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!castlsys.demon.co.uk!usenet Wed Sep 11 23:09:52 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:50816 soc.culture.nordic:1260
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!torn!news.bconnex.net!news.abs.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!in2p3.fr!swidir.switch.ch!01-newsfeed.univie.ac.at!Austria.EU.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!castlsys.demon.co.uk!usenet
From: [email-masked] (Steve A)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,soc.culture.nordic
Subject: Re: Today's developments
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 1996 11:30:10 GMT
Organization: Castle Systems Ltd.
Lines: 72
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
NNTP-Posting-Host: steveatp.demon.co.uk
Keywords: XENU, alt.religion.scientology.xenu
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: castlsys.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227

Zenon Panoussis <[email-masked]> wrote:

>I was not present at the raid yesterday. Today I learned from the 
>bailiff that the scienos' Swedish lawyer, two American scienos by 
>the names of Warren MacShane and William Heart, as well as a scieno 
>computer technician were allowed by the bailiff to search my home. 
>This is not only irregular, but highly illegal in this country. 
>In the total mess that my apartment is (and was already before the 
>raid), I have had no possibility to check what might be missing. 
>No time either.

My previous comments on this matter are now withdrawn.

It was offensive, wrong, and plain stupid, regardless of its
legality, for the courts to allow members of a known criminal
cult to interfere with the evidence.

Any evidence that was gained through the raid must now be
considered to be tainted, as the cult already has a reputation
for framing its victims with forged bomb threats, for example.
Furthermore, nothing that might emanate from any accounts that
Zenon Panoussis might own can be considered to be from him, since
an organisation such as Scientology, with its proven criminal
record, and its reputation even for hiring proven criminal liars
for lawyers, cannot be considered to be above attempting to frame
someone in Zenon's position.

>A journalist interviewed the bailiff on this matter today and the 
>bailiff looked quite shaken. As far as I am concerned, my home may 
>be bugged and has to be deloused. It is very probable that the 
>bailiff's office will have to pay that cost, as well as damages for 
>the violation of my privacy. But that is a later matter.

The case must be dropped with prejudice. This is how Scientology
treats anyone who dares to stand against it. You deserve to
receive substantial damages for the negligence of the bailiff in
allowing two members of a proven criminal and totalitarian
organisation to enter your home _in your absence_.

If this ridiculous state of affairs is allowed to stand
unchallenged, the reputation of the Swedish courts will be in
worse tatters even that the "court" of that laughable
Scieno-dupe, Judge Hon. "L" Ron Whyte.

>It is 04.50 am local time here and at 9 am I will be in court filing 
>motions etc. Considering the time difference to the US I have not 
>disclosed the best part of what will happen in the morning, in order 
>not to give the scienos advance warning. But I promise you that there 
>will be some laughter in ars tomorrow. For the time being I need some 
>sleep...

You are a hero. We salute you.

Buttfuck them. It's what they would have wanted.

--
ObURLS: 

Beginners:  http://www.tiac.net/users/modemac/cos.html
In-depth:   http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/home.html
Harassment: http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/harass/timeline-95.html
Fools, losers, and mugs: http://www.scientology.org

--
SP4, GGBC, KBM, Unsalvageable PTS/SP #12

     Support the Campaign For Free-Range Body Thetans. Ban dressage.

IN MEMORIAM: Richard Collins, victim of the criminal cult of Scientology
IN MEMORIAM: anon.penet.fi, [email-masked], victims of the 
             criminal cult of Scientology.

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.ruhr-uni-bochum.de!news.rhrz.uni-bonn.de!RRZ.Uni-Koeln.DE!news.duesseldorf.ecrc.net!news.ecrc.de!02-newsfeed.univie.ac.at!01-newsfeed.univie.ac.at!Austria.EU.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!xemu.demon.co.uk!dave Wed Sep 11 23:11:20 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:50796
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.ruhr-uni-bochum.de!news.rhrz.uni-bonn.de!RRZ.Uni-Koeln.DE!news.duesseldorf.ecrc.net!news.ecrc.de!02-newsfeed.univie.ac.at!01-newsfeed.univie.ac.at!Austria.EU.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!xemu.demon.co.uk!dave
From: Dave Bird---St Hippo of Augustine <[email-masked]>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.censorship,uk.politics.misc,uk.misc
Subject: Families & Netizins picket $ientology (LONDON England)
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 12:33:47 +0100
Organization: 1st Canine Chapel of Bob Dobbs Dog (Church of the SubGenius)
Lines: 75
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xemu.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: xemu.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 1.11 <dQumtnY$x4rJ2Kof$+89577fU7>

  ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
  P R E S S   R E L E A S E   IMMEDIATE     FRIDAY 13:00
 
              Families & Internet users

          picket London $cientology building.

  ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
 
TOMORROW, sat 7/Sept/96, at the Scientology building on Tottenham 
Court Road in London (England), from 12:30 to 14:30 hrs, there will 
be a picket by Internet users and family members of cult victims. 
This is to protest the cult’s increasing attacks on the Internet, 
where the newsgroup ''alt.religion.scientology'' has contained quotes 
of its bizarre secret scriptures----normally sold to devotees at 
anything up to $380,000 by the time the innermost revelation is 
reached.  In America, Scientology is currently suing Internet user 
Keith Henson over publishing part of its ''NOTs'' document, which he 
says make unlawful medical claims, on the ‘Net.  In England, it has 
picketed the house of the Woods family in East Grinstead who left 
Scientology to become Christians & now advise others who mean to 
leave Scientology on rebuilding their lives and recovering payments.

-------------------------------------------------------------
 ......................
 ......................                  ''Are there any overts
 .....[IMAGE]..........                     against greenfly?''
 ......................
 ......................                 L.Ron Hubbard  practices  
 ......................                  scientology 'auditing'
 ......................                  on a tomato plant.

---------------------------------------------------------------

      USERS  PROTEST  CLOSURE   OF    INTERNET 'REMAILER'

Internet users are also protesting attacks on the 'anon@penet' 
anonymous forwarding service run by Julf Helsingius in Finland
(tel. +358 0400 2605), which allows  forwarding and reply of text 
messages with the true senders name kept confidential. This follows 
a court battle by Scientology to obtain the confidential names, and 
simultaneous  stories that the remailer was used to spread ''90% of 
the child pornography on the Net''. Today’s PRIVATE EYE confirms that 
these stories are false -- the remailer can’t send files as large as 
pictures or to the newsgroups where child porn would be found, and 
Finnish police say there is no evidence it sends *any* significant 
amount of child pornography at all. The remailer, which *was* used 
by the Samaritans and for confidential child abuse victims recovery 
newsgroups, has now closed down. Last time Scientology tried to get 
a court order to produce names there were also false child porn 
rumours at the same time.  [Background:  Observer 25th Aug and 1st 
Sept, Independent 2nd Sept, Private Eye 6th Sept, check REUTERS 
stories re ‘Internet’/’Helsingius’ from 25th Aug to date]. 

FURTHER INFO [email-masked]

            __               .\|/////..
      ||_.-'  '.            /\\|//   ----
     //         ;          |          -----
--._//        .\|/.         .==== =====. ---  -----------X*E*M*U-----------+
   ((       //(####)        \d]>||<[d]>\ (~\                               |
   ||       v  '--'\\        .  | \        |  ''Auditting your Garden      |
   ||       ;       v         . {_ \   :  \/    Plants'' by L Ron Tubbard  |
   //     .'        :          .'___'  :   '      Bridge Publications      |
  //      ;         '.          ~===~     /\        $949.99 paperback      |
 //        .   .... o :       /__\''''   /  \                              |
            .   \\\\~~~~|~~~~~~~|\\     / /\/,,,   further details, ring   |
             .  | .\''. |/''''/.|,,\\  //,,,,,,,      01 800 FOR TRUT      |
              '.|:  O  :|[   / ]|,,,,\/,,,,,,,,,                           |
----------------| '...' |[__O__]|,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, --------------------------+
                |_______|_______|,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!torn!news.bconnex.net!news.abs.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.be.innet.net!INbe.net!xs4all!vulcan!vorlon Wed Sep 11 23:12:29 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:51543 alt.religion.scientology.xenu:1153
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!torn!news.bconnex.net!news.abs.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.be.innet.net!INbe.net!xs4all!vulcan!vorlon
From: [email-masked] (Vorlon)
Newsgroups: nl.scientology,alt.religion.scientology,alt.religion.scientology.xenu
Subject: Email service for the NOTs
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 07 Sep 1996 18:26:14 -0100
Organization: The Army of Light
X-Newsreader: TRN for OS/2
X-Posting-Software: UUPC/extended 1.12r inews (20Jan96 10:45)
Lines: 7

In response to this latest $cientology outrage - the harrasment of Zenon
Panoussis - I'll email the complete NOTs to everyone who requests by email
for them. Please put "Sendme NOTs - Xenu" in the subject line. The Xenu is
required to prevent scientologists from responding.

--
Vorlon

From elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news3.idirect.com!n2tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.duq.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!inferno.mpx.com.au!news Wed Sep 11 23:23:34 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:50838
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news3.idirect.com!n2tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.duq.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!inferno.mpx.com.au!news
From: [email-masked] (David Gerard)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Sydney picket Sep 6, 7: leaflet 'Is Scientology a Confidence Trick?'
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 1996 13:04:22 GMT
Organization: Prestige Elite(tm) Church of the SubGenius
Lines: 80
Message-ID: <3232c1b1.54922834@news>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-2b15.mpx.com.au
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227

This is the leaflet Tony McClelland usually hands out, the one we used
on Friday 6th September and one of the three we used on Saturday 7th
September (the other two being the ‘War on the Internet’ leaflet and
the ‘Revolt In The Stars’ leaflet).

Is Scientology
        a 
confidence trick?

Macquarie Dictionary 2nd revised edition.
Confidence trick
    /’-trik/, n. a swindle in which the victim’s 
    confidence is gained and he is then induced to 
    part with money or property. Also, US., 
    confidence game. - confidence trickster, n.

Scientology engages in the following:

Deceptive recruiting.
    The Church of Scientology advertises under 
    front names. eg. In the 9 to 5 Magazine 
    Scientology advertised their OCA test under the 
    name "The     Sydney Test Centre". advertisements for an IQ test 
    have used the Scientology phone number and 
    no name. Copy available on request.
    The Church of Scientology has a large number 
    of front names. Copy available on request.

Hidden agenda
    The Church of Scientology scriptures are 
    subject to copyright protection and trade 
    secrets of the Church. . This is legal but it 
    unfortunately prevents an informed decision by 
    a recruit.     The price list for all courses is 
    almost     $500,000.00, Copy available on 
    request. The CofS has a division called 
    Rehabilitation Project Force that is used for 
    discipline, Copy available on request.  Also the 
    Introspection Rundown for the incarceration of 
    a member suffering a Psychotic breakdown 
    while receiving sources, Copy available 
    on request. A recruit is not able to research this 
    information before joining.

Mind control.
    The CofS uses mind control including hypnosis 
    on recruits, Page 115 - 118 The Anderson 
    Report.

Reprehensible behaviour.
    Incarceration of members with mental 
    disturbance. (see Introspection Rundown 
    above). 
    Damage to family relationships. Copy of policy 
    document available on request.

For additional information write
Tony McClelland
Locked Bag 1000
Granville NSW 2142

--
*** David Gerard - http://suburbia.net/~fun/scn/demo/  "Nevertheless,
the indoctrinated know, or rather are brainwashed into believing, that
Scientology is a workable method for treating human ailments, both
medical and psychiatric, and every word of Hubbard's
science-fictionlike scribblings, no matter how ludicrous, are
‘scientifically proven facts’ referred to as ‘source’ or, more
significantly, ‘Source’, and thoroughly researched.  This ‘research’
in fact involved Hubbard sitting down at a typewriter and writing
whatever came to mind, a skill he developed while writing pulp science
fiction." (Martin G.V. Hunt)

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!grady Wed Sep 11 23:30:02 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:50750
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!grady
From: [email-masked] (Grady Ward)
Subject: Cult to Depose Henson Against (XENU)
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 1996 18:38:49 GMT
Lines: 65
Sender: [email-masked]

The crimninal cult issued a Rule 45 subpoena today
for Keith Henson to appear for yet *another* deposition
and bring with him

1. All letter, e-mail, notes, diary entries, telephone bills
and other documents concenring communication with Grady Ward.

[of course all communication containing lawyer's "mental
impressions" are *absolutely* privileged.
This includes a pro se lawyer of course.]

[other privileged information may be:

Expert testimony disclosures
Irrelevant information
trial preparation materials
material with an absolute privilege: clinet-attorney, husband-wife
provision privilege:
trade secret, scholar's privilege (see United States v IBM Corp,
83 F.R.D. 92 (S.D.N.Y.1979) (Dave Touretzky take note!)

2. All letters, e-mails, notes, diary entries, telephone bills and
other documents evidencing or relating to communications with anyone
concerning Grady Ward, Mr. Ward's dispute with Religious
Tehcnology Center and/or the Church of Scientology, and/or the
lawsuit entitled Religous Technology Center v Ward No. c 96 20207 RMW,
United States District Court Northern District of California

3. All other documents concerning Grady Ward, Mr. Ward's dispute
with Reliigous Technology and/or the Church of Scientology, and/or
the lawsuit entitled Religious Technology Center v Ward No. c 96 20207

the deposition will be held at Hogan's San Jose Office on
September 20, 1996 starting at 9 am.

I think the criminal cult is simply using this 3rd party subpoena
ploy to get around the one deposition limit of a party to
a suit.  

Will Mr. Henson make a motion before Judge Infante to Quash and/or
aprotective order from the harassment of the clams?

Here is a sample motion for Judge Infante:

[Caption]  

Defendant moves this court for an order pursuant to Rule 26(c)
(describe the relief you want here). A copy of the proposed 
order is attached to this motion.

There exists good cause to support this motion in that (explain 
why you are asserting privilege, harassment by the clams, undue
expense or burden, embarrassment or oppression)

This motion is based upon the notice, pleadings, or record, and files
in this action; the supportgin affidavits of (party, witness, or attorney)
the attached memorandum of law (if necessary) and oral or
documentary evidence to be presented at the hearing on the motion
(if anticipated).

Signed:..........

(from Fundamentals of Pretrial Litigation 3rd ed., Roger S. Haydock, etal
West Publishing 1994

From elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.rns.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-13.sprintlink.net!demos!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!grady Wed Sep 11 23:31:57 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:50930
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.rns.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-13.sprintlink.net!demos!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!grady
From: [email-masked] (Grady Ward)
Subject: Cult to depose Apple Computer
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 1996 18:45:13 GMT
Lines: 15
Sender: [email-masked]

My my litigaiton c 96 20207 RMW EAI the criminal cult has
issued a subpoena for Apple Computer Inc to turn over
my employee records.

I guess they hope to discover to see if I was ever fired
or if I was ever disciplined.

So sorry to diappoint but...

Maybe the cult will eventually piss off one of the
Silicon Valley gazillionaires and then we'll get to
see a *real* show?

Mythra v Godzilla v Xenu is a tag team free for all!

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!news.thenet.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.eng.convex.com!seas.smu.edu!news.ttu.edu!usenet Sat Sep 28 15:10:43 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:54095
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!news.thenet.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.eng.convex.com!seas.smu.edu!news.ttu.edu!usenet
From: [email-masked] (Padre Martini, Archdukebishop)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: "Fair Game" Means Co$ Can Kill You! (was Re: What does
Date: 18 Sep 1996 13:39:00 GMT
Organization: Esoteric Order of Godzilla
Lines: 75
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ttacs3.ttu.edu
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24
In-Reply-To: [email-masked]'s message of 18 Sep 1996 04:21:50 GMT

In <[email-masked]> [email-masked] writes:

> "Fair game" is a term which is often intentionally misinterpreted
> and used by apostate Scientologists and other critics to unfairly
> tarnish the Church. 

"Fair game" is a term coined by Hubbard in one of his more paranoiac stages as
an attempt at dealing with the "enemies" of Scientology. Critics do not
intentionally misinterpret the term to tarnish Scientology. The term does it by
itself, and there is no way to misinterpret it.

Observe the actual quote from L. Ron Hubbard instigating the "fair game"
policy.

"ENEMY: SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any
        means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the
        Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed."
	-- L. Ron Hubbard, HCOPL 18 October 1967

> "Fair game" was cancelled in 1968, more than 25 years ago,
> expressly because it was susceptible to misinterpretation and
> misuse. The term meant that apostate members could not seek
> protection or refuge under the Church's internal ethics or justice

Actually, it looks like it means that Scientology can do _anything_ to people
declared "fair game." Hubbard is quite explicit in what to do to the enemies of
Scientology. How can one misinterpret the term "destroyed" when it refers to a
person? Hubbard was openly advocating KILLING PEOPLE THAT GOT IN HIS WAY!

> This concept is as old as religion itself. Many faiths reserve the
> right to expel or excommunicate members who refuse to abide by the
> moral and ecclesiastical codes of the group. 

Excommunicating or expelling one from the religious community is one thing.
Killing them is entirely something else. This is what sets Scientology apart
from other religions.

> The term does not appear in the Scientology Scriptures and has not
> existed since 1968. In fact, its only use since then is not by the
> Church at all, but by a handful of anti-Scientology apostates and
> their attorneys who have exploited it in efforts to generate
> anti-Scientology prejudice in the media or courtroom. 

To be fair, here's Hubbard's order "cancelling" fair game:

"The practice of declaring people FAIR GAME will cease. FAIR GAME may not
 appear on any Ethics Order. It causes bad public relations.

 This P/L does not cancel any policy on the treatment or handling of an SP."
	-- L. Ron Hubbard, HCOPL 21 October 1968

Note the last line, however. All this order does is cancel the act of attaching
the term "fair game" to people. All other policies ("tricked, sued, lied to, or
destroyed") are kept in place. Hubbard has done nothing good at all in this.
He's just abolished the use of a term. A similar situation would be if a law
were passed that made saying the word "nigger" illegal. Does this mean that
racism is abolished? Just because a label is no longer used, that doesn't mean
that previous actions towards people with that label stop.

> The truth is that Church management never has and never would
> tolerate illegal or unethical actions to be committed in the
> Church's name. The scriptures of Scientology are replete with
> admonitions to its adherents to build their lives on foundations of
> honesty and integrity. The commission of dishonesties or harmful

Out-and-out bullsh*t. I can quote at least ten "scriptures of Scientology" in
which Hubbard advocates dishonesty and criminal practices. If you Scienos would
like to see them, let me know. I've got them ready to post.
--
--------------------\--http://pegasus.acs.ttu.edu/~z5d31/martini.html--\
Padre Martini, OED,  \    Join the Expedition to Find the East Pole!    \
Archdukebishop of West>For Lots of Weird Stuff from The Holy Order plus a>
Texas, HOSC, Lubbock / Catalogue, Send a SASE to:   307 Gordon Hall, TTU/
--------------------/[email-masked], TX 79406--/

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news1.mpcs.com!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news Sat Sep 28 15:23:49 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:54154
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news1.mpcs.com!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 08:56:01 -0700
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
From: [email-masked] (Huge Cajones Remailer)
Comments: Please report misuse of this automated remailing service to <[email-masked]>
Subject: Leaked from TNX: "OSA does not want public posting to ars"
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Mail-To-News-Contact: [email-masked]
Organization: [email-masked]
Lines: 159

This message from the manager of TNX - a private mailing list for
Scientologists - is evidence that alt.religion.scientology is off-limits to
"public" (i.e., non-staff) Scientologists.

===========================================================================

Date: XXX, XX XXX 199X XX:XX:XX -0700
From: Ron Chester <[email-masked]>
Subject: [deleted for security reasons]
To: [email-masked]
Message-ID: <XXX@apollo>

[personal detail & greeting deleted]

Here's the story.  As TNX Administrator, it is sometimes necessary for me
to look around ars a bit, usually in response to applications for TNX that
have been submitted.  I have also become our liaison with the person
handling the Internet at OSA Int, and we have developed a good working
relationship.  As a result of a number of comm cycles with OSA , I learned
that the Church does not want any Church public posting to this entheta
forum.  We have never made a point of this publicly on TNX, because we
found that, in the past, TNX posts that discussed how to handle ars
somehow ended up reposted to ars. 

As an alternative, I worked up a write-up that addresses the most commonly
asked questions about ars.  I send this to people when needed on a case by
case basis, rather than posting it to all of TNX.

Now a while back I was looking around ars, because of an application to
TNX that we had received.  In the course of doing that, I discovered that
you had posted quite a few messages to ars.  So before saying anything to
you about it, I called OSA to see if they had changed their view of this
at all.  Once again, I found that they consider that it is their hat to
handle ars, and they do not want any public posting to ars for any reason. 
They asked me to refer you to the relevant policies, and to ask you to
stop. 

So here goes.  I will separately email you (from my other address) our
write-up of TNX rules about handling entheta on the net.  I want to
emphasize an LRH quote that we use at the beginning of that writeup: 

   "The man who has no impulse to set things right is insane."
         -- LRH, "Operation Manual for the Mind" lecture

So we acknowledge your efforts as stemming from a sane impulse to clean up
this entheta site!  And there is even a possibility that you did it in
coordination with your local DSA. (If so, please let me know.) I have
found that sometimes there is a lack of coordination between OSA Int and
the local level.  In any case, here are some policies that would be good
to look at.  Please take the time to look them over in their original
form, not just the parts I have quoted here.  And recognize that my
intention is not to make you wrong in any way, or to indicate anything 
about your case or any ethics situation.  But this tech needs to be 
aligned, as it applies to ars (which LRH never wrote about specifically).

1.  Data Series 43RA: Evaluation and Programs (OEC Mgmt Series, Vol 1, 
    p. 172)

    This just establishes that OSA has the hat of "handling the public 
    and acceptance of Scientology..."

2.  HCOPL 16 Aug 66 Iss II Clearing Course Security (OEC Vol 1, p. 627)

    "Any sort of squirrel activity, contact with declared SPs or suppressive
     groups... would be grounds for suspicion."  It also states that there
     would be no grounds for suspicion, if unsolicited mailings received 
     from suppressive groups are turned in unread to the Ethics Officer.

3.  HCOPL 7 Jun 65 Iss II Entheta Letters (OEC Vol 2, p. 661-9)

    This is the basic hat write-up on how to handle entheta comm, which is
    the dead file system.

    "Therefore it is illegal as can be to handle entheta letters or ethics
     reports in any other way than to and by Ethics."   -- p. 663

    "Dead file does *not* cover business firms demanding bills, government
     squawks or dangerous suits or situations. [OSA now handles the latter-
     RC] It covers only entheta public letters received on any line including
     SO #1."   --p. 664

    "Ethics seeing somebody answer an entheta letter ... should order a 
     hearing on the person."   --p. 666

    "It is the *full* intention that:
     4. That the line be cut completely."   --p. 667

4.  Admin Know-How Series 16: Suppressives and the Administrator
    (OEC Vol 1, p. 1028-30)    

    "An SP (suppressive person) is unable to change because he cannot,
     himself, confront.  He is badly "out of valence".   --p. 1028

    "Our policy is we don't waste time on them.  To cater to them is to
     betray 90 percent of the population. So we set them aside for 
     another day.   --p. 1029

5.  HCOB 10 Sep 83 PTSness and Disconnection (OEC Vol 1, p. 1041-4)

    "If one has the right to communicate, then one must also have the
     right to not receive communication from another."   --p. 1041

    "The term "disconnection" is defined as a self-detemined decision
     made by an individual that he is not going to be connected to 
     another.  It is a severing of a communication line."   p. 1042

    "An Ethics Officer can encounter a situation where someone is
     factually connected to a suppressive person, in present time.  This
     is a person whose normal operating basis is one of making others
     smaller, less able, less powerful.  He does not want anyone to get
     better, at all."   --p. 1043

    "In such an instance the PTS isn't going to get anywhere trying to
     "handle" the person.  The answer is to sever the connection.

    "To fail or refuse to disconnect from a suppressive person not only
     denies the PTS case gain, it is also *supportive* of the suppressive--
     in itself a Suppressive Act.  And it must be so labeled."   --p. 1044

6.  PR Series 27: The Enemy Line (OEC Mgmt Series Vol 3, p. 102-3)
  
    "There is a maxim in PR or advertising that A MESSAGE MUST BE REPEATED
     OVER AND OVER TO IMPINGE ON A GIVEN PUBLIC.

     An enemy group usually originates several carefully worked-out entheta
     statements."   --p. 102
 
    "NEVER FORWARD AN ENEMY CAMPAIGN ON YOUR OWN OR OTHER LINES!
  
     Don't deny rumors for that is what they want you to do."   --p. 103

Whew, that's a lot!  BTW the three most important are probably #3, 5, & 
6, especially #6.

This is what I have observed on ars.  Nearly everytime an on-lines Scn'ist
posts a message, regardless of its content, it brings on an entheta
response (and sometimes many) from the sps.  So even though you may not
quote their entheta (and thus forward it along), your response gives them
a reason to state it again, and again and again... 

I believe this may be the main reason OSA does not want public posting to
ars.  I have seen threads started by Scn'ists that have been followed by a
dozen or more entheta replies.  Or a Scn'ist will post a reply to a
thread, and this will spawn another batch of entheta responses.  So if we
post anything, no matter how theta, to an entheta forum, it can cause the
volume of entheta to increase many times over.  That's why the sps love it
when Scn'ists start posting to ars.  It gives them another chance to state
their enemy lines over and over again. 

I created TNX so there would be a theta forum for Scn'ists, so that they
could leave ars behind.  Per #4 above, I think your time would be better
spent on TNX, rather than messing around with ars.  Leave that task to the
staff at OSA. 

Again, no make wrong intended.  Let me know if you have any questions or
disagreements on any of this. 

Thanks... Ron Chester
          TNX Administrator

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!news.inet.tele.dk!enews.sgi.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!sthomson Mon Sep 30 13:44:37 1996
Xref: elastic alt.fan.grady-ward:28 alt.religion.scientology:54746 misc.legal.computing:2295
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,alt.fan.grady-ward,misc.legal.computing
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!news.inet.tele.dk!enews.sgi.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!sthomson
From: [email-masked] (shelley thomson)
Subject: **Biased Journalism** V2no18 The Jackson Story
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 08:10:58 GMT
Lines: 2877
Sender: [email-masked]

     **Biased Journalism** : a net magazine designed to compensate for 
     the shortcomings of the professional news media.          

     Copyright 1996 Shelley Thomson; all rights reserved.  

     Mail, articles and comment may be directed to <[email-masked]>.  
     Netiquette will be observed with all communication, except for the
     following:  harassing or threatening mail will be posted to the
     net immediately.        

**Biased Journalism**  Volume 2, issue 18      September 25, 1996.  
  
Contents:  A Knock On The Door:  The story of Alex and Ariane
           Jackson.  Introduction; Interview with Alex and
           Ariane; Visits by OSA and Alex's Conclusions;
           the Police Report; the Negotiation transcript;
           A Message to the Net.
         
Read at your own risk.  This is **Biased Journalism**!

1.  A Knock On The Door

        In September on ars Ariane began her story this way:

        "My name is Ariane Jackson and I intend to share some of the
information I have concerning the cult known as Scientology.  This
information covers the experiences of myself and some of my friends
and relatives during many years.  Some of this information is
supported by very complete, original documentation.

       "I was involved in Scientology for 17 years and I attained the
highest available level, called "New OT8, Truth Revealed". I was also
trained as an "auditor" to "Class 6" and I have studied the
"technology" of "Class 12". I was a staff member at Flag Service
Organization, Inc. in Clearwater, Florida.  My husband [Alex] was
involved for 20 years, attained "Clear", was trained as an auditor and
was also on staff. My ex-husband [Albert] was involved for 14 years,
attained "OT7, Cause over Life", gave his fortune of several million
dollars to Scientology and died at the age of 59, within days of being
audited at Flag!

       "In Dec, 1995 my husband and I approached the "church" of
Scientology and requested that steps be taken to repair the damage we
had experienced as a result of our involvement.  We met with a
representative from Flag and specified the damage as clearly as we
could... [They received the cold shoulder.  Brian Anderson, Church of
Scientology, Flag Service Organization, replied accusing them of
blackmail and an attempt to extort funds.  Independently the church
contacted the Procureur General of the State of Geneva requesting
a police investigation for blackmail and extortion; this went to
a hearing, and was denied; the church was required to pay the
Jacksons' costs.]

        "We received a third response during a live TV broadcast in
Paris when I was interviewed and described some of my experiences in
the cult.  The Scientology representative stated that I had made an
offer to withdraw from the show if they paid me 17 million dollars.
This I had never done.  I have filed a suit for defamation."

Ariane goes on to describe what she plans to reveal:
        
        "1. The destructive effects on myself, on my personality, on
my behaviour and on my life of receiving Scientology levels including
OT8, auditor training, "ethics", and being subjected to the level of
control exercised by Scientology staff on other staff and public.

        "2. The various methods used to persuade my ex-husband to pay
money.  These included daylong interviews by groups of salesmen,
"investment opportunities", donations to translate a book, donations
to "protect Scientology", etc., etc. Two of the "investment
opportunities" where he loaned almost half a million dollars in 1989
to a "patron" and a "patron meritorious" of the International
Association of Scientologists"(IAS) turned out to be very bad
"investments"....My ex-husband tried for MORE THAN FOUR YEARS to get
them to pay what they owed but failed and actually died in the
attempt.  Their failure to repay him added to the fact he had given
so much of his money to Scientology ruined him financially. The
stress arising from his bad financial position aggravated a heart
condition for which he could not afford proper medical care and
which he had been persuaded Scientology would resolve. This illness
killed him before he could recover the money owed to him.

       "The "church" of Scientology was fully aware of this
situation and was actually claiming to be administering "justice" in
the affair, since my ex-husband was prohibited, by Scientology policy,
from taking ANY legal action. At the time of his death Darling and
Rhyner owed him around 650,000 dollars!! This is the "result" obtained
by the cult's business and ethics "technology". Darling raised his
status in the cult from "patron with honors" to patron meritorious
shortly after my ex-husband "invested" in his company. This step is
achieved by paying IAS around 150,000 dollars..." 

        "3. The effects of Scientology on my life as a wife and
mother, including two divorces, a husband (to whom I was married
before the ex-husband already mentioned) who was persuaded by auditing
that he was Jesus Christ reincarnated and could perform miracles but
could not keep a job to support our three young children.  How I
allowed my children to be taken from me.

        "My husband and I, during the period of our involvement, had a
total of 4 divorces and 5 marriages with 6 children involved.  To
prove this problem is not confined to just my husband and I, a review
of the marital experiences of all my ex-husbands and his ex-wives
gives totals as follows:- for 6 Scientologists, 9 divorces, 11
marriages and 13 children with broken homes.  Of these 6 people only
3 are currently married; my husband and myself are two of them.  Only
two mariages have survived and one of them is mine.  (I have just
heard that my 16 year old daughter, who is at the cult's center in
East Grinstead, England, is MARRIED!) This is the result of the
cult's "technology" for resolving marital problems..."
              
Albert Jaquier ultimately wrote to both David Miscavige and Guillaume
Lesevre [Executive Director International] pleading for assistance in
collecting his money from the Scientologists who had borrowed it.  He
asked Lesevre for a refund of the money his major debtor had donated
to the church to earn "Patron Meritorious" status.  Nothing happened.

One of his many faxes to Scientologist Jody Darling was finally
answered as follows by Robert Eakin:

"Mr Jaquier
Quit being a victim.  You will be paid when there is money available
to pay you. Right now all monies are invested towards production that
will result in funds to pay you-- no matter how much time and paper
you waste this way it will not result in getting paid any earlier.
Your entheta comm is not OK and you have been deadfiled (Scientologese
meaning any communication received from Albert would be immediately
filed away, not shown to anyone and not answered.  It is from a
policy used by Scientology orgs to deal with critical mail they
receive).....I do not pass this comm on to Jody nor do I give him
your repetitious.......(illegible)." (end of quote)

On March 2 1994 the Deputy Chaplain for Courts wrote admitting that
Darling's loan had been arranged by an IAS salesman named Hans Peter
Tschupp.

Ariane published the last series of entries from Albert's diary.  It
is a wrenchingly sad chronicle of his last struggle against poverty
and illness.  As his business failed, due to the unpaid loans, his
health declined.  He was unable to afford medical care for the
illness which claimed his life, and which he had once believed that
Scientology could cure.

After many difficulties with the church in Europe Alex and Ariane
and Michael, Ariane's nine-year-old son by Albert, arrived in the
United States.  They were found by OSA with shocking
swiftness.

2.  Interview with ariane and Alex Johnson  -  9/16/96

[We will talk with both Ariane and Alex Jackson.  We begin with
 Ariane, who is AJ, below.  Ariane speaks excellent English with
 a musical French accent.  Alex, whom we shall meet later, has a
 Scottish burr.]

bj:  I gather you've had some interaction with OSA.  Did this happen
     because you posted your story to the internet?

AJ:  Yes, I think it happened because I posted OT VIII to the
     internet.

     [actually Ariane posted a description of OT VIII from her own
     memory, not the church document.]

     Because they are very worried, they have a lot of attention on OT
     VIII because I think it was the first time the new OT VIII was
     made public.

bj:  so you think it was the OT VIII and not the story of your
     ex-husband.

AJ:  Yes, I think it was that too but they have a lot of attention
     on the confidential material.

     I am sure the story of my ex-husband has a lot of importance too
     because I don't think they want that public, you know.  It is not
     nice for the church.

bj:  well, what makes you think this OT VIII is correct?

AJ:  Because I did it.  I did it in '88.  So I know what I have
     written is right.

bj:  what kind of results did you get?

AJ:  Nothing really.  Incredible disappointment.  Because there is
     a lot of hype in the church around OT VIII.  Like 'we have
     abilities, we have a lot of skill,' and I had nothing.  I came
     back, I was sick, I was in bad shape, I had a headache, I had
     absolutely not what was promised to me.

bj:  and did you tell anyone in the church that you were unhappy about
     your results?  

AJ:  No because if you tell that to somebody you have to back to do
     other action or to do ethics.  And I had absolutely no desire to
     do anything else.

bj:  did you leave the church at some point?

aj:  I didn't [leave] until 1993.  I did some courses, but no I didn't
     speak at all about my disappointment.

bj:  what is causing you to speak out now?

AJ:  In 1993 [my husband and I took a withdrawal] from the
     church and we began to think about that.  We read the book of
     Corydon [Bare Faced Messiah] and A Piece of Blue Sky  [by Jon
     Atack].  It [the church] was a lot of lie.  The reality was
     totally different than what they showed to us.  And I had a lot
     of [ethics actions] and duress with them.  I couldn't see my son
     during seven months because they show my ex-husband that I was
     somebody ugly, or somebody dangerous for my son.  I had a lot of
     problems with them in fact.  I was under duress very often.

bj:  what happened when you finally left the church, and what made
     you do that?  And how did you leave?  Did you tell them you were
     leaving, or were you declared, or what?

AJ:  When I decided to leave the church I had my three older children
     who were working in the church.  So I decided "I don't want to do
     anything, I don't want to speak about anything because I want to
     stay in a relationship with my children."  And it was in November
     of 1995 I went to Switzerland to be a witness for my friend who
     was an ex-scientologist, and the fact [that] I go as a witness
     makes my decision public.

bj:  in a court trial against the church?

AJ:  Yes.

bj:  did your friend want his money back, or what was the situation?

AJ:  No, he doesn't want his money back but he had a lot of problems
     with the church.  In fact he was very disappointed and he had the
     problem with his throat--he's a musician--and he said to let him
     go by a medical doctor.  They do processes on him [instead] and
     it doesn't resolve his problem so he decides to leave the church.
     He was OT VII, he was very high.  And I did a witness because I
     know him since a long time and I know him, he's a friend.

bj:  how many years were you in the church?

AJ:  Seventeen years.  I began in '76 and left in '93.

bj:  did it cost you a lot of money?

AJ:  Yes.  I did a calculation with my ex-husband.  It was $47,000.  

bj:  often people pay more, or so I understand.

AJ:  Yes.  My ex-husband paid around five million dollars.  But not
     just for courses and other things, but he gave a lot of
     donations.  [and the bad loans -ed.]

bj:  well, what caused you to put OT VIII on the internet?  

AJ:  Because I saw the old OT VIII which was on internet was not
     correct.  And [I don't want for other people to go as far as
     this and not be aware of what the level is about].  It is really
     to make people aware of the lies.

bj:  when you thought about posting it to the internet, was this
     a scary thought for you?  What did you think the church would do?

AJ:  yes, it was a scary thought.  I know that I will receive
     harassment.  Because I know the church doesn't want that known
     and believed, but for me, I have to inform other people that
     these charges, all that is wrong and is false.  If someone goes
     in scientology and pay a lot of money, certainly at the end he
     will be disappointed.  He will have debts or a lot of problems.
     This why I decided to post OT VIII.

bj:  when you were sick after you finished OT VIII, what happened to
     you?

AJ:  I had a very bad headache.  I had fever, I had a cold.  And I was
     so ashamed, you know, to be sick because when you finish OT VIII
     you should be able to undo any sickness.  So I hide from other
     people from the church because for me I couldn't understand why
     I am sick.  Even a little cold is not normal.

bj:  [sympathetically] how long did this sickness last?

AJ:  One week.  But very often after I get headache, and cold or
     fever.  Very bad headache.  But I didn't say anything about it
     because I wanted no more heartache.

bj:  do you usually have bad headaches, or was this the first time?

AJ:  No I had these kind of very bad headache after some of my OT
     levels, like OT V, OT VII  I was sick.  After OT VIII I had this
     bad headache and bronchopneumonia.  I will not say it is because
     of OT VIII, but for me I couldn't understand why I am sick when I
     have done this level.

bj:  you felt ashamed.

aj:  Exactly.  

bj:  so you posted OT VIII and then what happened?  You waited for
     the roof to fall in?

AJ:  Yes.  Really I didn't think it will be as fast as that.

bj:  what happened?

AJ:  I think two days after we posted OT VIII they found us.  They
     arrive and-

bj:  how do you think you were found?

AJ:  I have no idea.  Because we just arrived from Switzerland three
     weeks ago.  And nobody knew where we were living and our phone
     number.  It is possible they followed me.  I have no idea.

bj:  So what happened on the day that you knew they had found you?
     How did you know?

AJ:  because they arrived at the door.

bj:  who?

AJ:  Three people from OSA.  It was around eleven o'clock [in the
     morning].

bj:  a bright sunny day?

AJ:  [amused] Yes, a bright sunny day.  Like we have in Florida.

bj:  and did see them coming?

AJ:  No.  I heard the knock at the door and I saw these two women and
     a man.  And they said "we are with the church, don't close the
     door."  And they were in civil [casual clothes].

bj:  did they look well dressed?

AJ:  Yes.  The women had pants and the guy had pants with a shirt.
     But very nicely dressed.  Very clean.
 
     They said "we are from the church.  Don't close the door."

     And I was so surprised because I never thought it would be the
     church of scientology.  They just said "the church."  I thought
     maybe it is another church, like a Baptist church.  So I said
     "I want to ask my husband," and I closed the door.  I asked Alex
     to come, and he opened it, and they told him they were the church
     of scientology.

     And Alex closed the door and they spoke through the door.  They
     asked Alex to speak to them, because they had a few questions to
     ask him.  [Ariane talks to Alex]

     They said they wanted to speak with us because they just wanted
     to ask a few questions, it will be not long.  And as they were
     speaking through the door we go to our bedroom and Alex opens
     the window.  And we begin by speaking through the window.  

     They asked about the post we did on Internet about confidential
     work.  And they said you know, it is trade secret and copyright.
     And things like that.  And Alex said "tell us what you want.
     But we will not answer to any questions."  So they begin by
     speaking about trade secret[s] and copyright[s].  They said
     they don't want to use a lawyer.  They would like to do a normal
     speech with us to handle the situation.  They don't want to use
     a lawyer if they don't have to use a lawyer.  And they go on
     a little bit like that.
  
bj:  yes, I see.   It sounds like Alex is pretty much on top of the 
     situation.  What is his background?

AJ:  Yes, he's on top because he speaks better English than me.  And
     he has more strength.  Me, I am more scared about them.

bj:  Has Alex been in the church before?

AJ:  Yes, for twenty years.  He left at the same time as I did.

     He began in Scotland.  But he went less far in the upper levels.
     He went as clear, and I went way up.
  
[now Alex Jackson takes up the story.  He is AL, below]

bj:  The church people found you and you were talking with them
     through the bedroom window.

AL:  I said "We are not answering any questions.  We simply want you
     to say your piece and then go.  So they spoke about how they had
     a legal responsibility to safeguard their trade secrets and they
     had to show their lawyers who were putting pressure on them to
     demonstrate to the lawyers that they were taking effective action
     to protect copyrighted trade secret material.  They didn't want
     to resort to legal action because nobody won except the lawyers.
     It was expensive for them and expensive for us.  And they
     described the gory details of how a lawsuit would basically
     destroy our lives.  
 
bj:  well, let's get to those gory details.  What did she say?

AL:  Well, she said at one point, "you want a life.  You have
     children."  She looked in Ariane's direction.  You don't want to
     leave [them with nothing].  Use all your money" and she goes on
     and on.  Because when you go in the court system you're on
     the conveyor belt and just, whoa, and do you know what it's
     like?  And they said, 'it's like a war.'  It's 'terrible,
     terrible, terrible.'

     That's been the tack all the way through in all the meetings.
     With any pretext they'll start on stories about Dennis Erlich,
     about Grady Ward, Arnie Lerma, about what it's like for these
     people.  They paint a picture that they don't have a life
     anymore because they decided to make a legal thing against the
     church of scientology, they just don't have a life anymore.
     It's finished for them.  

     I shut them up because they just kept going on about it.   

bj:  What did they want from you?

AL:  They wanted an agreement that we wouldn't divulge any more
     confidential materials such as OT VIII and the Running Program,
     that we had divulged.  And they didn't mention a release, they
     just kept saying that we have to ensure that nothing else, no
     more of our trade secrets are made public, go on the Internet.

bj:  did they ever show you the document they wanted you to sign?

AL:  Not the first day.  The second day they produced it.

bj:  So the first day, how long did the interaction last?  

AL:  An hour.  It is difficult [to judge], we were so wrapped up.
     Ariane reckoned that it was more than an hour.

bj:  at the end of that hour how did you feel?

AL:  Ohhh.  Stressed out. 'How did they find us?  What are we going to
     do?  Are we in legal trouble?'  [and so on]  'What will we do?
     I think we handled it well, but I don't know.  Maybe we said
     something [we shouldn't have], you know?'

     The fact [is] that we didn't answer any questions, or, we
     certainly didn't give them any agreement.  Toward the end they
     were pushing for an agreement, they said well,--I had the
     impression they had to go back with something-- they said, well,
     we need your assurances.  Are you going to discuss this with us,
     or are you going to continue to post stuff, or can we resolve
     this, is it going to become a legal matter?  And we just said,
     we're not making any agreement.  

bj:  Did they say they'd come back the next day?

AL:  Well, they wanted to go wait in the car for a half hour, and then
     we give them a decision.  They said 'well, how long is it going to
     take you to decide what you are going to do here?'  I said "we're
     slow.  We have a thing about decisions.  We're not too fast on
     decisions."  And they got angry.  They wanted that decision, they
     wanted a promise, they wanted to take something back with them.
     They were unhappy.

     At the end it was getting repetitive.  They were trying to get
     something.  And at the end I just said you are not getting any
     answers, you are not going to get any promises, you are not going
     to get any agreements from us.  Do you have anything else to say
     that you have not previously said?  If not, please go.

     They realized they were not getting anything.  So they left. They
     were unhappy.

bj:  I see.  Now what did you do after they left?

AL:  We discussed it.  How did they find us?  We patted ourselves on the
     back.  We obviously handled it good.  What do we do now?

bj:  do you think anyone stayed to watch your place?  Were there any
     watchers outside that you saw?

AL:  No.  

bj:  Did you worry about that?

AL:  At the time I don't think so.

bj:  Well, did they come back the next day?

AL:  They came back the next day, yep.  It was after lunch.  The same
     three.  I can give you two of their names.  The woman who was the
     chief spokesman, her name is Jacqueline Kevenaar.  She's from
     Holland.  She said she was from CSI but later I said, "Are you
     OSA?" and she said "Yes."  But then later she changed it back to
     CSI.  So officially they claim to be CSI.  

     The guy, his name is Edward Parkin.  The third, her name is Joan.  

BJ:  What were their faces like?  

AL:  Oh, full of warmth.  And friendly and understanding.  Very very
     nice.  And when we started talking through the window they were
     saying 'oh, you've had bad handling.  We would like you to know
     that we realize that this situation has not been handled well.
     Your concerns should have been addressed before.  That was an
     error on our part."  and blah, blah...  

     Because we had a meeting in Geneva with someone from Flag in
     December 1995.  When we told them what we considered the damages
     that we received as a result of being involved.  And after that
     we received a complaint in Geneva that we had attempted blackmail
     and extortion.  We won it, but they appealed it twice.
     Eventually they had no more appeals to go.  So I mentioned this
     to them the first day and the guy said "yes, but it was dropped!"
     as though this were a good thing for the church of scientology.

     And I said "well, so we had your reply."  And they said "well,
     that was done by the church in Zurich and it was actually
     done without our permission.  And it shouldn't have been done.
     It was a bad thing, it was a bad idea.  We didn't agree with that.
     They shouldn't have done it."  blah, blah, blah...

     The first time they were relieved they could speak to us and they
     were nice.  [they said we had] bad handling.  We could have said
     L. Ron Hubbard [untranslatable] and they would have said "you're
     so right, it's true".   You know, that kind of thing?

bj:  How old were these people?

AL:  Fortyish, late thirties.

bj:  Did the women wear any makeup?

AL:  Yes, they were wearing makeup.  Not a lot, a little bit.  They
     [the women] both said they had been in scientology more than 20
     years.  The chief spokesman  was a tall, slim blonde, kind of
     sandy blonde.  The other woman was shorter, longer hair, less
     pleasant, more hard looking.  They guy is a little bit, kind of,
     goofy.  But I think it's an act.  

     There was another visit later the same day.

     We were eating dinner.  We heard the knock on the door.  I
     didn't answer the door; I just went straight to the window.  And
     she had the Jody Darling post.  It's the second post we put on.
     It's about this guy Jody Darling.  He's high up in the church,
     he's public.  And he borrowed $200,000 from Ariane's ex-husband
     but he didn't pay it back.

     She had a printout.  She was outside the window waving this thing
     at me.  And she was angry.  She said "Look, this is the kind of
     thing that we can handle.  I have the authority to do something
     about this.  I could have handled this.  This is what I want to
     handle.  Right now you are eating" -I was chewing- "but we'll be
     back tomorrow and we'll discuss this.  And we'll handle it."
     This was the blonde, Jacqueline.

bj:  So on the second day they showed up after lunch.

AL:  Right.  The first thing, they started discussing the money thing
     with [Ariane's] ex-husband and Jody Darling.  She [Jacqueline]
     wanted some more information about that because she said "we can
     assist you, we can resolve it with Jody Darling, by finding him,
     getting him to Clearwater.  We'll take care of everything."

     They were shouting about this money, and Ariane said "I don't
     like the way this discussion involves me."  She noticed the way
     the neighbors were starting to look, so she said "why don't we go
     somewhere?"  So we went to Denny's.

     We arrived and it was very nice.  It was relaxed, it was
     friendly.  Jacqueline had a pad.  She was very businesslike.
     She was asking questions about the estate of Albert, Ariane's
     ex-husband and what was happening.  And she actually knew that it
     was stuck in probate here in Clearwater.  She knew that, she was
     fishing to find out what we were doing.  Because--the executor
     in charge of this estate--she wanted to know if we were working
     with him to do any recovery on these debts.  

     She was pretending.   She said 'I need the information so we
     can work with you to do this, to solve this'  but she was
     actually trying to get information, to find out if we were
     working with the executor, she wanted to know if I had a lawyer,
     etc.

     When we were in Switzerland we had this guy representing us
     that they absolutely hated, and she wanted to know if we were
     still working with him.  We're not, and I told her that.  We
     probably told her more than we should have.  We fell for the
     story that she wanted to help us with this estate thing, but
     later we thought that she was trying to find out what danger
     we would present legally, you know.

bj:  How long did the conversation last?

AL:  In Denny's?  It was over an hour.

bj:  You just had coffee?  Or did you have food?

AL:  It was right after lunch.  We just had some coffee.  They had a
     bagel and a muffin or something.

bj:  Did she ask you to sign anything?

AL:  That was when she produced the release.  

bj:  Oh, really.  Did you keep a copy of it?

AL:  They refused to give us a copy.  I asked for a copy, they said
     "no, you can't get a copy."  

bj:  They wanted you to sign it and they wouldn't give you a copy?

AL:  No.

bj:  Well, what did it say?

AL:  Well, the first paragraph, I didn't even read it because it was a 
     list of people and churches and parts of the church that we were
     waiving any and all claims against, past, present, future, known,
     unknown, uh, whatever.

     Ariane had a version in French which was actually different
     from my version.  It was a totally different version.  [In] my
     version, after waiving all claims, there was a little bit in the
     top paragraph that said, I don't know how it was worded, but it
     mentioned that we had violated their copyright and in exchange
     for them not taking action on that, we were signing this release.
     It waived all our claims.  And then it said "I promise not to
     discuss or speak about anything I have experienced in scientology
     including experiences on staff and other information that is not
     widely known," and then went on to say anything confidential,
     anything blah, blah, unless I am subpoenaed.  If I am subpoenaed
     I promise I will immediately notify them.  At the end, I affirm
     that I am not under the effect of drugs, alcohol, bla, bla, bla.

bj:  Did you sign it?

AL:  (emphatically) No.  It also said, 'for each and every
     infringement I promise to pay $10,000.  

bj:  Was there any type of time limit on this contract?

AL:  No.  I mean it was past, present, future.  No limit.

     Ariane's had some extra on it.  She was not to speak to her 
     family, her children.  And they couldn't speak about it
     [scientology].  She could not divulge any of her experiences to
     them and they could not divulge any of her experiences to anyone
     else.

bj:  So the woman showed you these things.  And then what happened?

AL:  I started shaking my head as I was reading it.  And when I 
     finished it I said "can I have a copy?"  "No."  So I just gave it 
     back to her.  "Do you have a problem with it?" she said.  "Look,
     if there's a part--you don't like this one?  Anything you have a
     problem with, we can take it off.  If you want to write one
     yourself, you can write one yourself.  We can work something
     out."

bj:  Well, that sounds pretty reasonable.  What did you say?

AL:  [Laughing]  I said "we're not signing anything."

bj:  And she said?

AL:  I think she went back on, "we have to protect our
     confidentiality.  There has been a breach already, you have
     breached your agreement, you have violated our trade secrets and
     our lawyers are putting pressure on us, are demanding that we
     take action, that we get something equivalent to a court
     judgment, a restraint so that there will not be any further
     quoting or publishing of our secret church scriptures."

     We just held our position.  "We are not signing anything."
     And she said, well is there a point you have a problem with?
     And she actually scored one out, she took her pen and scored one
     out.

     I didn't want to have a discussion with her.  It sort of became
     a standoff.  One of them said "you need to talk to your lawyer."
     Because she knew we didn't have a lawyer.

bj:  Now were all three people present at this meeting, or just this
     one woman?  

AL:  All three.

bj:  And you didn't want to sign anything without legal advice.

AL:  Right.

bj:  And what was their response?

AL:  "Go talk to your lawyer.  And we'll meet again tomorrow."

bj:  And then?

AL:  And then we left on good terms.  It was very nice.  Everyone was
     smiling at everyone.  We felt we were making progress.

     We had a meeting the next day.

bj:  Where did you meet?

AL:  Well, the next day I had received some advice.   [someone]
     suggested not meeting with them or else taping the meeting.  

[Alex and Ariane discussed how to tape the meeting.  They
 decided against surreptitious taping as being underhanded and
 'playing their game.'  "We decided to open the door and shove the
 microphone in their faces," Alex said.  And that is what they did.]

     I opened the door and I said "do you mind if we tape it?"  They
     went white, and they said "No, sure, go right ahead."  And I said
     "we can't go to Denny's, I'm connected to the stereo.  One of you
     can come in.  You can come in [to the blonde] but we don't want
     three of you in here."  

     She said "well, can Ed come?  Because he knows about legal things."
	
     I said, "no, you come yourself and we tape it, or nothing."   So
     she was in agreement, she wanted to tape it because I was
     taping it.  But his tape recorder wouldn't work.

bj:  So he had a tape recorder with him?

AL:  Oh, yeah.  

bj:  Do you think he had used it before, maybe to tape things you
     said?

AL:  No, because it was like one of these tiny ones.  And it was in
     his briefcase, which was probably too far away to pick up
     [sounds].

bj:  Ok.  So he was just using it right then only it wouldn't work 
     then.

AL:  Right.  I don't know if he just said that or not.  But then he
     went off to get batteries for his tape recorder and he came back
     about ten minutes later.  At that point she didn't want to come in
     alone.

Al:  "Well, why don't you stay on the doorstep?  We'll have a
     meeting on the doorstep."   But she didn't want to do that
     because of the neighbors.  So I had a discussion with Ariane and
     we decided to allow the two of them in.  So the two of them came in.  

     They produced a general release again.  And they were pushing,
     pushing, pushing, and pushing.  And then there were the horror
     stories about Arnie, about Grady Ward, about what it's like to
     engage them in litigation.

[On the tape we hear Alex opening the door and saying hello, do you
 mind if we tape it?  Not at all, the scientologists reply, sounding
 nervous.  Alex calmly presents his demands.  He has described
 Jacqueline as upbeat, but she has a hard voice.  The emotional
 subtext of this meeting is tense and unfriendly.]

[Alex begins with the date, September 13, 1996 and his address.
 He asks the scientologists to identify themselves.  Jacqueline
 gives her name and states that she represents the Church of
 Scientology International.  Edward gives his name and states
 that he also represents the c of s Int.  "I am not a lawyer.
 We are civilians.  We represent our church, and we would like
 to speak to you and your wife to amicably resolve what, based
 on our conversation today and yesterday, is some kind of a
 problem."  

bj:  So how long did the meeting last?

AL:  Almost an hour and a half. 

bj:  What ended it?

Al:  Well, they spoke about the release and they wanted it signed.  I 
     said this is a general guide, this is a shut-up about all of our
     experiences.  She said no, no, you don't understand.  It's just
     for your experiences on staff and the confidential materials.  So
     I actually read to her one of the paragraphs that specifically
     said "I promise not to say anything about my experiences in 
     scientology including staff."  And I read this to her two or three
     times, and she kept saying 'well, you interpret it means anything
     but it's really just on staff.'  

     It was becoming silly.  I looked at the guy and he was
     smiling.  And I said "he can't keep a straight face."  He was
     nodding and saying "this is general, this is general" so I 
     dropped it.  

     They did the confidential, all that stuff.  And then she
     was ready to leave, and they stand up to leave, and I said
     "wait a minute.  Whoa, whoa.  What about the state of our 
     [concerns]?  What about over a million dollars that is owed
     to this estate by a scientologist?"  Between the two meetings
     we had [posted] the diary of Albert.  Now with interest [the
     debt] is over a million dollars.

bj:  You are talking about the scientologists who owe money?

AL:  Yes.  And I'm talking about Darling who borrowed the money
     from Albert, and shortly after he paid the $150,000 to IAS.

bJ:  Is that all on the tape?

AL:  Yes.  

bj:  Well, let's move out to how that meeting ended.  

AL:  It was friendly.  There was laughing and joking.  Just
     before the end the guy said something strange.  He said "it
     is difficult to get people to do something that is requested
     by two people who are guilty of suppressive acts, who by
     church tenets are guilty of suppressive acts, which are the
     absolute worst--(Alex can't remember the exact words)
     actions anyone could do against the church."  I didn't
     realize he was referring to *us* as the people who were doing 
     the worst possible acts against the church.  

     That was just before the end.  And it kind of became
     heavy.  But the meeting finished.  They wanted to come by
     the next day, which would be Saturday, but we said that we
     have a friend all weekend.  There will not be a school.  We
     will not discuss this in front of him [Michael]; we don't
     have anybody to take care of him.  

     They said "oh, we can come and Joan can take him to
     the pool and play with him, [!] maybe we can all go to the
     pool.

     No, it will be Monday before we can have another
     meeting, [Alex said].    They said "well, we'll come back 
     tomorrow.  We'll just check.  And if we can, we can ask you 
     some questions or have a re-discussion."  We said ok, fine. 
     And on Saturday we took off at lunchtime for the beach to
     make sure we weren't there.  They came back Saturday
     evening around 8.  I answered the door.  It was her and the
     guy.

     She said "I just have some questions about Albert's
     estate."  And I said "no, I refuse to discuss this in 
     front of the child."

     I think they are using that [the estate] as a hook
     because they think that is the thing we want to talk about.
     They think we want money from them,  and so 'if we talk
     about that they'll talk to us'.  She said "just a couple
     of questions."  I said no, it will have to be Monday,
     sorry, goodnight.  

     We decided Saturday that we are finished with the
     meetings.  We have the tape, and there is nothing more we
     have to gain.

bj:  What do you want to do now?

Al:  Put the ball in their court.  We don't think they have
     a valid legal action.  Although that's never stopped them
     before.  I mean, they can start harassing us with legal suits
     that have no validity.  But they have a problem because
     they run the risk of OT VIII, if they want to do a suit
     against us they have to prove that Ariane infringed their
     trade secrets or their copyrights.  They run the risk of it
     being discussed in the court.  So I think that they are in a
     sticky position.  

     Their first attempt was, 'maybe we will get these
     suckers to sign something.  Scare them, and get them to
     sign something.'   If that doesn't work they'll probably
     get together with their lawyer 'what can we do?' 

bj:  Have you noticed anything else?  People lurking outside
     the house, or being followed or anything?

Al:  Nope.  Yesterday Ariane's car, the little door for the
     fuel cap was open.  I felt 'aw, they put sugar in the gas,'
     so I drained some gas off to check.  We are sort of paranoid,
     you know?  [He describes some other precautions he takes to
     preserve their privacy.]

     Last week when they were here every day--Wednesday,
     Thursday, Friday--we were just wrapped up in it.  That's all
     we talked about.  That's all we thought about.  We couldn't
     sleep.  We were just stressed out.  

bj:  What would you like to have happen right now?

Al:  A normal life.  We came here to try and have a normal life.
     We felt that we had to do something, that we couldn't just go
     off and drop scientology, go into a new life without saying
     something.  It wasn't revenge.  Because we've had three
     years of going through the original suicidal depression.  

     I don't know if you know about that, but I think it's common
     [when people leave the church].  Because you're hyped up on all
     this hope.  You know that every problem in your life will be
     resolved by scientology.  That is a promise.  Then you read a
     book and a month later all that hope is gone.  You have a life
     that has been stopped for twenty years or something.  And
     your development and normal maturity hasn't occurred for
     twenty years.  And you're confronted by, you're middle
     aged, you are confronted by a life that is destroyed, and
     no money.  All these wierd ideas about people and how
     they're all wogs and stupid, and filled with BTs and 
     clusters, and crazy,  And you now have to confront this
     without the scientology crutch.  

     And you also have this idea that 'a body is just a body.  It is
     something that you use sixty years and discard.  And this is
     turning around in your head and you're saying 'this life is
     basically finished.'  I'm talking personally.  I just had the
     idea that I should just scrap this and go be a baby again, you
     know?  I mean, you look at your life and-  it's like coming off
     of drugs, I imagine.  I don't know, I've never experienced that,
     but I imagine it is like that.  In alcoholism, everything is ugly
     and you've got to confront that.  And you don't want to.  And you
     don't have anything to use to confront it with. 

bj:  Well, what do you want to do with your life now?

Al:  Get some kind of professional qualification, get some kind of way
     to make money other than driving a truck, which is what I've been
     doing.

bj:  Do you need help with that?  Do you have any type
     of support?  

Al:  Actually we managed to borrow some money when we were in
     Switzerland from different people.  So that was why we came here.
     To study, and to do some stuff.  We'd like to be able to continue
     that without fear and harassment and legal actions, and having
     to spend all the money on a lawyer.  Depends on what they do.  If
     they give us notice of a legal action we need a lawyer, they need
     a retainer, and then... we just didn't think about this before we
     made the posts.  

     We didn't feel that we could just go and drop it and forget it.  

bj:  How do you feel now?  Are you worried about the church
     doing other things?

AL:  Yes.  Our viewpoint is, they have to do something.  They
     can't allow us to be-  we have some very damaging information
     on the money, Ariane's ex-husband, some of Ariane's experiences
     with her children and friends and acquaintances that were
     blown, OT VIIIs that were sick, problem... so we would like to
     be able to expose all this shit.  But I don't think that they
     can allow that to happen.

bj:  They can sue you for copyright infringement, but I don't
     think they can stop you in any legal way from publishing your
     experiences.

AL:  Ariane's ex-husband kept incredible files on all this financial
     craziness.  Fraud, loans...ah, it's a mess.  It's terrible, what
     they do to you to get money from you.  And the money always ends
     up in the same place.  It always ends up in the church.  You have
     these guys doing all this craziness and getting their cuts and
     their commissions, but they have to be putting it in the church.

     The rich guys that come to Clearwater, and these vultures sitting
     waiting--it's ugly.  And they come in and take these guys, they
     offer these "investments" but they're not investments.  They're
     called investments, but the money is actually going to the church
     of scientology.

bj:  Is there anything you would like to say to the people
     on the internet who are reading this?

Al:  [thinks for a minute]  Yes.  My personal opinion is
     that scientology has within it the seeds of its own destruction.
     I don't know when it will happen, but it will happen.  Because
     Hubbard, when he was alive, he changed it.  He had to change
     it to get new gimmicks and new stuff all the time.  And he had
     to explain why it didn't work, make a discovery about why
     it didn't work.  And since he died they keep changing it, they
     keep discovering his notes that someone had stolen and blah,
     blah..  So they keep having to change it to say well, the reason
     it didn't work was because, and then they'll fix that.  A year or
     two later, 'well, we've made another discovery,' and so despite
     that they cannot change what he wrote, and he wrote some 
     crazy stuff, it will come back on them.

     Twenty, thirty years after the guy's dead they cannot still be
     finding his notes!

     They are going to be stuck in the trap of what he wrote.
     And this is what he wrote.  His purification rundown cannot be
     changed as medical knowledge progresses.  In twenty years it
     will be so obvious that the purification rundown is just
     nonsense.  And then they will do research on the E-meter and they
     will find that it doesn't work, Etc, etc.  Science will cut
     something out.  It will just become antiquated because
     they can't change. It's not science.  It's supposed to be
     science.  It isn't science.  It's faith.  It's lies and 
     it's going to stagnate.  

bj:  how long have you and Ariane been together?

Al:  Since 1990.  

bj:  Do you have any children?

Al:  No.  Well, we have Michael.  [son of Ariane and Albert]  He's
     nine years old now.  

bj:  How's Michael holding up under this?

Al:  Very well.  He's, his story is a crazy story.  Because when
     Albert and Ariane separated in 1990 she was told by the ethics
     officer to give custody of Michael to Albert.  Then a few months
     later Albert was persuaded that she was suppressive and bad, and
     so he would not allow her any contact with Michael for seven
     months.  Which made Michael crazy.  And then four years later he
     lost Albert.  You see, he had lost the stability of Ariane and
     he became stuck to Albert.  And then he lost Albert.  The guy
     didn't know what was up for a while.  

bj:  Terribly hard.

Al:  Nightmares, hyperactive, and scared, you know.  If he doesn't
     know where Ariane is he freaks.  

     He asks what's happening and we try to explain it to him in a way
     that doesn't scare him, that doesn't just feed him a line and
     treat him like a child.  Because he resents that.  

     He found his dad when his dad died.  By the time his dad died he
     stayed with his dad through the week and he came with us on the
     weekend.  And his dad died Saturday night in the night.  We took
     Michael back on the Sunday evening.  Michael went into
     the apartment and his dad was laying on the bed.  Michael went
     over to him and his dad was cold.  That was when he realized
     there was something wrong.

--------------------------

3.  OSA on Candid Camera:  notes by the Jacksons      
        
FIRST VISIT.

        We received our first visit from the cult's representatives on
Wed Sep 11. Ariane answered and, when she saw who it was, shut the door
in their faces. They stood outside the door, three of them, for about
10 minutes, pleading with us to speak to them. I took their photos;
they smiled.  They refused to go away.

        We decided to let them say their piece, so they could go away
since we knew they are not allowed to return without a "product".  We
spoke to them through a window, and asked them what they wanted to say.
They were unbelievably NICE, full of "ARC", warm.  The chief spokesman
was a blond who identified herself as Jaqueline Kevenaar, from OSA
(she also said she was from CSI), the other woman did not give her name
(she was later identified as Joan), she was dark-haired, and the third
was a man who gave his name as Edward. They sympathized with us, said
our situation had been handled very badly by previous "church"
members, etc., etc.

        It's a drill.  We were not impressed.  Whatever we said (we
did not say much) they were in total agreement, nodding vehemently, as
if it was the very thought they had.  We got bored with this and
pushed them to get to the point.  They said, still very nicely, that
our posts on OT8 (they admitted it was OT8) and the Running Program
(more confirmation) were in violation of the agreements we had signed
when we were given access to the data.  They were referring to
"non-discosure bonds" which are supposed to be signed before someone
is allowed to see anything "confidential", and [which] state that
he/she promises to pay $100,000 (or $1,000,000, or another amount
depending on how "hot" the data is) if he/she divulges or discusses
any of the data.  Not only is the legal validity of these bonds
questionable but they get lost and they forget to make people sign
them sometimes.

        Meanwhile, back at the window, which we had now opened so
they did not have to shout, they said they wanted to resolve the
conflict between us and the cult without resorting to lawyers, because
"nobody benefits but the lawyers", and it would be much better for
everybody concerned if we could discuss it.....(bla, bla, bla).  They
spent a great deal of time describing how gruesome it would be for us
if we refused to talk to them and forced them to resort to legal
action.  Jaqueline said to Ariane, " I am a mom too. You
have children, you want to get on with your life, you don't want
to......"etc.

        Jacqueline assured us that she has the power to totally
resolve our situation, because she is from CSI and not Flag.  She
said their only concern was that we had "violated" our signed
agreements and divulged their "sacred church scriptures" and that
was against the law and they had an obligation to protect their
religion.  She said they had no desire to prevent us from speaking
about our experiences and if we wanted to say "I worked 48 hrs
straight in the galley" we can say that.   All they wanted was
to ensure that no more confidential data appeared on the Net.

        They pushed for something from us, an agreement, a promise,
anything, and it became repetitive.  We said we had to think about it;
they said "for how long?  we'll wait in the car a half hour". I said
"we are slow, we have a thing about decisions, it comes from our
ethics experiences".  The dark-haired one got angry, said "why don't
we just acknowledge the past and handle what is here right now".

        We reiterated that we were not answering any questions or
making any agreements or promises.  They continued to push and try to
find some way to make us more amenable to being manipulated by them.
They referred to Ariane's statement about being uncertain that it was
the correct decision to post OT8, and tried to work on her uncertainty.
Didn't work. They tried to make us more relaxed using a technique
described by Hubbard where the exact reason for someone's anger
or annoyance or upset is supposedly located and then indicated to the
person.  Didn't work.  Of course, no matter how nice they are, we know
they think we are Suppressive Persons and Scientology won't work on us
for that reason.

        An interesting point came up when Jaquelin was assuring us
how familiar she was with our situation. I joked that she had probably
read our pc folders (folders containing all the supposedly
"confidential", intimate details of our lives that we had revealed in
auditing).  She admitted that she had but in a later visit denied that
she had but admitted that Joan had.  SO OSA IS STILL GOING THROUGH PC
FOLDERS. Under the circumstances, there is no pretext for them going
through our pc folders, we are SP's and ineligible for auditing.  The
only possible reason would be to find data they can use to manipulate,
embarass or intimidate us.

        Eventually we had to tell them to go away because it was
obvious they would stay until we did so.  They left their phone number
which is the # for OSA Legal, (813) 461 3052.

SECOND VISIT.

        The second visit was very brief and Joan was not there.
Jaquelin waved a printout of our post on Jody Darling and Ariane's
ex-husband, Albert Jaquier.  She appeared to be angry, and was
red-eyed.  She said that it (the situation with Darling) was something
she could resolve, she had the authority to resolve, etc.  She said
she did not have time but would return the next day.  Edward did not
say much, if anything, but nodded in confirmation of whatever she
said. They left without being told to.

THIRD VISIT.

        By the time they arrived, all three, for the third visit,
around 2pm, Thursday Sept 12, we had posted Albert's diary.  They
still managed to paste smiles on.  They used the hook of Albert's
estate to persuade us to talk to them.  When they started shouting
details through the window we suggested we adjourn to a nearby
Denny's and they were more than happy.

        At Denny's, Jaqueline was all business with pen and notepad
ready.  Under the pretext of ascertaining what the situation was with
the estate so they could "help", they pumped us to find out what we
had done and were doing to recover the money owed by Scientologists
to the estate (around $1,200,000).  Who was the executor?  Who was
representing us?  Etc., etc.

         When we had told them all they wanted to know and they had
given us the impression they were sincere about "helping" us get the
money owed by Scientologists to Albert's estate and therefore to
Ariane's son, they brought up the subject of our posting OT8 and the
Running Program.  They produced copies of a document titled "General
Release", copies of which they refused to give us.  Ariane's copy was
in French and was also differently worded.

        This release began with our waiving any and all claims, past,
present and future, known and unknown, against all these individuals
and entities that seemed to cover everyone connected with Scientology.
It also made us promise never to speak about "anything" related to our
experiences or knowledge of Scientology.  We also had to promise to
notify them if we were subpoenaed and had to speak.  It also included
that we would pay them $10,000 for each and every infringement of it.
Ariane's also stopped her speaking to her family members and them
speaking to others.

        We refused to sign, at which point Jaqueline said that they
could take off anything we did not like and she began drawing lines
through the parts she thought we did not like.  We reiterated that we
would not sign.  They continued to push and tried to interpret it for
us and persuade us that it did not say what it obviously said.  It was
not well done on their part, and was almost pathetically inept.

        During this meeting we also had a kind of theological
discussion, if that is actually possible with a Scientology fanatic.
Edward asked us what we were thinking when we posted the confidential
materials, and why we did it.  I tried to explain that I felt I had
been deceived by Hubbard concerning his "research" and his claimed
life accomplishments and I did not want others to have similar
experiences and lose many years of their lives before discovering the
truth about Scientology and Hubbard.  I mentioned that the data from
Gerry Armstrong's trial had shown me the truth about Hubbard.

        The women obviously did not know what I was talking about.
Edward jumped in and said first that Armstrong had stolen Hubbard's
papers and altered them, then he said he didn't alter them, then he
forgot what he was trying to say and Jaqueline had to jump in and
rescue Edward.  Both of the women asserted that they had been in
Scientology over 20 years and they had heard everything negative there
was to hear and not once had anyone ever been able to get them to
question Scientology.  They were proud of that.

        I thought about pointing out that that statement told me more
about their inability to question than it told me about Scientology,
but I had the impression they would not understand.  Joan was going
on at length about how many people had benefitted from Scientology
and, just because we had not, we should not try to spoil it for them.
She said she personally was very happy and had been lucky enough to
benefit greatly from Scientology and had not had negative experiences.

        I argued that it was not Hubbard's view that she had
benefitted because of luck, it was his view that if someone had bad
experiences, or was "unlucky", it was because that person had done
bad things in this or an earlier lifetime.  I even referenced the
issues covering it, but she did not know what I was talking about.
The discussion just petered out.

        I mentioned the spamming of ARS, and had to explain what
that was.  They looked at each other and said, "Who is doing that?"
They said they did not get to see ARS but someone gave them copies of
posts that they needed to have.

        At the end of the meeting, it was jovial, everyone was
smiling.  We were going to check on some points on the estate of
Albert.  They were apparently happy with the progress they had made,
they had got us out of our appartment, into Denny's, relaxed about
talking to them, they had introduced the release and started to
handle our disagreements.  We separated "on good terms".

THIRD VISIT.

        The third visit took place on Sept 13, between 3 and 4:30pm,
in our apartment. The participants were Jaquelin, Edward and
ourselves.  [The session was taped.  A transcript made by **Biased
Journalism** follows this account.]

        At the end of the third visit we told them we would not be
able to meet with them again until the following Monday.  They were
unwilling to accept that and said they would come by and "just check"
to see if they could talk to us.

        We made sure we were not at home all afternoon Saturday.

FOURTH VISIT.

        The fourth visit was also very brief. Jaquelin and Edward
came around 8:30pm Sat 14 Sept and she said she wanted to ask some
questions about Albert's estate.  I told them to come back on Monday,
but they persisted and I had to close the door in their faces.  They
left.

FIFTH VISIT.

        On Wed 18 Sept we sent a fax to Brian Anderson, OSA Flag
telling him we did not want any more visits or any harassment from
representatives of any of the cult's organizations.  We also mailed a
copy of the fax the same day.

        That same afternoon, around 5:30, Jaquelin and Edward came
back and told me they had a very good offer to make to Michael,
Ariane's son who has a claim on the $1.2 million owed to his
father's estate by Scientologists.  They wanted a meeting and I agreed
to have one the following day because if I hadn't they would have
stayed until I did.  They left.  We made sure we were not at home at
the agreed time for the meeting the next day.

SIXTH VISIT.

        On the evening of Thursday Sept 19 around 8:30 Edward came
alone and said he had come alone and wanted to discuss it.  I told him
to put it in writing; he persisted with the same line, and I closed
the door in his face.  He left:  Jaqueline was driving the car.

        Ten minutes later he returned with a note written on Fort
Harrison memo paper that said

                                              Thursday 7:45pm

              We invite you at Denny's in 30 minutes from now.
        
        It was unsigned.  Needless to say we did not go to Denny's.

SEVENTH VISIT.

        On Friday morning, Sep 20, we were returning to our apartment
after jogging and they were waiting outside.  Ariane was so scared
she went and hid in the laundry room and did not enter the apartment.
When they saw me coming towards the appartment, they came and
followed me the last 50 yards or so and were yelling at me such things
as "Where are you getting your advice, Alex?  From Armstrong, is it
Armstrong?  Or Vaughn Young who just spent 2 days in deposition.  Or
Dennis Erlich?  You are getting bad advice.  You are making a bad
decision.  What are you scared of, Alex, what is it, why are you so
frightened?  We just want to discuss it.."etc., etc.

        They were still doing this when Ariane appeared from the
laundry room and they started on her with the same kind of verbal
attacks and harassment.  She was really scared.  We got into the
apartment and locked the door and immediately called 911 and told them
what was happening and gave them the details.  When I was on the phone
I could here them yelling at us outside the door.  The 911 dispatcher
said a deputy was on his way and asked for the tag # of their vehicle
but I could not see it through the window, because they never park
directly in front of the appartment.

        When I hung up, I went out with pen and paper to get the tag #
and they followed me from the door of the appartment to their car
yelling at me that I was not scaring them, they were not scared and I
could not scare them. I ignored them and went back into the apartment.

        They loitered ouside the appartment and continued to yell
through the door at us.

        The deputy arrived shortly after and spoke to them briefly
then came to see us.  I showed him a copy of the letter I had sent
telling them to stay away.  He asked if we had been involved in the
cult and were we no longer involved.  We said yes.  He explained to me
that he could have me give them a warning in front of him telling them
to stay away and, if they came back after that, they can be arrested.

        I went with him and he told them he did not know what was 
going on between them and us but I did not want them visiting.
Jaqueline tried to be smart and snapped that it was "civil", so
he told her the place for it was in court.  He explained to them the
"trespass warning" he had explained to me and had me tell them to stay
away.

        As I did that, they all looked at me and the silly smiles and
"ARC" were totally wiped off their faces. They looked at me like I
was something Xenu had vomited up.  They tried to interrupt me and the
deputy shut them up.

        I returned to the appartment and, as I left, I heard him
demand to see their ID's.  Another deputy had arrived by this time and
the deputies took down their names etc.

        Later, the deputies came to see us and got our names etc., and
told us to phone immediately if they returned.

        That was the last visit.

CONCLUSION.

        The most useful conclusion I can come to after observing, and
experiencing, this activity is that these individuals are _infantile_.
Their behaviour is similar to that of children.  This is supported
by traits such as their earnestness about trivia, selfishness,
naivete, devotion to a cult, lack of realism, lack of critical
ability, and behaviour more appropriate to a children's TV show than
real life.  When they collide with reality which does not subscribe
to their science fiction delusion, you can see their obvious
inadequacies and their inability to deal with something that has
been described to them in a distorted way.

        For example, there is no word in Scientology for a critic of
Scientology who is a "good guy", so they cannot have that concept.
Now they have to come and talk to Ariane and me and we are not
frothing at the mouth, and we are not ugly, and we appear to be
sincere.  But they "know" that cannot be true so they have to
conclude that we are pretending, and we actually are evil.  As a
result they are trying to deal with situations different from the
actual situations, and are suffering from delusion to that degree.

        Yes, they are dangerous in the same way that juvenile
delinquents are dangerous, and they are used and manipulated by
others and they can be very, very cruel. They are, in fact,
very cold emotionally.

        I think the most effective,and true, statement that can be
made TO these people would be "GROW UP AND GO GET A REAL JOB!"

                                                    Alex Jackson.
                                                    Sept 1996.
        
-----------

4.  The Police Report

        **Biased Journalism** obtained a copy of the police report.
It is dated 9/20/96.  The report was made at 11:35; the unit was
dispatched at 11:36 and had completed the call by 12:03.  The
description is listed as TRESPASS WARNING.

        Alex Jackson is listed as the Complainant.  Subject 2
(Suspect) is Edward W. Parkin, a 37 year old white male.  Subject
3 (Suspect) is Jacquelin Kevenarr, [note: this spelling is
different than the one obtained by Alex, which was Jacqueline
Kevenaar.] a 46 year old white female.  Subject 4 (Suspect) is
Joan Ellen, a 45 year old white female.  All three Suspects gave
the same address and telephone number:  6331 Hollywood Blvd.,
Suite 1200, Los Angeles, CA 90028; (213) 960-3500.   We called
the number and determined that this is the Church of Scientology
International.

        The Sheriff wrote:  "I arrived at the complainant's
 residence.  I made contact with Alex.  ALex stated he resigned
 from the Church of Scientology earlier in the month.  Alex stated
 that three members from the church came to his door and started
 harassing him.  Alex stated he asked them to leave, but to no
 avail."

        "In my presence, Alex told the three members of the church
 he did not want them back on his property.  I explained to the
 church members that they have a Trespass Warning against them.
 They understood if they came back they could be subject to
 arrest.  The church members then left the property."

------------------------

5.  Negotiating with OSA

OSA interview tape
September 13, 1996
Alex & Ariane

Alex:   Hi, guys.  Do you mind if I tape the conversation?

J,Ed:   Not at all.  Do you mind if we do?

Alex:   Sure.  Are you all ready?

Ed:     no

[Alex:  we can't go to Dennys, obviously.  We don't want to
discuss it on the balcony.  We also don't want all three of
you in our apartment.  So we'd be willing to discuss it with
you (to Jacqueline) alone and on tape.  Do you agree with that?

J:      Can Ed be there was well?  Because he knows a lot about
        legal and stuff.

Alex:   No.

J:      ok.

[Ed gets out his tape recorder but it doesn't work.  While he
fiddles with it:]
Jacqueline:  is there a reason why you don't want all of us in here?

Alex:   It's just our preference.

[Jacqueline explains that Ed's tape recorder is dead and asks where
they could find batteries.  Alex describes a hardware store, and
they leave to get batteries.  Tape resumes after their return:]

Alex:   this is September 13, 1996 [gives his address] and I am Alex
        Jackson.  Do you want to identify yourself?
        
J:      Jacqueline Kevinaar.

Alex:   representing?

J:      I am representing the Church of Scientology International.

Ed:     My name is Edward Parkin and I also represent the Church of
        Scientology International.  I am not a lawyer and neither is
        anyone-unless you are- none of us are.  We are civilians.  We
        represent our church and we would like to speak to you and
        your wife to amicably resolve what I think, based on our
        conversation yesterday, the day before, is some kind of a
        problem.

Alex:   I would also like to record that my wife, Ariane Jackson, is
        present.

J:      So, I thought we met yesterday, we went over the whole
        [indistinct].

Alex:   So you don't want to come in alone.

J:      I'd feel better about the full cycle because this is a meeting
        where we want to settle things.   We want to sort things out.
        We want to come to an agreement.  We want to resolve the
        problem created by you guys putting confidential church sacred
        scriptures on the internet.  You are bound by confidentiality
        agreements not to do so.  Does [?] till your death.  So we
        have the church's concern, which is, the official position is,
        that we have the obligation, we are obliged by law to sue in
        order to protect our rights to this material.  If we don't
        take any action whatsoever, we sit by and we don't do
        anything,  then we might lose our rights because we don't
        protect it.  We're not diligently protecting our rights to
        the upper level materials.  Which we have to do.  That is our
        trust.  That is the law.  This is what the law requires of the
        owner of upper level or sacred materials or trade secrets.

        Ok.  So we are obliged to sue.  However we have come here in
        total peace.  That is something that must be believed because
        that is the truth.  We come in all fairness to see if we can
        work out an agreement where you agree not to breach those
        upper level, trade secrets on the Internet and in that case,
        that will be equal to a judgment to us, just laying out the
        position here, it would be equal to a judgment to us, so we
        are protected as the owner of the materials.  And that is
        really the bottom line on that.

        Now, if we go ahead and sue and do all of these things
        we also wanted to tell you, in all fairness because I think
        you should be aware of that, and because of our obligation we
        have to sue, it will be expensive, obviously.  There will be
        lawyers involved.  There will be all sorts of things.  The
        financial hardship on ourselves in order to have to do this
        and on you is I think worse than if we can sit down and simply
        agree that you won't breach the agreements you signed.  That
        is why I have come.  Within that parameter I think it's only
        fair that the two of us can talk to the two of you.  I'd feel
        better about it and I'm sure you don't want me to feel bad.
        I don't want you to feel bad.  I'd feel better about it.  I
        think it's only fair.

Ed:     You put us at a disadvantage.  It ceases to become an
        even playing field at that point.  If that's the way you want
        to do it, you're putting us at a disadvantage and then I think
        you're going to be creating problems for yourself.  Because we
        have requested that it is both of these representatives of the
        Church of Scientology Interational who are here to, as it were,
        represent our interests.  And you and your wife together to
        represent your interests.

        If you're putting one of these representatives at a
        disadvantage by not having the other, then it's not an even
        playing field and whatever may or may not get worked out or agreed
        to at that point, it then becomes inequitable.

[Ed and Jacqueline are skilled negotiators.  A good negotiator haggles
 over everything:  the room, who is present, whether they sit or
 stand, etc.  The objective is to get the other party involved in
 the process.]

Al:     in that case we'll conduct a meeting here.  [Alex means
        the doorstep]

[They natter about it, but the scientologists don't want to talk
 on the doorstep.  They'd rather go to Denny's, but Alex's tape
 recorder is in his stereo.  He can't move it.  Ed offers to make
 a tape and give Alex a copy, but Alex dismisses the idea.]
        
Al:     right now we have an event playing field.  We don't have
        particularly perfect conditions.

Ed:     no we have very bad conditions

J:      Just because of the neighbors

Ed:     One of your neighbors tried to follow us when we left.  The
        one in a Lincoln, gray, a gray Lincoln Continental.

[Alex and Ariane close the door to discuss the matter.]

Alex:  come on in.

[nattering about arrangements]

J:      I'm just curious.  Did anything happen?
        
Alex:   No, we just discussed it.
                   
J:      I thought maybe you got upset about something.

Alex:   No.

J:      [refers to yesterday's shouting match about money]
        We basically explained what the whole purpose of the whole
        thing is.  Obviously a lot of cycles have to be sorted out
        and we are more than prepared to do that.  However-

Alex:   Could you be specific?

J:      Specifically like the thing we went over for instance
        yesterday with Albert's estate.  There are real problems.
        I'm sure we can assist sorting that out.

Al:     Are you referring to Jody Darling, a debtor to Albert's estate
        and a Scientologist, Hans Gaspar Rhymer [J's beeper goes on]
        another Scientology debtor to Albert's estate, and other-

J:      Like the document you gave me?  You gave me a document which
        listed out the names of debtors.

Alex:   Scientologists owing a total of just under one million dollars
        [?] eight and a half years ago.

Ed:     I don't remember the exact figure and I'm not sure I have the
        document here, but that's what we went over.

J:      We are prepared and we are willing to sort that out.  To do
        whatever the church can do to sort that out.  And basically
        continued.  Many actions the church has already done to sort
        this matter out, but didn't complete the cycle.  That's all I
        wanted to say.

Ed:     Right.  Exactly.  Now the things is, a communication was not
        delivered yesterday.  And the bottom line as we see it is that
        there are two ways that this can go.  The two ways are, we
        either work it out and resolve it or we go the other route,
        which is in the law courts.

J:      And this is really, what you have to understand about this-

Alex:   We have several different matters to resolve here.  It would
        be to everyone's advantage and for the record I want to have it
        clarified that we specify whether we're talking about -

Ed:     I thought I did when we introduced ourselves and I put a
        little preamble, I stated -

Alex:   The confidential materials.  We also, we will be discussing
        something that is our concern, which is the money owed to
        Ariane's son by Scientology that we have discussed.

Ed:     w-w-w-w  Ariane's son did not loan Scientologists any money.
        Albert Jaquier loaned Scientologists, as I understand, the
        documents that you presented and so forth, you know, money to
        individual Scientologists.

Alex:  The money was not repaid and is currently owed to the estate of
        Albert Jaquier and Ariane's son is an inheritor in that
        estate.

J:      That's what we went over already.  You gave us the
        documentation.  That is a known fact.   I don't think that's
        in question.  So we have two matters now.  One matter is our
        claim for our protection in terms of confidentiality, the
        other claim is Albert's estate.  And I think those are the two
        things we want to sort out.

        Now, I think, and that's our position, that the matter of
        posting confidential materials and coming to an agreement not
        to do that or not to breach any further agreements or whatever
        is something that we have an extraordinary amount of attention
        on.  As you can understand.  So far anybody who breached our
        right in terms of doing that, we either went to see him, some
        of them we went to see just like we did with you, to give him
        the opportunity to settle and have an agreement with us that
        they won't do that, knowing well that based on earlier signed
        agreements it is not ok to do it, in fact it is a breach of
        the contract.  Others didn't want to do that, so we saw them
        in court.  And we litigated because, and this is something
        I want to make completely and totally clear, so it is fully
        understood.  It's not like we want, we're desperate for a
        court case.  No, we have to.  We are obliged to do this.
        Because we have to protect the right to something which we
        hold confidential.  If we said, well, this part of what we
        studied cannot be revealed then we also have the obligation
        to make sure that doesn't happen.  When it happens we have to
        come to judgments that enjoin people from doing that.  Like
        injunctions, for instance.

        Like somebody like Dennis Erlich has an injunction.  He
        cannot do that.  If he does it he is contempt of court and
        that's a jail sentence in this country.  Do you know what I
        mean?  

Alex:   [irked]  We understand your legal obligation to diligently
        take action to protect your copyrights and trade secrets.

J:      The other thing I think we should inform, which is only fair,
        just in my view, so we could file a suit and litigate.  I'll
        let you guys cope with that.  I tell you, that is not a nice
        situation to be in.

Alex:   We know, because we've just had a suit from your church.  And
        we know how that is.

Ed:     The only thing is, one, it was in Switzerland, it's a
        completely different thing mainly because the holders of the
        trade secrets and copyrights are based here in the U.S. and
        those actions that have been brought on the basis of the
        copyright ownership and the trade secrets are brought by the
        churches housed in the U.S. and there are numerous precedents.
        Numerous precedents.  You are going from the early 1980's
        until the present time.  I don't know if you are aware of
        them, but we have Grady Ward, for example, the Internet
        character.  There is a preliminary injunction on him that
        prohibits any type of activity, or Keith Henson is another.
        I have - this is why I wanted to meet you because I am aware
        of these [?] I am intimately aware of them.  And I also know
        the effects that it [litigation] creates on people when for
        whatever reason they have violated our trade secrets and
        they wound up in a situation where the suit was filed and it
        basically goes on a conveyor belt in a law court.  Hugely
        costly.

J:      I mean, we could tell you this one guy, what was his name,
        Arnie Lerma-  it's just that you need to know these things.
        You're not American citizens-

[She is wrong.  Both Ariane and Alex are American citizens.]

Ed:     But our lawyers say, 'you'd better come back with something,
        otherwise we have to.'

Al:     Ok. I would like to just make a fact on record that since
        your initial visit to us two days ago we have not posted
        anything, I think you will agree, we have not posted any of
        your confidential scriptures.

Ed:     To our knowledge nothing has been posted that has
        violated confidentiality.  Absolutely.

J:      That's correct, and I acknowledge that.

Alex:   So we are not dealing with a situation where we are insistent
        upon or continuing to post materials subsequent to being
        apprized of your position.

J:      [insistently] But if you would tell us-

Ed:     If say this [negotiation] broke down now, and tonight you         
        decided ok, well we're going to stick OT VII-

Alex:   I understand your responsibility.

J:      [brightly insistent]  And since there was already a breach,
        obviously we just say 'well we talked to these people, and
        they look honest, and I don't think they will do it.'  Our
        lawyers are going to say "well, you're nuts.  How do you
        know?"  Just face it, that's reality.  You have to have it in
        writing, you have to have something that is equal to a
        judgment.  In fact moreso because there was already an earlier
        breach.  So the respect for contracts was at that moment in
        time, no matter what the considerations, what the
        circumstances were, was not there in order to restrain the
        posting from happening.  So what will make this restrain the
        posting from happening?  You know what I mean?  Sure, there's
        always an element of risk there.  Of course.  And our
        interests, in the church interest, you want to make that as
        small as possible.  That's the bottom line.

        That is the situation we need to resolve first.  First
        and foremost.  Because that risk is there.  There is another
        thing you have to know, there is a certain time period in
        which you act.  When the infringement -  takes place, there's
        a clock that starts ticking and the sooner you act the better
        it is for the plaintiff, obviously.  Now we're in
        negotiations.  We are.  There is a reason you can say that
        clock will slow down a bit because we're talking.   We're
        trying to solve this without having to go to court.  But that
        clock still ticks.  And there is a point in time where we, you
        know, have to make a decision.  I'm telling you the straight
        dope.  I'm here to PR or anything.  Or make it all nicer or,
        well 'there won't be any problem'.  Because I think there will
        be.  And I think you should be informed of that.

Alex:   So within a certain time period we sign or you go legal?

J:      No, there isn't, like, 'ok we give you ten days.'  And if you
        don't sign in ten days- it doesn't work like that.  It works
        that from the moment of the infringement you have to
        diligently pursue making the infringement either invalid, or
        stop it, or prevent it from happening again.  You have to show
        that you have diligently done this and pursued your rights.
        If you sit back, let the time go forward, ...that is not
        diligently pursuing your rights.  So that's why we come here,
        we talk to you, and so on and so forth...

        So that's basically I think the first thing that we should
        resolve.

Alex:   Ok.  Yesterday you asked us both to sign general releases
        which were not confined to confidential material but included
        experiences that we had in scientology outside of what was
        even on confidential or involved in confidential, taking or
        receiving confidential material.  It was a general release
        concerning experiences of any kind.

Ed:     No. No.

J:      Not quite.

Alex:   Do you have a copy?

Ed:     "not generally known."  I remember the paragraph well.  5b, I
        think it was.  Anyway, "not generally known."

Alex:   The point I'm making is that it was not confined to our
        experiences of confidential activities or the release of
        confidential material in public places.

Ed:     Right.

J:      "in a public place," obviously.

Alex:   Why?

Ed:     Because we would like to contain-

J:      I'll tell you why this is.  Because this is while on church
        staff.  It says "I will never post or publish or attempt to
        post or publish anything relating to my experience with,
        knowledge of or information concerning the scientology
        religion or any of the releasees which are the parties in
        this contract, including any information which I obtained
        while on church staff and which is not widely known."

        In other words, by joining staff and signing your covenant
        you agreed that you can be talked to and you can engage in
        activities which are not normally accessible to anybody
        outside.  'I am a staff member.  I am privy to things the
        church is doing, the inner workings, the administration,
        the what-have you, organization inside.'  Which of course a
        public getting a service would not be free to do.  If I go
        and bank with the Bank of America I'm not sitting in their
        board meetings [fweet! interesting choice of metaphor!],
        you know what I mean?

Alex:   May I check this?  [papers rustle]

J:      [brightly determined]  And those are matters that are
        basically covered in the covenant, that you promised not to
        divulge any information which you received as a staff member,
        which you otherwise wouldn't have gotten if you were doing
        the Comm course.

Alwx:   Can I retain a copy of this?

Ed:     [flatly]  No.   Unless you sign it.  In which case, obviously.

Aj:     -because mine is different.  [Ariane's agreement, written in
        French, has different provisions than the one offered to
        Alex.]

J:      Because each of you have to make that decision for yourself.

[the Jacksons read.  Nobody says anything for a minute.]

Alex:   This states "I will never post, publish or attempt to post or
        publish anything relating to my experiences with, knowledge of
        or information concerning the scientology religion or any of
        the releasees including any information which I obtained while
        on church staff and which is not widely known."  So therefore
        5b is not limited in any way to just experiences on church
        staff.  It includes experiences on church staff that are not
        widely known, but specifically says "anything relating to my
        experiences with, knowledge of or information concerning the
        scientology religion."

J:      So how to you interpret that?  What do you read in that?

Alex:   Well, the two key words are "anything" and "including."
        Because "anything" means "anything".  It means "anything
        relating to my experiences with, knowledge of or concerning
        the scientology religion or any of the releasees _including_
        any information which I obtained while on staff and which is
        not widely known."  So this "anything" includes this.   But
        it's not limited to this.

J:      Ok, I get it.  So that's how you interpret that clause.  Now
        I have another question.  Is there anything else in this
        release that you have a problem with.

Alex:   Yes.  I-

J:      Any other clauses

Alex:   I don't see the necessity of your requesting, or suggesting,
        or asking us to sign a general release when your stated sole
        concern is the matter of confidential materials.  Which you
        claimed you already have a signed written agreement on our
        part--do you have copies of those, by the way?  Can you share
        them with us?  Do you have them with you?

J:      No.

Alex:   Can you get them for us?

J:      [vaguely]  I guess so.

Alex:   Because we'd like to, we don't remember if we did sign, what
        we signed.

Ed:     [not sounding friendly]  You remember, when you signed, when
        you joined, you were both staff, right?  You remember
        signing a-?

Alex:   I actually don't remember what I signed.  I certainly don't
        remember the details.  And I certainly don't even know if what
        I signed was legally valid.  So-

Ed:     Well, that puts it all into the validity, and this, that and
        the other-  we don't want to go that way.  We don't want to go
        that way.

J:      That's where you go into court-

[scientologists are both talking at once]

Alex:   We also don't want to be scared or frightened into doing 
        something.  Like this general release.  It is unnecessary.
        It is extremely, it is a total gag on our free speech
        concerning the subject that we were involved in for more than
        half of our lives.

J:      Ok, well, just to correct one [?] of things.  Just let me get
        that straight.  Which is that you say 'well, why do I have to
        sign this if you already have it.'  Because we're not dealing
        with the original situation of you having signed the
        agreements and nothing happened.  You have breached the
        contracts.  So we need to settle the breach.  It is a
        different situation, a different circumstance.  There has been
        a breach, so you settle the breach.  We're not settling the
        earlier contracts.  Those are fine.

Ed:     Many settlement agreements, where there was a contract
        originally, and there was some dispute over it, and a
        subsequent settlement which resolves that.  That's very
        common.

J:      You resolve the new circumstance.  Ok.  Now if we look at this
        though, it says "general release."

Alex:   Let me ask your minimum requirement on this matter of
        confidentiality?  This is your minimum requirement?  What is
        your minimum requirement?

J:      Something that is equal to a judgment, that will protect our
        rights completely and fully.  That is what our minimal
        requirement will be.  Something that we could get in court.
        However we think we can do it without all the court, and the
        cost, and the lawyers and so on, because we don't want to put
        you up to a lot of expenses.  We really realize it's very
        expensive.

        Arnie Lerma, just up to summary judgment, is the first step
        in the case, paid $950,000.  I mean that's a horrendous
        amount.  It's just the lawyer fees.  And then, now he sits
        with a summary judgment where he has to pay us damages.  Now
        what position is that to be in?

Ed:     He was a staff member and so on, and he came in and out and
        so on and so on, many many times, and he did some
        confidential level, violated his agreements, we sued him--
        because we had to--and the court case, it was a fast track in
        Virginia, and we filed a summary judgment motion.  It was
        upheld and granted.  And we have a judgment in our favor.  We
        have damages awarded us for each of his infringements and he
        has to pay our lawyers' fees.  I know, I was sitting there
        when the Judge ruled.

J:      You know if we go that route it will be so bloody useless,
        because even if you would get Albert's one point two million
        dollars, you don't want to pay that to attorneys.  It's the
        last thing you'd want to do.

Ed:     Any money that you have now or would have in the future gets
        totally blown down the drain.

J:      It's expensive for us.

Alex:   We have no claim on Albert Jaquier's [estate].  Ariane's son
        has a claim on the estate.

[Ed has to change his tape]

Alex:   I just wanted to clarify.  It is Ariane's son who has a claim
        on Albert's estate.

Ed:     Understood.

Alex:   We are not claiming against Albert's estate.

J:      Ok.  All right.  So that is really the things we want to lay
        out.  And then if you get this thing going, if you, like,
        suspend part b here, because you have a problem with that.
        As far as I see it, and understand this thing, it tells you
        to do a few things-
[Alex breaks out laughing, but she plods determinedly on]

        You cannot breach anything that you know is confidential,
        maintaining the confidentiality  [Alex is still laughing.]

Alex:   I cannot listen to you and keep a straight face.

Ed:     I understand.  I know what you are laughing at.

Alex:   You can't keep a straight face [yourself]!

Ed:     Don't interpret what I'm doing!   I understand what you're
        laughing at.

J:      So, what it says is-

Alex:   Jacqueline, we're not signing it and we're not discussing it.
        We're not going to hack it to pieces and then- you understand?

J:      Uh huh.

Alex:   I understand your position and your obligation.  [his Scottish
        burr got the best of us here, but we gather he said something
        to the effect of, we are at an impasse, there is no reason to
        take this topic any further.]

Ed:     Good.  Let me clarify something to make sure I fully
        understand.  Now let us say, this release was directed solely
        to confidential materials.

[Fweet!  It looks like they are suggesting that Alex sign a
 legal contract, enforceable in a court of law, making all the
 the confidentiality agreements he may have signed in the past
 enforceable!]

Alex:   Well, we'd have to consider it.  I'm not saying anything.

Ed:     I'm not asking you to promise me one thing or the other.  I
        just said I can think with the cycle.  If it was restricted
        solely to the upper level materials and that basically-

J:      [She sees where Ed is going]  But there was a breach, and
        in settlement of the breach we enter into an agreement
        between you and the church that you will not breach on
        confidential, upper level materials; confidential
        information.  Which you know is confidential because you
        signed agreements to that effect.  That's it.

Alex:   That would be acceptable to you?

Ed:     [very controlled:  this is the big moment]  I'm asking if
        it would be acceptable to you.

Alex:   I'm not saying.  But would that be acceptable to you?

J:      I don't know either.

Alex:   We're going to have to have it checked.  We're not signing
        anything without having it checked.

Ed:     It would make our job a lot easier.

Alex:   If we didn't?  I'm sure.  But-

Ed:     [wants Alex to believe that the proposed idea is
        innocuous, so he makes himself a victim]  You don't know
        the pressure that comes to bear with the lawyers pounding
        on the table saying 'you are giving away your rights, what
        the hell are you playing at!'  'Give them away, fine:  we were
        led to believe that you considered your sacred scripture
        sacred and yet, you're letting them-'

Alex:   I understand your problem.

J:      The obligation is there.

Ed:     And we are here to resolve it.

J:      But it's not just, Alex, it's not just our problem.  You're
        involved in that problem.  You realize that.    Our problem
        goes to the extent that we have to go to the motions, get the
        machine rolling, instruct our lawyers, go to the court, get
        the witnesses, the testimony, this, that and the other; and
        you've watched L.A. Law [!!], you know how court cases go.

Alex:   [laughing]  There is a difference between our situation and
        the situation of Dennis Erlich or Arnie Lerma in that right
        now we are not posting.  Right now we are not actively
        posting any confidential materials.  And we have not for two
        days.  We have not subsequent to your first visit.  That is
        the difference.  That is something that you can tell your
        lawyer.

J:      I am not sure if that would hold up in a court of law.

Ed:     Lerma posted to ars.   In fact he only posted once but it was
        sent out two times.

J:      Because a breach is a breach.  If you breach once, it's a
        breach.  The difference between a hundred breaches and one
        breach is very small.  A hundred breaches may show a
        continuous, you know- and despite this talking you might go
        back to your computer and post again.  And we talk again, you
        go back to your computer and post again.  That of course
        makes matters worse.

Alex:   Why?  You said we could post anything we wanted-

J:      I'm talking about upper levels-

Alex:   Okay.  You are talking about a hypothetical case.  I thought
        you were talking about Jody Darling and the diary.

J:      So that would make matters worse if you were doing that.
        Obviously you're not doing it.  You say you're not doing it.
        I don't know.  I have to believe you.

[Scamizdat? OSA thinks the Jacksons are Scamizdat?]

Alex:   [indistinct]

J:      Yeah, but what appears on the Internet doesn't always show up
        right away.  It can take days to show up.  It's not like an
        instant-it's not email.  So I have to take your word.  Which
        I'm ready to do.  I mean, I don't think you are sitting here
        lying to me.  You know what I mean.  So.  But you have to
        realize a breach is a breach and to something which is a trade
        secret or a confidential thing it's sort of, because of the
        litigation that has occurred, factually we'd probably have
        been the first ones that ever litigated on these.  These are
        laws that we in fact almost wrote the book on.  Because the
        precedents and the jurisprudence--you know what that word
        means?--exists now on the cases that we have ongoing or have
        had.

        And if you look at a big access provider like Netcom, that
        is one of the biggest in the world,  they adopted rules where
        they will screen for any copyright violations and trademark
        violations.  That's unique.  Before our cases Netcom would
        never have thought about doing that.  In fact it wasn't the
        practice at all.  It was 'well, you folks, it's your
        responsibility.'  But it isn't, really.

        They wrote the whole- [Ed breaks in here.  He wants to get
        back to the topic.]

        So these are not minor matters.  We're creating all the law
        and definitely jurisprudence on the whole subject.  So-

Ed:     Add to that our own lawyer.  Our lawyer is _the_ trade secret
        lawyer in the whole country. [presumably he is talking about
        Roger Milgrim]

J:      He wrote the book on the subject.  But besides that-

Ed:     It's not just us here, it really is something.  Do you
        appreciate that?

J:      Since 1950 there's been people that didn't agree with the
        church  of scientology.  1954, the first church started.  But
        even before that.  And they had their say.  And they had their
        things to say about it.  And it may not have been good.  I've
        seen, in my 22  years [in the church] I've seen stuff, you
        know, obviously there   have been people that weren't happy
        and they've tried all sorts of things.  Look at people like
        David Mayo.  That was a battle and a half.

        It's like they weren't happy with what they got out of it.
        Okay.  There's one thing otherwise, there's another thing I
        just wanted to tell you just apart from anything else.  Which
        is that just saying 'okay, it's all the church's fault that
        I am in this position' is factually not honest and not true.
        Because it really isn't the church's fault, you know, like
        whose fault?  Who was in the church?  What has happened?
        What was applied or wasn't applied?

        There are numerous circumstances-  Just like, for instance,
        you cannot hold the Pope in the Vatican responsible for what
        his millions of followers do.

Alex:   We understand that.

J:      So you can talk about bad experiences but even then there is
        enough to say about that too.  Understand, there is enough to
        say about it.  Your side of the story.  There's other sides to
        that type of story.  Other people had their own experiences
        with the same situation as what occurred.  And they have lots
        of things to say too.  It's a game in other words, that okay,
        my viewpoint, your viewpoint, Joe's, Bill's, Fred's, Peter's
        viewpoint; we have all these viewpoints.  What do we achieve
        with it?  I don't think we achieve much.  The church is still
        there.  You know, but we are being thrown to our fates as over
        the years is a lot but we're still there.

        If we would have done one percent of what we are accused of,
        we wouldn't be there.  Not a soul would want to come into the
        church.

Alex:   Okay.  That's all right.  That's all right. [wants to move on]

J:      Yeah, we can go over that a little -

Alex:   We need to go get proper legal advice before we enter into an
        agreement.  We understand your position, your requirements,
        your minimum requirement.

Ed:     I just wanted to make sure that we are tracking.

Alex:   This would be your minimum requirement:  a promise on our part
        to not divulge specifically upper level confidential materials
        past XEW [?] - through OT VIII.

J:      Yeah.  Or matters such as the Running Program.  That is not
        something that you can read in HCOB's or you can buy in any 
        bookstore.

Alex:   Confidential.

J:      Yes.  That's not stuff you can buy anywhere.  You know it's
        not "Dianetics:  The Modern Science of Mental Health."
        That you can talk about to your heart's content.  It's
        publicly available.

Alex:   So that would be acceptable?  You have to have a verification
        on that, right?

J:      Yeah.  We-

Alex:   For you that would resolve your problem, would be a promise-

Ed:     [edge in his voice]  An immediate promise.

J:      [unwittingly sabotages Ed] Well, you see we have to go back
        about that.  You have to go back about that.  I cannot
        guarantee here or now that that would be the end of all our
        problems.  I cannot guarantee that.  Because I don't know.

Ed:     I'd like you to [garble] totally your own way.  If you want to
        think about some[thing] you can.  It's totally up to you.

Alex:   That will be our discussion of experiences outside of
        confidential material, that you are to discuss.  But the
        matter of your problem that you have discussed concerning the
        upper level material would be possibly resolved to your
        satisfaction when a promise on our part that we would not
        divulge in the future any of the specified materials which
        are primarily technical materials-

Ed:     Yes.

Alex:   Okay.  So that is something.  Because we can't have a copy.

J:      Well, if you will not agree to this then it is useless to even
        talk about it.  But if we can set parameters like you just did
        then I think we can come to an agreement.

Ed:     Because that gets the legal stuff out of here.  Then we can
        start-

J:      Then we have something concrete to go with.

Alex:   Okay.  Why don't you guys drop something [tape switch].

[chatter about Michael]

J:      [brightly] Well, I think we're basically done, right?  I mean
        we do this-

Alex:   Your problem, Jacqueline.  But one of our concerns yesterday
        was that our concern was basically blown off, and most of
        the time was spent discussing your concern.  Our concerns
        have not, to our view, been adequately discussed.

J:      I get it.

Alex:   --Or resolved.  Or even a resultion instituted.  Because-
        let me finish-  this, situation with debts owed to the
        estate of Albert, which is currently stuck in probate, from
        -
J:      Is he okay?  [she is talking about Michael.  Ariane has
        been on the telephone.]

Alex:   So the situation with regards to the estate of Albert.
        Albert, it's obvious from what Albert wrote and communicated
        to various individuals in different parts of the church that
        he considered that the money that he had thought he invested
        in the company of Jody Darling was, or was maybe not directly
        but enabled Jody Darling to pay $150,000 to the International
        Association of Scientologists shortly after; and then
        subsequent to that Jody Darling became delinquent on that
        debt and when Jody Darling was arranging that debt, that
        loan, he was sending faxes from the office of the
        International Association of Scientologists in Clearwater.

        Now, Jody Darling currently owes the estate of Albert over
        $300,000.  Do you contest that?

J:      No.  I've seen at least the - [indistinct]

Alex:   Okay.  This is our concern.  You have your concern: this is
        our concern.  Now, yesterday we discussed probate laws and
        it is possible if not probable that Jody Darling doesn't
        have the money to repay this debt.  Right?  Either he
        doesn't have it or he doesn't want to pay it.  He hasn't
        paid it.  He has been delinquent for about four years.
        He was refusing to communicate when he was delinquent.
        So what your suggested solution has been to get Jody
        Darling in Clearwater and to attempt to make Jody Darling
        good upon his debt.  That has to go to the estate and
        that has to be probated, etc., etc.  Now it is true that
        Michael won't actually need it or get it until he is
        eighteen.  But if Jody Darling doesn't have it and he's
        [claiming] bankrupt, then- what I am trying to say is
        that the International Association of Scientologists
        received $150,000 from-

J:      You don't know that.

Alex:   Yes!  His photograph's in Impact [magazine]!

Ed:     I understand that.  I understand that.  I also know that
        Jody Darling borrowed vast quantities of money from
        innumerable, many different people.  I don't know it
        was Albert's-

Alex:   I- that is- you can't follow dollar bills through a bank.
        You see what I'm saying.  But he's a Patron Meritorious
        and listed as such.  Therefore he paid IAS $250,000.
        When he borrowed the money he was a Patron With Honors.
        That's $100,000.   He paid $150,000 shortly after the-
        you understand?

J:      What's the significance there in terms of what he did with
        the money?

Alex:   [trying not to lose his temper]  IAS received money from him.
        He received money from Albert.  He didn't-

Ed:     So you are trying to show a chain of title of the money?

Alex:   He got $200 [thousand] from Albert and at the same time he
        paid $150 [thousand] to IAS.  He arranged it from the IAS
        office!

J:      Just one thing you have to explain.  What's the significance
        of where that money went for you?  For you, or for Michael,
        or for the estate?  That's my only question here.

Alex:   Okay.  Let me mention a similar situation.  Edwin Baer also
        borrowed money from Albert.  Edwin Baer got a refund from IAS.
        We have evidence that he got a refund.  That's how he repaid
        Albert.

Ed:     [derisively]  Huhn.

J:      That money went to Albert?

        [everyone talks at once]

Alex:   We can read it because it's in French and then we can
        translate it for the record.  Edwin Baer's letter to
        Albert, stating that he had arranged the refund from IAS-
        just translate it [to Ariane]

Ariane: Okay.  It says "I-

Alex:   This is from Edwin Baer in Switzerland.

Ari:    It says "I work

Alex:   Give the date.  To Albert Jaquier:

Ari:    5 October 94.  "I worked during the [?] week with the DED
        IASA to find a solution for the money which is owed to me,
        that I did not receive yet.  I had to do a CSW asking a part
        of the money I had loaned to an [?] to ask that it be
        reimbursed by IAS.  And he said that it is an irregular
        cycle.

J:      So basically what you are saying is that if Jody is not
        able to pay the money back out of his own pocket IAS
        should be doing that for him.  Is that what you're
        explaining to me?  Or, there is a possiblity for IAS to
        do that?

Alex:   Yes.

J:      I get it.

Alex:   Yes, since they were a beneficiary, not necessarily
        directly, but they benefitted in the time period.  You
        understand?

J:      Yeah, I do.

Alex:   And we can say well, if Darling had not paid IAS, he would
        have been in a much much better position to have repaid
        the debt to Albert.  I haven't, since by church policy
        Albert was prohibited from taking legal action against Jody
        Darling and his other debtors.  This was by church policy
        [and] resulted in Albert being unable to, and before he
        died, then since he was prohibited from taking legal
        action and the church at that time, and we have evidence
        of this, claimed to be administering justice in the
        affair, and failed to force or ensure that justice was
        done in time, as evidenced by the fact that the money
        was not repaid and Albert died.  So that he couldn't go to
        a lawyer.  He went to his church.  And I think the evidence
        demonstrates that his church failed him.  And handling
        --you told me the first day that December 94, Jody
        Darling was denied services at the church of scientology.
        At that time Albert was dead.

        This situation had been brought to the attention of the
        church.  This is chronologically laid out in the post.  It
        had been brought to the attention of the church several years
        earlier when Albert was still alive.  The church failed.
        They prevented him from seeking legal action.  And they
        failed to provide any substitute justice that was effective
        in time.  Because if Jody Darling had paid when he said he
        would pay, Albert could have paid for and received the
        medical attention he desperately needed to stay alive.

        And we cannot definitely state, but it is a possiblity that
        right now you would be talking to Albert, not us [if Darling
        had paid].

J:      I understand what you're saying.  I understand what you're
        saying.

Alex:   I am not finished.  Michael Jaquier was seven years old when
        his father died.  He lost his father.  Now you may consider
        that all he needs is a rud session, but he lost his father.
        He loved his father.  Several years before that he had lost
        his mother through the policy of disconnection, for a period
        of seven months.  Michael's story has not yet been
        [indecipherable].  Albert was his stable parent after he
        was disconnected from his mother.  With Albert's death he was
        disconnected from his father.  You understand?

J:      I do.  I hear what you're saying.   I hear what you're saying.

Alex:   And my impression is, I still see Michael sitting sometimes
        and he will be reminded of his father and you can see, he
        looks off a little distance and his eyes mist over and he
        doesn't speak of anything or say anything, but you know
        what is happening with the guy.  You understand?

J:      I hear.

Alex:   Yes, he's recovering.  Yes.  Yes.  The nightmares he has,
        they're not as bad.  You understand?

J:      I hear you.

Alex:   Your church is involved in that, Jacqueline.  Specifically by
        preventing Albert from what was available to
        non-scientologists, which was the courts of law and civil
        action.  He was prohibited from doing that.  He would have
        been declared or susceptible to declaration as an sp if
        he had done that.  So he couldn't do that.

J:      Can I ask a question?

Alex:   Sure.

J:      Because those are like, heavy accusations.  And I don't have
        necessarily a counter-view on that because one of the things
        we are doing is still going through all of the data.  As I
        said, a week ago I didn't know you, a week ago I'd never
        heard of Albert Jaquier.  So we're still going through
        everything.  And we're talking to people and getting _all_
        the data.  We have your story, which you posted.  We have
        what you _claim- is Albert's diary, which is in the post.
        I don't know if that is a literal representation of it.
        But we have files and we're going through this.  So we
        still have to, and you have to grant us a bit of time
        to sort this thing out.  For you this is a cycle that
        has been taking years and years and years.  You are
        intimately familiar with the things that went down.  For
        us-

Alex:   Your church was first informed in 1991 when Jody Darling
        was initially delinquent.  And so-

J:      [very reasonable]  I've seen in the files, I've seen
        justice actions, I've seen board of investigations, I've
        seen Chaplain's Courts and about this much correspondence
        about the cycle.  It isn't like, you know, nothing
        happened because I tell you, these files are _thick_.
        On the whole cycle, on whatever went down on that, you
        know?

Ed:     Albert.  A lot of letters.

J:      In Albert's case, he sent-

        [all three talk at once]

Ed:     Did he ever do a CSW to file a civil action with IJC?  You
        know, the policy that says, do a CSW-IJC if you don't hear
        back within a certain amount of time?

J:      Fine, it says you have to notify IJC.  It doesn't say you
        can't sue.  You have to notify IJC.

Ed:     That's what I think.  I haven't read the-

J:      Maybe this is something you can read.  We'll bring the
        policy tomorrow.  You can read it.  It's available.

Ed:     Okay.  I haven't seen it in the file, but he may well
        have-

J:      It's not, you know, you cannot sue, you cannot sue, you
        cannot sue.  You say the church prohibited him from
        suing.  I only know what the policy says.  This is
        where they talk about that.  I bring that tomorrow
        and show it to you.

        Because that is not something that I saw in the files
        particularly.

Alex:   Are you suggesting Albert should have initiated a civil
        action?

J:      No, I was just asking-

Ed:     If he felt that it was the only thing he could do
        then he should have applied that policy letter.  If
        that was the only thing that he felt he could do.
        Maybe he did.  I don't know.  We have-

J:      Did he ever file a complaint?

Alex:   You mean, outside the church?

Ed:     Yes.   That is exactly what I meant.

Alex:   I would have to check.

Ed:     Yeah, I'm not sure either.

J:      So that's the whole, again as I said, this is a cycle
        that you're emotional about.  And I hear you.  I
        understand that.  On the other hand, it is for us a
        fairly new thing that I haven't had on my lines for
        you know, up until a week ago, literally.  So I will
        familiarize myself with a couple of things.  Because
        I know, if I have all the information I know it can
        be resolved.  If I don't have the information there's
        nothing I can do.  You know what I mean?  That is
        literally where I come from.

Alex:   Okay.  Okay.

J:      I know this is a concern of yours.  I know that you have,
        your viewpoint, you know what happened, you have your
        data, there's also, hopefully there's a lot of other data,
        a lot of other people wrote a bunch of things about this.
        Albert's estate is something that I know for sure was
        discussed by a lot of people.  So. We'll just have to
        look at it.

Ed:     Yeah, you don't know what was done to get Edwin Baer
        to pay.   I just found out some of the stuff this morning.
        Yeah, I mean a lot of things.  You know, to make the guy
        take responsibility for, I know because our area of CSI,
        took a lot of cleanup of the guy, make the guy confront
        it, and so on and so on.

        Ah, the thing that I was thinking of is, us doing anything
        while we have this confidentiality thing hanging out
        there is a problem.  It really is a problem.  And the other
        thing is, ah,

Alex:   You're saying you don't want to discuss it?  Until you get-

Ed:     No.

J:      No.

Alex:   Well, you're jumping back on the confidentiality and -

[pause while Ed changes a tape]

J:      Well, let's say this.  We came to talk to you because of your
        posting.  That was the reason why we came.  The posting of
        confidential stuff.  In the course of dealing with the cycle,
        you know, we find out about the whole Albert cycle.  I
        personally was not aware of all that.  And I just have to
        see.  And we find that this is a point where you have a
        lot of attention.  Obviously.

Alex:   Uh, huh.

J:      Good.  So we came here to do a).  You come back to us so we
        find out there's also a b).

Alex:   Yep.

J:      Okay.  Now what we want to do, and I think this, in all
        fairness, we want to resolve this confidentiality thing.
        Because that is definitely a direct immediate risk for
        the church.  Where we have to know.  I'm not excluding,
        we won't talk about Albert's estate.  Absolutely not.
        I said, you have to give us some time to go through
        all the facts.  Which we're doing every day.  And that,
        you know, familiarizing ourselves but also talking to
        people.  You know I told you yesterday, Jody will
        come to Clearwater.  I want to talk to him.  I want to
        know from his mouth what happened.  And I have the
        right to do so, you know what I mean?  Certainly when
        there are these large sums involved, I want to know.
        So we'll have to work with this.

Alex:   [unbelieving chuckle]  I laugh because Albert heard that.
        In fact Albert heard that more times than-

J:      I know.  But I also said something else to you yesterday.
        Surely you remember that.  We have come here with full
        bargaining [power] to sort out [the situation].  And I can
        personally do that.  So.  That's it.

Ed:     You've got to give us a little bit of trust.

Alex:   Okay.  We have voiced our concern and you have voiced your
        concern.  We have to discuss it, we have to think about it.
        [to Ariane]  Your draft, may I see it?

J:      --work out what is the minimal requirement, we'll look at
        it.   And we'll come back, we'll have the same setting if
        you don't mind.  Is it an acceptable setting for you?
        Then we'll just take it from there.  I mean, really this
        is a thing that I don't think will be resolved in ten
        minutes.

Ari:    No.

Alex:   Well, it hasn't been ten minutes.

Ed:     And a resolution is a resolution.

J:      That's another thing that we want, when we walk out of
        here, when we part, it is a completely handled situation.
        A handled cycle.

Alex:   Yeah, but there are two different definitons of handled.

J:      Look, if you were not happy it would not be handled.  If
        you would go up and say, ok-

Ed:     Because you would say something on the Internet tomorrow
        and it would be the same thing-

J:      -'fuck you, go out of my live,' you know if you would say
        that it ain't handled.

Alex:   Ok, let me make a suggestion before we- this general
        release, to try to get us to sign this general release
        is unrealistic.  It's nowhere near a handling.  He knows.
        You know.  Get Real.  Get real.  Do you understand?
        [He is still polite, but the edge is unmistakable.]

Ed:     I do understand.

Alex:   We're not whining victims.  And we're not, you know,
        'you did everything, and look at everything that you
        did,' you understand?

J:      Yep, we do.

Alex:   So, get real.   Because we're real.

J:      Uh, huh.  [reflexively] Good.  

Alex:   [laughing]

Ed:     By the same token, uh, I, you know, we have to force people
        to do things.  Trying to force somebody to do something on
        behalf of somebody who by church tenets, or two people who
        by church tenets, have committed suppressive acts of the
        worst actions conceivable in scientology-

Alex:   Huh?  [puzzled.  He doesn't realize that Ed is referring
        to him and Ariane]

J:      [quickly]  What he probably is saying--I, I'll translate it
        for you.  You asked me to get real and I will, I am.  Also
        there is the other reality of your situation.  You see,
        the knife cuts both ways.  There is the reality of, if you
        choose litigation, if you choose to go that route, be
        real, because, know what you're sticking your foot into.

Alex:   I know.

J:      You know?  So that's what I'm saying.  I don't mind being
        told to be real.  But on the same hand, I want to tell you
        that, do the same thing.  Apply your own words of wisdom
        to yourself, to look at what's there at the end of that
        road.  Because it ain't anything pleasurable for any of
        us.  And that is the reality I'm dealing with and I
        come from.  You understand?

Alex:   Yeah.

J:      And as long as we have those realities I'm sure we can
        sort it out.

Alex:   [laughing helplessly]

Ed:     What?  What?

Alex:   uh, when I said get real I wasn't being a smart ass.  If you
        know, then when you see we're not going to go off happy.

J:      No, I don't-

Alex:   the general release- you see what I'm saying?  Don't waste
        our time, and don't let's start editing it, and stuff like
        that.  Do you see what I'm saying?

Ed:     [silky] You won't see that document again.  

Alex:   All right.  You know, different words with the same sense,
        you know-?

Ed:     I know.  You can read.  You understand what you read.  You
        understand legal sufficient to know what the significance
        of those legal terms are.

Alex:   Right.  Anything that is worth anything, that means
        anything.  Don't tell me [it isn't a general release
        when it is].

J:      That's how I understand it, you don't understand it that
        way.  Fine.  So.  That is the reality of that.

Alex:   You still think it means just staff?

J:      I don't think that it says you cannot talk about any of
        your experiences.

Ed:     This is true.

J:      We do _all the time_ on the Internet.  So how, you know-
        if it would say that you cannot talk about anything
        concerning scientology, then what are our five or six or
        seven or thirty-seven web sites for?

Alex:   [laughing again]

J       [plowing right on] --all the experiences with people, but
        the difference is, they are good and they are happy.  So
        it would be sort of stupid to say, well you can't post
        about scientology anymore.  I mean, that really, I
        mean it's like, there can never be such a thing.

        If you want to talk about scientology you talk about
        scientology.  We expect you to say the truth though,
        because otherwise you enter a whole other realm of
        stuff, which is libel and slander, which is a whole
        different ball game, or inciting to hatred.  If
        you say "I think that church is so bad that I think
        every one of you should now go and bomb the church
        or something," you can incite hatred.  In Florida
        there happens to be a statute that says, a law,
        if you utter words or publish, say something with
        the intention to stir up hatred against somebody
        else, a group or an organization or whatever,
        that's illegal and you're going to jail.  It's a
        criminal offense.  It's called a "hate statute."  A
        hate crime.  You cannot, and that's because of, well
        we're in the United States.  You have multicolored
        people, the Ku Klux Klan.  They're burning churches.
        Right now there's a whole flap going on where six
        hundred churches in the South of this country, you
        know, black churches, have been burned to the ground.
        So, the whole subject of hate crime right now is a
        much discussed thing.  It was on Newsweek this week;
        it's all in there.  You cannot say something that
        will incite an emotion of hatred toward the subject
        you're talking about.  So that's what I'm saying,
        you know.  Within the parameters of free speech
        there's also the criminal code of the United States.
        If I say "I'm going to kill the President of the
        United States" just saying it will lock me up.
        Not even, I don't even have to prove that I intended
        it, didn't intend it or what.  Just uttering these
        words.  And there's no FBI agent that will grant
        you your free speech for saying that.  You know what
        I mean?  So, there is a criminal code.  That's all
        I'm saying.  There is laws.  And within those
        laws you're completely fine.  Overstep the laws and
        you go to jail.  And particularly in this country
        that's a very black and white type of affair.

        So that's what I'm saying.  If you want to post your
        experiences and it isn't libel, it isn't slander and
        it isn't a hate crime, go ahead and do so.

Ed:     I've got a question.  So we're doing this document, we're
        modifying this thing, right?

J:      Yeah.

Alex:   You are going to modify that one?

Ed:     Allow me correct and amend what I earlier said.  Yes, we are
        rewriting from scratch.  What are you guys doing?   It's
        almost like a summary or recap.

Alex:   We are discussing it.  We are getting advice.

Ed:     From whomever you want to get advice from.  Good.  

J:      Okay good.  So, we meet tomorrow?  Same time, same setting?

Ed:     A bit earlier?

        [discussion about Michael]

Alex:   Well, he'll be here over the weekend.  Monday.  We're going
        to have him all weekend.  [He accidentally calls Jacqueline
        Jody.]

J:      [joking]  Don't be snide on me.  I'm not snide on you.  

Alex:   [Laughs]

Ed:     Can we give you a call?

[Alex declines to give the number.  Jacqueline pushes for a meeting
 the next day.]

J:      We can work to resolve the situation.  We want to be diligent
        about this.

[discussion about Michael.  Alex does not want the meeting held in
 his presence.]

        I don't know.  Can he play in the pool?  And maybe Joan can
        be with him?  She likes a dip in the pool.  

Alex:   No.  If we can arrange something before Monday we'll call
        you.

J:      Well, let me ask you this.  What we can do is, why don't we
        come by tomorrow, say about 2 o'clock and we take it from
        there.  Like, if you can do it, fine.  If you can't, you
        can't.  I may not be in the office.  We're out and about
        too.  So I don't want to miss your call or have somebody
        near the phone or whatever.

Ed:     We'll be involved, we have to interview people-

J:      We'll be here two o'clock tomorrow.

Ed:     If you can't say we'll respect you.

J:      And then you can tell us.  If it's this weather he's playing
        outside.  You know, it wouldn't be a problem if he's in the
        house or watching tv or whatever.  We can take it from
        there.   Okay?  Let's do that.

Ed:     Very good.

Alex:   End of meeting.  Four thirty.  Or close to.

------------------

6.  A Statement by Ariane

        OSA CANNOT LEAVE US ALONE. THEY HAVE ONLY 4 OPTIONS
1. SWEET TALK /TRICK/INTIMIDATE US INTO SIGNING A GAG.
2. LEGAL ACTION.
3. ILLEGAL HARASSMENT.
4. PAYING US TO SHUT UP.
        OUR GOING PUBLIC REMOVES #1 FOR THEM. THEY WILL THEN
CONCENTRATE ON 2 AND 3. 4 IS RESORTED TO WHEN NOTHING ELSE WILL WORK,
AND ONLY IN EXCHANGE FOR TOTAL SILENCE. WE ARE PREPARED TO HAVE NO
LIVES FOR AN INDEFINITE PERIOD FOLLOWING THE PUBLICATION OF THE
DETAILS OF THE HARASSMENT.

        THANKS FOR OFFERING TO REPORT OUR STORY.

        THE SUPPORT AND ADVICE WE RECEIVED FROM MANY PEOPLE, AS THE
RESULT OF OUR POSTS AND OUR SITUATION, WAS INVALUABLE AND ACTUALLY
PULLED US OUT OF OSA'S CLUTCHES.

ARIANE

------------------ The End ---------------------------------------

   [**Biased Journalism** is distributed free in cyberspace.  To
   subscribe, send a message to <[email-masked]>
   with "subscribe" as the subject.  Comments, article submissions
   and hot tips should be addressed to <[email-masked]>.
   Solid mail, checks and donations go to S. Thomson, 236 Stanford
   S/C, Suite 142, Palo Alto, CA 94304.  Separate issues of
   **Biased Journalism** are available via USA domestic mail at
   $5 apiece.  Foreign rates on request.  NEW:  back issues of
   **Biased Journalism** are available on floppy disk at $2
   per issue, minimum of four issues.]

   

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!netrover2!news1.good.net!news.good.net!sn.no!Oslo2.Norway.EU.net!Norway.EU.net!nntp.uio.no!nntp.zit.th-darmstadt.de!fu-berlin.de!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!lynx.aba.net.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!matilda.vut.edu.au!cougar!gerdw Mon Oct 14 12:23:09 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:56769 misc.legal.computing:2350
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing,nl.scientology
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!netrover2!news1.good.net!news.good.net!sn.no!Oslo2.Norway.EU.net!Norway.EU.net!nntp.uio.no!nntp.zit.th-darmstadt.de!fu-berlin.de!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!lynx.aba.net.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!matilda.vut.edu.au!cougar!gerdw
From: [email-masked] (David Gerard)
Subject: **Biased Journalism** V2no19  Lerma Decision: RTC Lawyers Humiliated!
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Followup-To: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing,nl.scientology
Sender: [email-masked]
Organization: Prestige Elite(tm) Research Church of the SubGenius
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[email-masked]>
Distribution: inet
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:02:35 GMT
Lines: 1100

I have just found out that Netcom cancelled this issue of 'Biased
Journalism', presumably at the request of a certain tax-exempt
cult of our acquaintance.

Well, fuck that.

From: [email-masked] (shelley thomson)
Subject: **Biased Journalism** V2no19  Lerma Decision: RTC Lawyers Humiliated!
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 03:09:27 GMT
Lines: 1140
Sender: [email-masked]

     **Biased Journalism** : a net magazine designed to compensate for 
     the shortcomings of the professional news media.  We cover 
     issues of interest to the citizens of cyberspace.  This is a
     community newspaper of the net.  

     Copyright 1996 Shelley Thomson; all rights reserved.  

     Mail, articles and comment may be directed to <[email-masked]>.  
     Netiquette will be observed with all communication, except for the
     following:  harassing or threatening mail will be posted to the
     net immediately.        

**Biased Journalism**  Volume 2, issue 19     October 8, 1996.  

Contents:  Lerma Decision:  $2500 award humiliates RTC Lawyers.
           The Order; the Memorandum; the Order to Seal
         
Read at your own risk.  This is **Biased Journalism**!

LERMA DECISION:

        Goodbye, Suckers, and thanks for all the clams!
             --netizen

[Judge Leonie Brinkema produced a written decision in the Lerma case
 on October 4.  Lerma was fined $500 apiece for each of five copyright
 violations.  In consideration of his status as pro se, he was not
 required to pay attorneys' fees.  The church, which probably spent
 upwards of $1,000,000 to produce this result, was unhappy.  Attorneys
 for RTC immediately sought an order to seal the decision.  The order
 was granted, but by then the decision had been distributed in
 cyberspace and posted to Usenet.  Lerma attempted to call the
 copies back, but to no avail.  The information was *loose*.  A
 netizen helpfully provided us with a copy.  We apologize for the
 scanning errors.]

1.  The Order

        IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
        FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
	Alexandria Division 

	RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER  }
	Plaintiff 
        v.                            Civil Action No 95-1107-A  
	ARNALDO PAGLIARINI LERMA	
	Defendant) 

			ORDER 

	On January 19, 1996 this Court granted summary judgment to the
plaintiff on its copyright infringement claim.  That ruling was made
orally, in open Court, the Court advising the parties that it would
explain its reasons in a written opinion and thereafter give the
parties an opportunity to address remedies.

        The time in which to appeal the summary judgment ruling was
stayed until the written opinion and damage decisions were issued.
The written opinion has now been issued, thus the remaining matter to
be addressed is remedies.

        The Court is hereby advising the parties, consistent with what
it has previously stated, that it does not intend to impose heavy
financial damages on the defendant.  Unless RTC  convinces the Court
to the contrary, it will not make a finding of willful infringement in
this case.  Moreover, unless convinced to the contrary for purposes of
the damage calculation the Court intends to find five instances of
violation, specifically one violation for the illegal copying of each
of the five works discussed in the memorandum Opinion.  Because RTC
had previously indicated it seeks only the statutory minimum damages
provided its copyrights are respected, these conclusions would lead
to total monetary damages of $2,500.

	 Defendant is apparently suffering financial hardship and is
no longer represented by counsel.  Therefore, unless convinced to the
contrary, the Court does not plan to award attorneys fees or the costs
of litigation against the defendant.

	Lastly, RTC seeks injunctive relief in this action, to which
the Court believes defendant does not object.  The parties should try
to agree to the language of such injunction.

        In order to resolve these final issues, it is hereby
ORDERED that RTC file by October 21, 1996, any position on
the damages and injunction issues.   Defendant will have fifteen
(15) days to respond to RTC.

        The Clerk is directed to forward copies of this Order to
counsel of record and to defendant, pro se.
Entered this 4th day of October, 1996.
(signature)

Leonie M. Brinkema
United States District Judge
Alexandria, Virginia

[This decision is not a "done deal," and RTC will have an opportunity
 to argue that they should be awarded legal fees.  They can also
 attempt to multiply the number of infringements, but it sounds to
 us as though Judge Brinkema has made up her mind.]

2.  Memorandum Opinion supporting the Order

    [The Memorandum Opinion contains some interesting material about
copyrights.  It also refers at one point to a statement, apparently
made by Lerma, that Internet posts are "ephemeral."   Lerma wanted to
show that he needed to keep copies of material for scholarly purposes.
The same theory--that net posts are "ephemeral"--was used by noted
trade secret authority Roger Milgrim to argue that merely because
something was published on the Internet, does not mean that it is
not still a secret.  Netizens in the audience laughed when he said
this.]

	IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE	
	EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA	 	
	Alexandria Division			

	RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER		
	: 	Plaintiff,	
	vs.		Civil Action No. 95-1107-A 
	ARNALDO PAGLIARINI LERMA 
		Defendant.  

MEMORANDUM OPINION ON RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER'S AND ARNALDO P.
LERMA MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT  

	This matter comes before the court on plaintiff Religious
Technology Center's ("RTC") Motion for Summary Judgment for Copyright
Infringement Against Defendant Lerma ("Lerma"),  also under
consideration is defendant Arnaldo P. Lerma's (Cross-) Motion for
Summary Judgment and/or to Dismiss.  Both parties seek final
resolution of the allegation that Lerma infringed RTC's copyright when
he copied to his computer and/or posted to the Internet sections of
sacred properly copyrighted documents belonging to the Church of
Scientology.

	Summary judgment is appropriate when the record shows that
there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the
movement is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P.
56(c), Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 O.S. 242 (1986). In
ruling on such motions, the court must construe the facts and all
inferences drawn from those facts in favor of the non-moving party.
Charbonnages de France v. Smith, 597 F.2d 406` 414 (4th Cir. 1979).

	Based upon the arguments tendered in the briefs and at the
hearing, as well as the mass of evidence in this substantial 

			(1)

record, the Court finds that Lerma infringed RTC?s copyright and
that summary judgment be entered in favor of RTC and against
Lerma.

History of the Case

  The dispute in this case surrounds Lerma's acquisition and
publication on the Internet of texts that the Church of Scientology
considers sacred and protects heavily from unauthorized disclosure.
Founded by L. Ron Hubbard, the Scientology religion attempts to
explain the origin of negative spiritual forces in the world and
advances techniques for improving one's own spiritual well-being.
Scientologists believe that most human problems can be traced to
lingering spirits of an extraterrestrial people massacres by their 
ruler, Xenu, over 75 million years ago. These spirits attach 
themselves by "clusters" to individuals in the contemporary world,
causing spiritual harm and negatively influencing the lives of their
hosts.

        The texts at issue, the "Advanced Technology" or the
"Operating Thetan" Documents ("OT Documents"), were written by
founder Hubbard and allegedly provide a detailed program for
warding off these evil influences through creation of "free zones."
The OT Documents outline a process that must be executed
precisely according to the procedures laid out by Hubbard and under
the guidance of an assisting church official in order to be 
efficacious.

	Church doctrine teaches that improper disclosure of the OT
documents, both to non-Scientologists and even to church members if
done prematurely prevents achievement of the desired effect.
Unauthorized disclosure also. risks further harm of global
proportions: - See Religious Technology Center .v.. .Lerma, 908
F.Supp 1353, 1358 (S.D. va. 1995. Hubbard explicitly directed that
the OT Documents be released only in strict accordance with his
guidelines, and that they remain otherwise secret and secure.

	Consequently the church has charged RTC, the plaintiff in
this case, with securing the sacred texts and aggressively policing
any breaches in security or unauthorized disclosures that may occur.
RTC has enacted a comprehensive protection plan that includes locked
vaults, numerous guards, key cards, and signed nondisclosure
statements by all church members.  RTC has also been " relentless"
tracking down suspected offenders and vigorously pursuing legal
remedies against them.

         This litigation initially consisted-of both trade secret and
copyright infringement counts against multiple defendants, including
Lerma, Digital Gateway Systems (Lerma's access provider to the
Internet); The Washington Post,  which published a story about the
case which quoted fractions of the OT Documents), Marc Fisher (a
Washington Post reporter), and Richard Leiby (a Washington Post
reporter).  However, The Court earlier dismissed the trade secrets
count as to all defendants and the copyright infringement count as
to the Washington Post and its reporters.  RTC voluntarily dismissed
its claims against Digital Gateway systems, Therefore, the only
issue remaining in the case is RTC's:
	..	
		(3)

copyright infringement claim against defendant Lerma. Even that issue
has been progressively honed, with RTC moving for summary judgment on
only a subset of the copyrighted works originally contented in RTC's
complaint. 1.

 Bases for Copyright Infringement 

	To establish copyright infringements two elements must be
proven: (1)  ownership of a valid copyright, and (2) unauthorized
copying of constituent elements of the copyrighted work.  Feist
Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Company, Inc., 499
U.S. 340, 361 (1991). Copyright infringement occurs when there is
"substantial unauthorized copying of protected materials from a
copyrighted work."  Harry G. Henn, Henn on Copyright Law,
?27.6 (1991)  The first element is effectively uncontested by
Lerma. Filed in conjunction with RTC's motion for Summary judgment
was a set of exhibits (the "G-series Exhibits") containing 33
comparisons of RTC's copyrighted works and the "copies" allegedly
in Lerma's possession and/or posted by him to the Internet.  Each
of these exhibits includes the written segment allegedly copied by
Lerma, the corresponding Hubbard original, a certificate of
copyright

----------------------
1 RTC initially alleged that Lerma infringed the copyright of
multiple works from several different series or collections of the
OT Documents.  With its summary judgment motion, RTC now seeks ruling
only on materials excerpted from "OT II", "OTIII", "Power", "NOTs",
and "the Sunshine Rundown`" referred to in this motion as the "Works."
The Second Amended Complaint contained additional allegations
regarding infringement of other materials from "OT I", "OT IV", and
"OT VIII", however these allegations are not included in RTC's
instant Motion for Summary Judgment.

       (4)

registration, a certified photocopy of the masked work on file at the
Copyright Office of the United States, and a full (i.e. unmasked)
"translation" of that photocopy.  Lerma does not dispute that Hubbard
followed the appropriate procedures in obtaining the maximum
copyright protection of his original works and that these same Works
have now been produced in the G-Series Exhibits with the appropriate
validating documentation, nor does he dispute that RTC properly
owns the copyright interest in these Works .

The Idea/Expression Dichotomy 
Lerma launches collateral attack on the appropriateness of the
copyright.  Distinguishing between idea and expression, Lerma argues
that material contained in the Works is "uncopyrightable".
Copyright law promotes the advancement; of human knowledge and
thought by providing limited legal (and therefore economic) 
protection to an author's original expression.  The author's
temporary monopoly, however, does not include the ideas contained
within his work.   As stated by the Third Circuit, "the purpose of
copyright law is to create the most efficient and productive balance
between protection (incentive) and dissemination of information, to
promote learning, culture, and development."  Whelan Associates v.
Jaslow Dental Laboratory, 797 F.2d 1222, 1235 (3rd Cir. 1986).  These
intentions have spawned the idea/expression dichotomy in copyright
law, protecting the latter while still permitting access to the
former.  "The [Copyright] Act is thus able to protect authors
without impeding the public's access to that                 (5)

information which gives meaning to our society's highly valued
freedom of expression."  Harper vs. Row Publishers, Inc. v. Nation,
723 F.2d  195, 202 (2nd Cir. 1983).

	This idea/expression distinction is codified under 17 U.S.C.
102(b)  which states:

	In no case does copyright protection for an original work of
authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of
operation, concept, principle or discovery, Regardless of the form
in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in
such work,

	Courts have therefore held that wherever an authored
expression of on idea is closely intertwined with the idea itself,
the expression has ''merged" with the idea and is therefore
uncopyrightable. Under this Merger doctrine, where the author's ideas
and procedures can be properly expressed in so few ways that
protection of the expression would effectively accord protection
to the idea itself, " Kreqos v. Associated Press, 937 F.2d 700, 705
(2nd Cir l991), courts have found the expression not copyrightable.
Copyrighting the expression in these instances would effectively
prohibit discussion and analysis of the idea itself And grant the
owner a monopoly on all uses of the very concept.

        Lerma argues that this merger doctrine applies and that RTC's
claim of copyright protection is therefore invalid. He also argues
that Hubbard describes the OT Documents as primarily factual, and he
insists that their contents must be follower exactly as written.
Under the merger doctrine, even if Hubbard had followed all 

		(6)

procedural requirements, the Works would still be uncopyrightable if
protecting the expression would effectively grant a monopoly on the
idea itself.

	Despite this argument, the Court finds that merger of idea
and expression has not occurred in this case.  The ideas and concepts
of the Scientology religion can be discussed independently of the OT
documents.  This has been amply demonstrated in the voluminous
record accompanying the case and in all parties' numerous briefs.
Indeed, theological musings on the sources of (and remedies for)
spiritual harm have dominated discussions about religion for
centuries.  Whether achieved through animal spirits, witches,
demons, curses, Satan, angels, or "body thetans, " spiritual healing
is clearly not a concept inherently tied to the OT Documents.

	To the extent that the OT Documents supply a technique or
"process'' for achieving spiritual well-being, their copyright
arguably violates a strictly literal reading of §102 (b) .
However, as RTC has argued, virtually all works convey to some
extent ideas and processes that are uncopyrightable.  See Hr'g,
January 19 , 1996' at 23 et seq.  While such creations may contain
"procedure[s], process[es], [or]  system[s]?, 17 U.S.C.A. ?102 {b),
they are not thereby rendered de facto uncopyrightable.  As an
example, RTC cites programs which essentially describe a ''process
but are nonetheless copyrightable.  Other examples include
cookbooks and automobile mechanics repair manuals.  Each of these
documents purports to describe a precise method for achieving a
desired end, whether it be the creation of a spinach souffle
or the

		(7)

rebuilding of a defective carburetor.  Hubbard's instructional
directions for spiritual healing are no less-deserving of protection
than the admittedly copyrightable "recipe" in a cookbook or
copyrightable "repair steps" in a maintenance manual.

	Lerma attempts to distinguish the Works from these examples
because the Works require specific, precise repetition of the exact
text.  While a recipe, repair instructions, or a computer program may
permit some variation, Hubbard claims that the Works provide the only
correct method for reaching complete spiritual health.  If not
followed exactly, the process will fail.  However, literary  works;
such as: a poem or haiku and musical works such as a symphonic
score possess  the same quality -- -the desired effect cannot be
achieved without precise repetition.  This does not make poems,
haikus, and musical scores uncopyrightable, and it should likewise
not preclude copyrightability of the Works.  Denying copyright
protection to RTC on this basis would rapidly destroy the protection
and incentive for the likes of Wagner and Brahms -- an  outcome that
is most certainly contrary to the goals of copyright law.

	The Court, therefore, finds the merger clause inapplicable to
the Works.

Fair Use Defense 

Lerma freely admits that he copied portions of the Works by
downloading or scanning them into his computer and by posting segments
of this material to the Internet.  He argues that even if the works
are copyrightable and copyrighted,  this copying was

			8 

lawful because it was "fair use."

	In determining whether the use of a copyrighted work
constitutes fair use, the Court must consider four factors:

	1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether
such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational
purposes;

	2. the nature of the copyrighted work; 

	3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in
relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
	
	4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or
value of the copyrighted work

17 U.S.C.. §107. These four statutory factors may not be "treated in
isolation, one from another.  All are to be explored, and the results
weighed together, in light of the purposes of copyright." Campbell v.
Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510  U.S.. 569, 578 (1994).
	
	Lerma urges us, when conducting the fair use analysis, to
evaluate his actions in the special context of modern communication on
the Internet.  He describes the unique characteristics of computer
interaction and argues for special treatment under copyright law.
While the Internet does present a truly revolutionary advance,
neither Congress nor the courts have afforded it unique status under
the fair use standard of ?107. The law of copyright has evolved with
technological change, with each new technological advancement
creating complicated questions of copyright interpretation and
application.  Nevertheless, the new technologies -- from television,
to video cassette recorders, to digitized transmissions -- have been
made to fit within the overall scheme of copyright law and to serve
the ends which copyright was 

			(9)

intended to promote.   See Sony Corp.. v. Universal City Studios Inc.,
464 U.S. 417 (1984). The Internet is no exception, and postings on it
must be judged in reference to the already flexible considerations
which fair use affords.

	Purpose and Character of the use: The first fair use factor is
the purpose and character of the use made by the alleged infringer.
17 U.S.C  ?107 (1).  Lerma posits that his use of the Works falls
within several of the classic fair use categories listed in the first
paragraph of ?107, namely, that his copying and posting of the Works
constitutes "criticism, "comment, "news reporting", and "scholarship."
3 here is a strong presumption that factor one favors the defendant
if an allegedly infringing work fits the description of uses
described in section 107." Wright v. Warner Books, Inc J 953 F.2d 731,
736 land Cir. 1991).  Lerma argues that his Internet posting of the
Fishman Declaration originated from publication of information in a
California court record that was open to the public and which the
court refused to seal. Lerma asserts that he merely gathered that
information like a news reporter and then published it on the Internet
to unveil for the Internet community the "foibles" of Scientology In
the same spirit of the modern news expose.  This analogy fails.  The
full record clearly shows that Lerma's motives, unlike those of news
reporters, were not neutral and that his postings were not done
primarily for public benefit. , 677 F.2d 180, 182 (2nd Cir. l98l)+
When 

		10

judged in light of the degree of copying and the use to which the
infringing material was ultimately put, Lerma stands in a position
significantly different from the Washington Post and its employees
earlier dismissed from this suit.  Even if Lerma were a newspaper
reporter, the mere fact that a copyrighted Document was in a public
court file in no respect destroys its copyright protection.  Lerma
also describes himself as a dedicated researcher delving into the
theory and scholarship of Scientology.  He claims to be performing
academic work of a "trwasformative" nature, providing materials
which "add new value to public knowledge and understanding, thereby
advancing the goals of copyright as set forth in the Constitution."
Opp' Br. at 24. That argument does not justify the wholesale copying
and republication of copyrighted material.  The degree of copying by
Lerma, combined with the absence of commentary in most of his
Internet postings, is inconsistent with the scholarship exception.
Even assuming, arguendo, that Lerma's copying to his hard drive was
done solely in the name of academic research, this does not end the
fair use analysis.  Such uses are only "presmptively" permissible;
there is a limit to the extent of reproduction that can be
undertaken even by the bonafide researcher.  See American Geophysical
Union v Texaco, Inc., 802 F,Supp. I, 17 (S.D N Y" 1992), aff'd .,
60 F.3d 913 (2nd Cir 1994)(archival photocopying of scientific
journals for internal use by for-profit research laboratory and is
not fair use) See also Marcus v. Rowley, 695 F.2d 1171, il76 (9th
Cir. 1983 ) ("[W]holesale copying of copyrighted material precludes

			11

application of the fair use doctrine,), 3 dimmer § 1305[A] [3] (1996)
("[Generally] it May not consttute a fair use if the entire work is
reproduced") 

        Lerma argues that his "research" conducted via downloads from
newsgroups on the Interet provides a particularly strong argument for
fair use.  Because newsgroup output is by its nature ephemeral, Lerma
asserts that saving such postings for later review is
indistinguishable from the temporary storage on a VCR tape that was
upheld by the Supreme Court in Sony Corp. of America v Universal
Studios, Inc., 464 U*. 417 (1984) Lerma's  analogy fails because the
" -time- shifting" approved in Sony concerned the reproduction of
television programs that were implicitly licensed at no charge to the
viewer who then copied them for purposes of convenience.  These
critical factors are absent in the instant case.  Lerma is not
licensed to view or copy the Works, and his reproduction of the
Works on his disc served purposes beyond convenience.  The proper
analogy of Lerma to Sony would be if the Sony defendant obtained
unauthorized copy of television movie from a premium cable channel
and then re-broadcast that movie on public access channel'something
that would be clearly prohibited.  It may be true that Lerma's intent
in posting the Works was not "commercial" in the traditional sense.
He was not in direct competition with the church, and he did not place
a surcharge on, or receive any other "private commercial gain" from,
the information: contained within the Works [under the fair use
doctrine, conmercial use of an allegedly infringing works

			12 

disfavored whereas noncommercial use is not. See Sony Corp, 464 US
at 449.  Nonetheless, while there is no evidence that Lerma has
profited directly from the postings, this factor alone is not
[determinitive of fair use, even though it is a significant factor]
Whether the profit element of the fair use calculus affects the
ultimate determination of whether there is fair use depends on the
totality of the factors considered, it is not itself controlling.
n Ropers fir, Koons, 96O F 2d 301, 309 (2nd Cir. 1992) In
viewing the totality of factors discussed above, the Court finds
that the noncommercial character of Lerma's copying and posting does
not outweigh Lerma's nonneutral and non-scholarly motives in
publishing the Works.  Nature of the Copyrighted Work: The second
factor for consideration under the fair use analysis is the nature of
the copyrighted work. 17 O.S.C.A ?107 (a), "This factor calls for
recognition that some works are closer to the core of intended
protection than others, with the consequence that fair use is more
difficult to establish when the former works are copied"  Campbell v.
Acuff-ose Mumbo' Inc., 510 O.S. 569, SSS (1994*  In opposing RTC's
Motion for Summary Judgment, Lerma relies upon two aspects of the
Works which favor his position: 1) the factual. vs. the creative
nature of the Works, and 2) Shed r puL:Licato;a status.
The fair use defense is broader with respect to factual works than
to creative or literary works. "The law generally recognizes a
greater need to disseminate factual works than works of fiction 

			13

or fantasy " Harper &; flow Publishers, Inc . v. Nation 13
ntep:ci::es, 471 U.S. 539, 563 (ADDS). Hubbard's works are difficult
to classify in this respects and courts dealing with this issue
have differed in their conclusion.  As the Second Circuit stated in
New Era publications Into 1 V- Carol Publishing GROUP' 904 F. 2d
152, 158 .... (field cur I9S9), cert. denied, 493  S ;094 (1990),
"reasonable people can disagree over how to classify Hubbard's
works. In the case Tic bat:, however, RTC has characterizeci the
Works as training materials, stressing their use, li by over
their creativity.  The Court has previously resolved
this question by holding that the Works are intended to be
informational rather than creative'' and that a broader fair use
approach is therefore appropriate in th:Ls regard.  Religious
Technology Center  Lerma, 908 F Supp. 1362, 1367 (D Va. lS9S). 
Lerma's second argument regarding the nature of the copyrighted
Works pertains to their publication status.  Courts have
consistently found that "the scope of fair use is narrower with
respect to unpublished works," New Era Publications v. Carol
Publishing Group, 904 F.2d 152, 157 (and Cir.l9gO)(quoting Harper
& Row, Publishers Inc . v. Nation Enterprises' 471 O.S. S39, 564
(1985). The Works in question clearly have not been "published."
RTC has not released these materials to the public and does
not plan to release them.  Nevertheless, Lerma insists that for
purposes of a fair use analysis the berm "publication" means
"whether the work has been widely disseminated or is widely
available, regardless of technical publication." Oppose Brat 41
			14 

(citing Harper  Row, 471 O.S at S55)(ephasis in original) 
Because much of the materials which he copied and posted to the
Internet were already available in an open court file or on the
Internet, Lerma asserts that they are deserving of less protection
because he has not usurped RTC's right to first publication.
Lerma's reliance upon the argument is not convincing.  Although
Harper & Row weighs the de facto publication . or dissemination"
of a work in determining whether another's utilization of the
material constitutes fair use, this only applies where the author
has given ''implied consents through such action as performance
or dissemination. 471 u.S. at 551  in those circumstances, the author
has made the work publicly available and has implicitly invoked his
right to first publication. The copyright owner is denied this
opportunity when actions of a third party usurp the right to
first publication, as happened both in Harper  Row and in this case.
Posting without the owners consent cannot constitute a "first 
publication" under fair use principles.
Lerma also argues that the unpublished status of the Works is
entitled to even less weight because the RTC never intends to publish
them. He claims that the "central purpose of distinguishing between
disseminated and undisseminated works; to preserve for the author
the commercial value of the right to first publication " Opp'n Br.
at 44. Relying on Hrue;c v. Row, Lerma suggests that where [a]
copyright owner intends never to exploit the right of first
publication' the need to protect that right diminishes
and the scope of fair use correspondingly expands.
			15 

Lerma misreads his authorities on this point.  Harper  Row clearly
recognizes thy n [fiche right of first publication encompasses
[Olson the choice whether to publish at all. n 471 U.  . at 564.
See also salincrer v. Random House, Inc:., 811 F.2d go, 98 (end
Cir. 1987) (Potential harm to value of plaintiff'ss works is not
lessened by the fact that their Author has disavowed any intention
to publish them during his lifetime . . . th] eis entitled to
protect his opportunity to sell his letterer ) . This
approach   not il. ogica 
Thus, while the factual nature of the Works weighs in Lerma's favor,
the unpublished nature of the Works and RTC's inception to keep the
Works unpublished weigh against him.  As held in Harder & Row, 471
0,9. at 564, n the facet that  work :s publ d
___ 
critical element of: its 'nature.'" Unpublished works "normally enjoy
complete protection against copying any protected expression. It
caliper v. Random :EIouse, Inc., 811 F.2d 90, 97 (2nd Cir. 198?) On
balance, the second fair use factor tips in favor of RTC.
Amount and Substantiality of Copying: The third factor addresses the
amount and substantiality of the portion copied by the defendant in
relation to the copyrighted work as a whole. 17 [r.s.c. ?07 (3)
''There are no souse rules is to how much of copyrighted work may be
copied and still be considered a fair use t'
Maxtone Graham v Burtchaell, 803 F.2d 1253, 1263 (and Cir. 1966)
This factor has both quantitative and qualitative components, so that
courts have found  use to be unfair where the quoted
			16 

materials formed  substantial percentage of the copyrighted work or
where the quoted material was "essentially the heart of" the
copyrighted work.  New Era Publications v. Carol Publishing Group,
904 F.d 152, IS8 (2nd Cir portions omitted).
The parties dispute whether the segments excerpted by Lerma
represent "the heart of" the Works under the qualitative component.
The Court is unable to evaluate this component because many of the
copyrighted materials are incomprehensible.   However, because the
quantitative analysis weighs so overwhelmingly in RTC's favor, it
is not necessary to make this qualitative evaluation.
The 33 exhibits in RTC's G-Series Exhibits indicate extensive copying
and posting.  A majority of these 33 exhibits contain verbatim
copying, as if Lerma obtained the copyrighted materials and summarily
transferred them into ciberspace. In many cases, Lerma uploaded a
complete, self-contained OT Document with recognizable beginning,
body, and end over cwo-ds of the G Series Exhibits represent
virtually a total reproduction of the work on file at the
Copyright Office.
The wholesale copying of copyrighted material often precludes the
application of the fair use doctrine Marcus v Rowley, 6 9S F.2d
}171, 1176 lath Cir 1983) (citations omitted). Such blatant
reproduction has been prohibited even in the context of educational
instruction. See, e.q., Wihtol v. Crow, 309 F.2d 777, 780 (8th Cir
1962) (whatever may be the breadth of the doctrine of Fair use',
it is not conceivable to us that the copying of all, or substantially
all, of a copyrighted song can be held to be a 'fair
			17 

use, merely because the infringer had no intent to infringe",
Encyclopedia Britannica Educational Corp. v. Crooks, 447 F.Supp. 243
(W..N.Y 1978) (although defendants were involved in noncommerc is 1
educational copying of films to promote science and education, the
taping of entire copyrighted films was too excessive for the fair use
defense to apply).  Lerma opposes RTC's percentage calculations by
arguing a Different interpretation of what represents the "whole"
copyrighted work as defined under ?107(3. RTC has registered the
OT Documents with the copyright office in batches as part of a
series. Lerma argues that the "whole" work refers to the entire
series listed on [the] registraton certificate, while RTC argues that
the term refers to each component of these copyrighted series. Thus,
where RTC registered on one form the OT III collection of documents
A, B. C, D , & E , Lerma asserts that all five documents
constitute the "whole copyrighted work" for purposes of comparison,
whereas RTC maintains that each [separate] part constitutes a whole
copyrighted work. n Whether or not the "whole copyrighted work" is
viewed as the entire collection (as Lerma prefers) or as the
individual works (as RTC prefers) is critical to the fair use
assessment, and indeed may be the determining factor.  Under RTC's
interpretation, '! Lerma copied document A in toto.  He performed
a 100% copy.  Under Lerma's luterpretation, the same action amounts
to copying only a small portion of a larger work.  In this way Lerma
maintains that he reproduced only 13 of 213 pages from OT TI, 2S of
326 pages of OT IIl, 12 of 30 pages from "the Power," and 10 of 350
pages of the
18 

NOT's. Opp'n Br. at 47 RTC' s approach is supported by the Code of
Federal Regulations) which states inter alia that the following
shall be considered single works:  In the case of unpublished works:
all copyrightable elements that are otherwise recognizable as self-
contained works, and are combined in [a] single unpublished
collection  " 37      C.F     R.      5202.3 (b) (3) (B) .
That subsection proceeds to list the  factors to be used in
determining whether a set of works can be considered a collection,
including:
1) are the elements assembled in an orderly robin;[?]
2) do they bear [a] single title identifying them as whole
3) is the copyright claimant the same in each of the elements and in
   the collection as  whole; and
4) are the elements by the same author .
Id . When  udged by tines e f ac tore r W13: f ind that the works
i s sue
  - 1 _ 
in this case are combined in " collections " and that each subpart
must be considered a "single work" for the purposes of fair use
analysis.  Courts have followed this approach and found that
components of a Collection "constitute single works for fair use
purposes. In Szaho v. Errison, 68  ad 940 (5th Clr" 1995), the court
granted copyright protection to the component elements of a collection
of recordings despite tbe fact that the elements were not
individually listed on the copyright registration.  RTC's claim is
even stronger because it undertook an individualized listing.  See
also Hll$1er zne v. Moral Morley, 796 F.2d 14 4S, 1154 (9th Cir.
1986) 9

("each component of a composite work is capable of individual
copyright protection and need not bear a separate copyright notice");
American Geophyical Union v. Texaco, 802 F Supp. lr 17 (S.D,N.Y.
lg92(each article within a copyrighted original constituted a
single work for fair use purposes).  Although Lerma did not post the
entirety of OT II, OT III, NOT's, or Power, he did post the entirety
of certain discrete subparts of these series.  Under the Code of
Federal Regulations and under case law, these subparts constitute
single works Id are the benchmark against which to compare Lerma's
actions.  Following this analysis, Lerma' s infringement is clear.
As a final defense under this fair use factor, Lena urges this
Court to consider the Iternet postings in their unique newsgroup
context Rather than viewing each individual posting in isolation,
Lerma contends that each posting must be considered within the
context of the ongoing Dialogue he has conducted on the newsgroup.
The qualitative analysis would then include the multiple
communications posted before and after the alleged infringements,
communications which are likely to contain greater commentary
once analysis chars the postings at  ague 
This approach would permit a would-be infringer to participate in
blatant theft of a copyright yet still escape punishment via the
subsequent posting of subsequent commentary -- a commentary that
may not always be seen in tandem with the infringing work.  Under
this argument "cyberbandits" could easily cover their tracks.
The third fair use factor therefore weighs heavily against
			20 

Lerma.  His direct copying and posting of certain "single works"
registered within collections, almost tonally devoid of discussion
and commentary, nearly are sufficient to preclude a fair use defense.
Effect on The Market of The Copyrighted Work; The fourth and find
part of the fair use defense considers the effect which the
allegedly infringing use had on the potential market for, or value
of, the copyrighted work. 17 U.5.A. 5107.
Courts have frequently identified this as the most important element
of a fair use analysis. See, e q., flapper  Row, 471 O.S. at 566;
New Era Publications v" Carol.. Pub. Group, 9Od F Ed 1S2, }EiD (2nd
Cir legal.  However, the 1967 House Report cautions that it "must
almost always be judged in combination with the other three
criteria " Marcus v. Rowley, 695 F..2d 1171, 1177 (9th Cir
1983)(citig H.R. Rep No. 83, POth Cong , 1st Sess. 33, 3D (1967)
Lerma correctly argues that any economic harm befalling the Church
of Sctentology as  result of legitimate commentary is permissible
under the fair use doctrine.  The Supreme Court found in Campbell v.
Acuff-Rose Music' IT , 510 S. at Sg? (1994), that we must
"distinguish between biting criticism [that merely] suppresses
demand [and] copyright infrngement[,which] usurps it's (brackets
in orginal)(citatiou omitted) It is extremely difficult to assess
the issue of market impact in this case because it is unlikely that
excerpts of the Works posted by Lerma thus far, although substantial,
would provide a sufficient basis for would-be parishioners to defect
from Scientology. However,
			21

RTC's inability to prove a decrease in Scientology enrollment does
not justify Lerma's actions:. "The mere absence of measurable
pecuniary damage does not require a finding of fair use." Marcus v,
Rowley Ego F.2d 1771, 1177 lath cur 1983).
The potential for economic harm to RTC must also be considered.
"To negate fair use one need only show that if the 'challenged use
should become widespread, it would adversely affect the potential
market for the copyrighted work'." Haruer & Row, 471
S. at 568 (citing SonY Come ___f America =. Universal city Studios,
Inc., 464 U.S. at 451).  RTC correctly notes that substantial
expansion of Lerma's current activities presents an identifiable
risk of harming RTC.  In Bridge Publication, Ino. v. Vien, 827 F.Supp.
529, 633 (S.D.Cal 1993), the court found such risk in another case
involving the Church of Scientology. In Vien's unpermitted copying of
RTC's literary works and sowed recordings was held to violate
copyright law in part because the copies fulfilled the demand for the
original works and diminished or prejudiced their potential sale.
Id at 636. The infringer in Vien actually competed with the Church of
Scientology.  RTC argues that Lerma poses some competitive risk to
RTC, supports this argument with a communication which states that
the "public are [sic] encouraged to use a workable technology . . .
The complete works of all clearing practitioners are made available
to all with desire and courage to apply them. Franchises flourish .
. " Ex  ho Fifth L Decl.  Overall, however, RTC in this case are far
too speculative.

		21

RTC is [not] able to present specific, identifiable evidence of the
effect that Lerma's postings: have had or could have on the church of
Scientology, and cannot establish that Lerma is operating as a direct
competitor of the church.  Thus, the Court finds that the fourth
fair-use factor tips slightly in Lerma's favor.
Fair Use Summary: Based upon the Four statutory factors listed in
5107 for evaluating the fair use defense, the Court finds that Lerma's
copying and posting of the Works does not constitute fair
use of copyright.
Lerma next argues that even if his copying and publications on the
Internet are not protected by the fair use defense, this Court should
nevertheless grant summary judgment in his favor because RTC has
misused its copyright.  The misuse of copyright doctrine is an
affirmative defense to copyright infringement.  Its goal is to
prevent the owner of a copyright from improperly utilizing the
legal rights granted to it.  Aver the copyright laws Lerma is correct
that n [] successful defense of misuse of copyright
bars culpable plaintif from prevailing on an acts on f or infringement
of the misused copyright.  hseqomb America, ]:nc v. Reolcls, 911 F.
Ed 97D,, 972 (4th C:ir iggO) .
Lerma argues two bee: for his; me Ruse clad m  Fur rst, he questions
the bona fides of RTC's copyright infringement lawsuit, arguing that
RTC's true objective was the impoundment of Lerma's computer-related
materials.  Lerma maintains that RTC exercised its
23 

options under the Copyright Act as a mere pretense for gaining access
to his computer files, thereby allowing them to "tromp through" his
personal materials and investigate and intimidate other RTC critics.
Second, Lerma alleges that RTC utilizes its copyrights and the
litigation process generally "as a means to harass, burden, and punish
Mr Lerma for his criticism of Scientology. n
Even assuming arquendo that such motivations were part of RTC's
litigation strategy, that does not constitute misuse of copyright.
Misuse of copyright applies where the copyright owner tries to extend
the copyright beyond its intended reach, thereby augmenting the
physical scope of copyright protection.  It typically arises in
situations where it is alleged that the copyright owner projected his
unique rights in a work onto other, unrelated products or services.
See .c:, asercomb, 911 F 2d 970 (ash Cir. l9O)(defense of misuse
upheld against plaintiff who attempted to extend control of its
lawfully copyrighted material through the use of a 99-year licensing
agreement) ; Service Training, Ina, v. Data_General Corp., 963 F 2d
SB0 (4th Cir. 1992)(alleged misuse of copyright by premising
availability of computer programs on defendant's use of plaintiff's
computer repair services); Electronic Data Systems v. Computer
Associates, 802 F*Supp 1463 (N..Tex, l992)(allege misuse by tying the
purchase of copyrighted software to other products); United Tel. Co.
of Mo. a. Johnson Pub. Co+, Inc., 855 F.2d 604 (8th Cir. l988
alleged_ misuse by requiring that plaintiff purchase entire customer
list

		24

rather than the copyrighted subset requested by plaintiffs.  As these
cases demonstrate, misuse is somewhat analogous to the prohibition
against "tying"in patent law.  Because copyright is intended to
protect only those works containing the requisite inertia of
creativity and originality, casting the shadow of its virtual
monopoly onto other unprotected works would constitute a misuse.
The defense of misuse of copyright has also arisen in circumstances
where the plaintiff attempted to restrain defendant from using
material over which the plaintiff itself had no rights,  0. Ins. van
y_=e, inch, 770 F.Supp. 1261 (*Ill. 1991), where the plaintiff
distributed the. copyright in an allegedly Discriminatory manner,
Supermarket of Homes, Inc. v. San Fernando Valley Board of Realtors,
786 F.2d 1400 (9th Cir" 1986), or where the copyright owner
refused to supply a list of copyrighted songs as requested by the
defendant, ,Tempo Music, Inc v. Myers, 407 F,2d 503 (4th car. 1969)
In each of these cases, the misuse concerns the wrongful use of the
copyright powers themselves in ways violative of the Constitution or
public policy.  In other words, the proponent of the misuse defense
must effectively argue that the plaintiff is asserting its copyrights
in an Improper or offensive manner not intended by the copyright laws.
Such misuse Is quite distinct from the legitimate invocation of
one's copyright even though prompted by ulterior motives. To misuse
copyright, therefore, the copyright owner must use the copyright
in an impermissible way by [extending his monopoly or 

		25

otherwise violating] the public policy underlying copyright law.
" National Cable Television v, Broadcast Music, Inc., 772 F.Supp. 614,
652 (Dame.1991).  Lerma fails to make such a showing.  This is not a
case where RTC attempted to assert copyrights it did not own, or where
RTC attempted to tie its copyrights to other products.  Lerma's
infringement is unmistakable, and RTC's opposition is sound.
Erg determined that Lerma has violated RTC's rights to the Work=,
and having rejected the defenses of fair use and misuse, the Court
finds that Lerma has infringed RTC's copyright interest in the Works
by posting the O-Series Exhibits.
Imps: and Remedies 
The Court will now preliminarily address the appropriate remedy for
Lerma' s infringements.  The basis for monetary damages in an
infringement action is set forth in 17 u.S.C. ? E94 That section
enables a copyright owner to seek either factual damages and any
additional profits of the infringer or "statutory damages. 17 O-5.
?504.  Actual damages and profits are not readily ascertainable in ]
this case because of a number of factors, including that Lerma was
not selling the infringed material, that he is not a direct competitor
of the Church of Scientology, and that RTC is unable to show lost
profits or fewer parishioners with any degree of certainty.  The Court
need not determine actual damages, however, because RTC has indicated
its intention to seek only the statutory
		26 

minmum damges afforded by the Copyright Act. #2

	In determining a final statutory award, the Court must answer
three questions:  1) to what degree do the relevant postings (from
the G-series Exhibits) infringe RTC's copyrights; 2) how many acts
of infringement occurred and 3) to what extent was the infringement
willful.

        To what extent do the works Infringe -- The Court has reviewed 
in detail the allegedly infringing works submitted by RTC in
conjunction with its summary judgment motion.  Without exception,
each of the 33 binders tendered as the G-series Exhibits
demonstrates infringements of the RTC's copyrights in the 
documents at issue.

        None of the exhibits can be considered fair use under the
analysis above.  Lerma's copies typically consist of verbatim copying
wholly devoid of criticism or other commentary.  Lerma often
reproduces the exact text of the copyrighted work so that the two
versions are virtually indistiguishable.  Some indicia of his direct
copying include indentical use of titles, subheadings, section
markers, quotation marks, capitalization, hyphenation and underlining.

__________________

2. See Plaintiff RTC’s Motion for Summary Judgment for Copyright
Infringement Against defendant Lerma at 46, n. 40.

3. The Court initially indicated to the parties that it would
entertain supplimental briefing on all damages and remedies issues
following the issuance of the Memorandum Opinion.  Upon further
analysis the Court no longer requires additional argument
regarding statutory damages.  Supplimental briefs pertaining solely
to the award of attorney's fees shall be submitted within 11 days
of this Memorandum Opinion.

			27

In addition to these grammatical similarities, Lerma's postings
often reveal identical numbering and lettering schemes to separate
the text. See, e.q., RTC Exs. G-17  G-18. At times the copying
goes so far as to reproduce the actual visual layout of the
copyrighted text, so that the division of characters [and] their
placement into similar columns matches that of the copyrighted
Work. See, e.q , RTC Ex. G-18. Many exhibits include Lerma's
blatant reproduction of L. Ron Hubbard's authorship lore. See,
A., RTC, Ens G-26, G-27, & G-28)
Several of the disputed Works include band-drawn illustrations
which are not produced in Lema's copies.  See, em., RTC Exs. G-13.
G-21  G-22. These illustrations are omitted from Lerma's versions
of the document, omissions which make his infringement even more
glaring because much of Lerma's verbatim text refers to the
illustrations that are absent.   Other omissions which the Court
finds parts culpably troubling occur in verbatim copies of
certain RTC "bulletins " where terms appears to have transferred
everything except the "Confidential" heading and the copyright
markers. See,
eve  RTC Exs. G-6 through G-30.
The amount and substantially of the relevant sections of the RTC
and Lerma documents also support a finding of infringement. In the
vast majority of exhibits, 100% of Lerma's document is simply a
direct copy of 100% of RTC's copyrighted document. See, e.q., RTC
axe. G-1 through G-13, G-17 though G-l9, G-26 through G-30,  G-32
through G-33 when there are slight variances, they appeared to be
typographical errors or insignificant word substitutions. In a few
			28 

cases, the excerpted section of the copyrighted work was significantly
less than a total copy, but that section nonetheless constituted the
entirety of Lerma's reproduction See, e.q , RTC Exs. G-4, G-15, (:-16,
S: -20. If 60% of a RTC copyrighted document is copied to form 100%
of a Lerma document, without any change or commentary whatsoever, this
still does not constitute fair use.
Number of infringing acts -- Although each of the 33 binders combined
in RTC's G-Series Exhibits are infringing, this does not necessarily
indicate 33 acts of infringement.  The Copyright Act clearly states
that for purposes of calculating statutory damages for copyright
infringement, "all the parts of a compilation or derivative work
Donate tute one waxy.  -17 O.* ?504 (1996) 
Each of the 33 exhibits in this case arise from one of five
different compilations filed with the Copyright Office of the United
States. Exhibits G-1 through G-1S arise from the copyright
registration entitled "OT III SERIES" (Copyright Registration Number
TXu 290-496, Jan. 30, 1987),  Exhibits G-16 through G-25 arise from
the copyright registration entitled "OT II SERIES" (copyright
Registration Number Txu 303-388, September 17, lo; Exhibits G-26
through G-29 arise from the copyright registration entitled nND
FOR OTS SERIES a (Copyright Registration Number TXu 257-326,
November 10, 1986; Exhibit G-30 arises from the copyright entitled
"EGO BULLETIN OF 16 NOE;E; i981 TlIE t;lIINE RUNDOWN, INSTRUCTION"
(Copyright Registration Number TXu 3 03 -384, September 

			29

1, 1987); and Exhibits (G-31 through G-33 arise from the copyright
registration entitled "POWER SERIES" ( Copyright Registration Number
TXu 303-386, September I, 1897.
If multiple but distinct works are collected and filed together at
the Copyright Office under the some registration, they are to be
considered a single work for the purposes of damages.  This principle
is demonstrated in Stokes Seeds Ltc. v. Geo. W Park Seed Co., Inc.'
783 F.Supp 104 (W D.N.Y. 1991), where each copying of multiple
photographs appearing in a seed company's seedling reference book
did not constitute a distinct infringing transaction.  Instead, the
Court viewed the work as a compilation constituting "one work" and
therefore justifying a single award of statutory damages:. " Id. at
p. ;L07 . For the purpose of the damage calculation, the
infringing documents at issue in this summary judgment motion
similarly constitute five works, not thirty-three.  Because
statutory damages are to be calculated according to the number of
works infringed and not the number of infringements , Walt Disney
Co. v. Powell , SS7 F.2d 565' 569 (D.C..cir. 1990), the Court will
find only five instances of infringement for the purposes of
calculating damages.

Willfulness -

        This court declines to impose increased statutory damages
for willful violation.  'An infringement is 'willful' if the infringer
knows that its conduct is an infringement or if the infringer has 
acted in reckless disregard of the copyright owner's right". Video
Views Inc. v. S:`cudio 21 Ltd. 925 F.2d 1010 1020 r .
			30 

(7th Cir. 1991), cert denied, 502 U.S. 861 (l991), cited in Superior
Form Builders, Inc. v. Chase Taxidermy Supply Co., 74 F.3d 488, 496
(ash Cir Add. See also Microsoft. Corp. v. Gray Computer, Slo F.gupp. 
1077 (mid1995)*
Lerma's actions do not match those of infringers in cases where
courts have found willful violations.  In determining whether an
infringement was willful, the court in Superior Form Builders
considered the infringer's history of infringement' noting that on 
the record supports the conclusion that Dan Chase Taxidermy became
the largest taxidermy supplier in the country by consistently and
deliberately copying competitors' forms in disregard of the copyright
laws.h 74 F.3d at 497. The defendant also falsified a copyright on
his product, a mannequin, and was previously sued a least three times
for copyright infringement. 74 F ad at 497 Finally, the court
stressed that Chase had represented in his product catalogs that his
products were copyrighted and had therefore taken an inconsistent
position at trial that the mannequins were not copyrightable. In
contrast, Lerma has no history of copyright infringement and he made
no representation that he owned the copyright to the Works.
Damages Calculated -- For each instance of non-wilful infringement,
the Copyright Act enables the Court to award statutory damages of
"not less than $SOO or more then $20,000 as the court consider just."
17 O.S.. 9504)  (1995. In light of the five instances of infringement
which occurred in this case, because the penalty is being assessed
against an individual of
			31 

limited means who has already expended considerable sums in this
litigation, And because RTC  has indicated its express desire to seek
only the statutory minimum, provided its copyrights are protected.4
the Court intends to award the statutory minimum of $5OO for each
infringement, for a total statutory award of $2,500 in favor of RTC
and against Defendant Lerma, unless the RTC convinces the Court to
do otherwise.

Conclusion _ For the above - stated reasons, summary judgment on
the copyright claim is found in favor of plaintiff, RTC, against 
defendant Lerma.
The Clerk is directed to forward copies of this Memorandum 
Opinion to counsel of record and to defendant, pro se.

Entered the 4th Day of October, 1996.
{signature}  Leonie M. Brinkema
United States District Judge
Alexandria, Virginia

--
*** Rev Dr David Gerard                     http://suburbia.net/~fun/scn/ ***
"I think RTC may be living in 'interesting times'.  People are coming out
of the woodwork to poke them in the eye.  I have this vision of a large
cat surrounded by four nimble mice with miniature pro-per Uzis.  The cat
is bleeding $100 bills." (Perry Scott)

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!lippard Mon Oct 14 12:38:10 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:56977 misc.legal.computing:2367
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!lippard
From: [email-masked] (James J. Lippard)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing,nl.scientology
Subject: Re: **Biased Journalism** V2no19  Lerma Decision: RTC Lawyers Humiliated!
Date: 11 Oct 1996 16:14:01 -0700
Organization: Primenet (602)416-7000
Lines: 26
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]>
X-Posted-By: [email-masked] (lippard)

In article <[email-masked]>,
Jason Fordham  <[email-masked]> wrote:
>Steve A wrote:
>> Looks to me like the old six line "please don't throw me in the briar
>> bush" quote has been supplanted, no?
>
>What six lines are those, Steve?

The lines from OT7-48 that say:

   1. Find some plants, trees, etc. and communicate to them individually
until you know they received your communication. 
   2. Go to a zoo or a place with many types of life and communicate with
each of them until you know the communication is received and, if
possible, returned. 

Helena Kobrin used to threaten people for posting them, but they've been
printed in the _New York Times_, in _Skeptic_ magazine, and all over the
web (e.g.,
http://www.skeptic.com/03.4.news-scientology.html).

--
Jim Lippard    lippard@(primenet.com ediacara.org skeptic.com)
Phoenix, Arizona  http://www.primenet.com/~lippard/
PGP Fingerprint: 35 65 66 9F 71 FE 50 57  35 09 0F F6 14 D0 C6 04

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!sthomson Mon Oct 14 12:42:38 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:56723 misc.legal.computing:2343
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing,nl.scientology
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!sthomson
From: [email-masked] (shelley thomson)
Subject: **Biased Journalism** V2no20 The Envelope, Please!
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 08:03:48 GMT
Lines: 891
Sender: [email-masked]

     **Biased Journalism** : a net magazine designed to compensate for 
     the shortcomings of the professional news media.  We cover 
     issues of interest to the citizens of cyberspace.  This is a
     community newspaper of the net.  

     Copyright 1996 Shelley Thomson; all rights reserved.  

     Mail, articles and comment may be directed to <[email-masked]>.  
     Netiquette will be observed with all communication, except for the
     following:  harassing or threatening mail will be posted to the
     net immediately.        

**Biased Journalism**  Volume 2, issue 20    October 9, 1996.  

Contents:  The Envelope, Please:  A Hearing in San Jose;  A Word From
           Zenon; Letter to the Editor [Threat Mail from RTC]; Rodent
           Report [a gossip column]

Read at your own risk.  This is **Biased Journalism**!

1.  The Envelope, Please!  San Jose:  October 4, 1996

        Netizens Keith Henson and Grady Ward were scheduled to appear
before Judge Ronald Whyte at 10:30 a.m. in San Jose.   The occasion
was a lawyers' conference rather than a formal hearing.

        Aircraft toiled through the morning mist.  Tinted with the
exhalations of a quarter of a million automobiles, it gave a buttery
tone to the light.  Commuters waited in unmoving lines on the
freeways.   We had passed these lines on August 2; to our eye, they
appeared to be exactly the same cars.  Behind the mist the sky was
bright blue, streaked with white clouds.  It promised to be a hot
day.

        The courthouse plaza was almost empty.  A few hispanic men and
women waited outside the Immigration and Nationalization Service.
This time entrants were ostentatiously scanned for weapons by
uniformed guards.  The doors behind them were covered with paper
notices taped to the inside of the glass.  This lent a faintly sad
and scruffy air to the scene.

        We successfully passed through the metal detector and
proceeded to the fourth floor.  At a few minutes after ten, the Judge
was hard at work.  A solitary netizen lounged on the bench outside the
courtroom.  On the next bench, church attorneys were gathered in
force.  Everyone looked upbeat and rested.

        Attorney Helena Kobrin wore a navy blue suit in a fabric we
guessed as sueded silk with a white blouse, attractively striped in
red and peacock blue.  The formidable attorney carried a purse in lieu
of her usual large briefcase.

        Roger Milgrim strolled past, affording us a good view of his
blue striped tie and the red handkerchief in his breast pocket.  He
looked oddly like an usher at a wedding.  Eric Lieberman wore a very
plain but nicely tailored charcoal gray suit and a forgettable but
doubtlessly expensive tie.  His round glasses accented his schoolboy
air.  The lenses were self-tinting and made frequent shifts between
clear and black.

        As soon as netizens arrived, conversation between the RTC
attorneys sank to whispers.  Milgrim, Kobrin and McShane stared stonily
ahead, ignoring the net.citizens.  Lieberman watched the Henson group
with fascinated interest, like a small boy at the circus.

        The netizens looked back at Lieberman with exactly the same
attitude.

         Everyone took turns peering through the door, trying to see
where the Judge was in his calendar.

        There was nothing to do for a moment, so we went over to
talk to Eric Lieberman.  We were immediately drilled by unfriendly
stares from McShane and the attorneys.  We introduced ourselves and
asked if he remembered us from Keith Henson's deposition.  He admitted
this, but promptly denied that he had read our article about the
deposition.  "Do you have email?" we asked hopefully.  "No!"
[<fweet!>]  The other attorneys glared at him.  The conversation
was not developing as cordially as we had hoped, so we got to what
was on our mind.  "I understand that a motion was recently filed in
the Colorado case in which **Biased Journalism** was mentioned.
Can you tell me anything about this?" "No."

        Lieberman counterattacked very quickly.  "How do you know
about it?"

        We mentioned the post Arnie Lerma had recently made to
alt.religion.scientology.  By now the stares from Kobrin and McShane
were very unfriendly.

        McShane said, "why don't you have your buddy Larry send it to
you?"  It took us a moment to realize that he must mean Lawrence
Wollersheim.  We replied that Lawrence probably did not consider us a
friend at the moment.  "Well, what about Bob Penny," McShane said
nastily.  We chose to ignore the tacit invitation to discuss our
sources.  "If I already had it, I wouldn't be asking you for it," we
pointed out reasonably.  "Well, we don't know a thing about it,"
Lieberman said.  Everyone else nodded grimly.   [We wondered if the
motion in Colorado had been sealed.  In that case Graham Berry
probably had a few words to say to the loquacious Mr. Lerma.]
Conversation lagged for a moment.

        "I don't suppose you want to give me an interview," we
said.  They gave us lizard smiles like displeased Narn.  "You got that
right," McShane said.  We looked hopefully back at Lieberman, whose
glasses had turned black again.  "I would like to represent your
point of view."   

        "I really doubt that," McShane scoffed.  "well, let's put it
to the test" we proposed.  "I would like to interview Mrs. Kobrin."
We assured Mrs. Kobrin that she would be well treated, and promised
to stay away from legally sensitive issues.  Mrs. Kobrin said sadly
that she did not trust us.  We said we hoped she would change her
mind.  

        Keith Henson had arrived, looking cheerful and distinguished
in a navy blue suit.  Under his arm he carried a brightly colored
cardboard envelope.  It proved to be an overnight airmail folder
from Sweden.   (About which, more anon)  A few more netizens
strolled in.

        RTC attorney Tom Hogan greeted Henson cordially.  He wore
his usual gray suit, but looked rested.  Whatever had gone wrong for
RTC before the previous hearing, causing them all to look tired 
and surly, had not happened this time.

        Without ceremony, everyone suddenly piled into the
courtroom.

        The room was almost empty.  Roger Milgrim was already
at the large counsel table to the left.  A tall, lean man in
an impeccable white shirt and conservative tie was fussing
with some papers at the table, his face completely intent on
his job.  He brushed against a two-foot-tall stack of manila
folders; the top third slid off the table.  "Now I've done it"
he said gloomily.  He looked familiar.  A clerk rushed over to
pick up the files.  We realized that this was the Judge.

        Henson, Hogan, Kobrin, the Judge, Lieberman, Milgrim
and a few clerks sat down at the table.  This discussion was to
be off the record; the court reporter would be summoned later to
nail down whatever was agreed to.   

        Judge Whyte began briskly.  He started with the RTC
expedited motion to clarify or modify the Preliminary Injuction.
Mr. Henson has filed papers in this too.  I have the impression
that you don't have a dispute, the Judge says hopefully.

        Tom Hogan puffs up slightly like a disturbed cat.  He
complains that Henson has, in effect, switched signals.  Henson
wanted to take the entirety of NOTs 34 to the FDA.  He, Hogan,
pleaded with Henson not to do this, or to take only parts of
the NOTs.  [In the background, Eric Lieberman looks acutely
unhappy.]

        Whyte:   is it an issue between you, or not?

        Henson says he will agree to an injunction if his
wording is accepted.  Hogan mutters something to the effect that
he will agree as long as his language is accepted.

        Whyte looks at the parties doubtfully.  "Is this something
that you're agreeing to?  If there is language that both parties
agree to-"  ['This is wierd,' we can see the Judge thinking, 'but
if they want to go ahead with it ...']  But the Judge is a
conscientious man.  The issue cannot be swept under the rug.  He
turns to Henson and explains that Henson would have various options
under Hogan's proposed language; the language Henson is proposing
is broader.

        It is hard to find out what the real issue is, the Judge
says, because the parties want to make things difficult for
the other side.  The Judge wants to find out what the real issue
is and get it settled.  Having said this, he waits to see if
someone will tell him.   Everyone stares back unhelpfully.  
'This is a fight,' their body language says, 'and we couldn't
care less about the details.'

        Henson picks the moment to say that he will agree to
an injunction that says he cannot turn over the NOTs to anyone.

        The Judge fixes Henson with an icy glare.  If what
you mean for me to do is, I agree to an order that I know is
illegal, and I want you, Judge, to enter it--I won't have any
part of that.

        The Judge's cold rage is impressive.  The attorneys
curl slightly at the edges, but Henson looks back calmly.  He
does not look contrite.   After a bit the Judge instructs
Henson to notify him prior to giving the NOTs to the FDA.

        Hogan uses his turn to complain.  Mr. Henson has made
it clear from the beginning that he is simply doing this for
entertainment; his expenses come out of his entertainment budget;
he thinks it's "a hoot"... obviously no lawyer would ever behave
like this.  Sanctions should be awarded, payable to the Court.

        Whyte:  do it under the proper rules.  You should make
a separate motion on that.

        Hogan:  [obsequiously] absolutely right.

        Henson:  [meaningfully]  me, too.

        The Judge whisks through a series of problems.  With
respect to discovery issues, application must be made through
Magistrate Judge Infante.  The request to modify the injunction
to remove reference to trade secrets should be noticed on the
calendar, or else a time should be set at which he could file
a response.  [We think it is Henson's motion and Hogan's
response.]

        They arrive at the request of the church to take Henson's
deposition.  Theoretically he should be deposed only once, in
a group of related cases.  Henson has already been deposed in the
Ward case.  [**Biased Journalism** V2no10]  Speaking for RTC, Roger
Milgrim backtracks quickly.  He explains that they only need to
make the information in the existing deposition available in
the current case;  will Henson agree?

        Henson says he will agree provided that Grady agrees.

        A discovery conference is set on the 21st; this will
be held before Judge Infante.

        Lieberman's glasses are clear again.

        Now Henson pulls his surprise.  He remarks that he has
something to file with the court.  "This is a copy of NOTS 34,
from a publicly available file in Sweden."  The Judge looks
startled.  The RTC attorneys look shocked and furious.

        Judge Whyte accepts the document gingerly, as if it is
a new type of letter bomb.  "Have you seen this?  Do you want a
copy?" he says to RTC.  Yes indeed, most definitely, the RTC lawyers
want a copy.  Lieberman, his glasses phasing again, sounds cheerful.
Milgrim sounds menacing.

        The Judge declares that the document will be filed under
seal.  Milgrim tries to argue the trade secrets issue again,
but Whyte reminds him that he is off topic and anyway, if something
is not a secret, it is not a secret.

        Milgrim:  we do not believe that is a public document.

        Whyte (to Henson):  was it unsolicited?

        Henson:  yes.

        WHyte:  can anyone get it?

        Henson:  from Zenon, presumptively.

        Whyte:  no, my question was, can anyone get this for a fee?

        Henson:  yes.

        Milgrim (suppressively):  An individual filed some
documents that were placed by the Court of Appeals under seal-

        Judge Whyte:  so this was obtained before it was filed
under seal?

        Milgrim tells the Judge that the copy is unauthorized and
the document is not available in Sweden; a person broke an
injunction to file the document with Parliament.  He says he
has a declaration to file.  [see 2. Declaration of Warren McShane]
Then he says he wants the envelope--Henson's overseas air
letter--seized.  It may contain evidence [of a dastardly crime].

        Henson shrugs.  Milgrim picks up the envelope, then
glares at Henson.  "There's something missing from it, sir."
The return address is gone.

        Henson:  It got sort of trashed in the mail.  

        Milgrim (deeply sarcastic):  Oh, really.

        Milgrim asks the Judge if he can have the envelope.  "If
he wants to give it to you," Whyte says.  "Sure," Henson says.

        Milgrim launches into a story.  He explains to the Judge
that the material provided by Henson is in violation of an
existing court order in Sweden.  Without actually calling it a
conspiracy, he suggests that Henson is involved.

        Judge Whyte is unfazed.  "Take it up in the discovery
conference," he says briskly.  [For a moment we wonder whether he
has something against Judge Infante.]

        In the background, Eric Lieberman looks relieved.  At one or
two moments during the preceding discussion he has looked, briefly,
acutely unhappy.

        Henson is now talking about the huge burden he must bear in
his case.  He has to show the criminal nature of the church of
scientology.  "-that we are dealing with a criminal conspiracy..."

        Judge Whyte [recoiling]:  but that has nothing to do
with this case.

        Henson:  it's the justification for posting what I posted.

        Whyte:  remind me what you posted.

        Henson:  NOTs 34.  (He remarks on the worldwide nature of
the conspiracy.)

        Whyte:  can't you determine criminality by looking at the
document?

        Henson:  this is just one facet of an extremely large amount
of criminal activity.

        Whyte:  well, your defense with regard to posting NOTS 34
would presumably be  1) your argument that it's not a trade secret;
and 2) that the posting was fair use.  What else is there?

        Henson responds that you can do things that are marginal,
where the public good is involved.  Whyte replies that that is covered
under fair use.

        Henson:  but to show that it is fair use, I have to show the
criminal nature of the church of scientology.

        Henson wants to expedite discovery.  Judge Whyte, looking
unhappy, refuses to oblige Henson by delaying the trial.  The
schedule calls for a trial in May.  He sees no reason to delay it.
The trial will begin on May 26th unless Henson has a conflict.
Henson says that he will go along with this if Judge Whyte will
support him in his discovery efforts.

        Whyte explains that discovery will be handled by Magistrate
Judge Infante.  An issue can be brought to Judge Whyte if either
side feels that Infante has made an error of judgment.

        Milgrim steps in.  He wants to fiddle with the schedule,
and Whyte refers him to Infante.

        Tom Hogan asks for a court order.  He wants Whyte to order
Henson and RTC to settle [this apparently concerns the wording of
the Injunction].  Whyte says that he will order Judge Infante to
discuss the issue.

        The Judge then administers, in short form, a lecture he has
given several time before.  To Hogan, and RTC in general, he says:
"you have to be very conscious regarding sensitivity--you have
1, 2, 3, 4 lawyers and Mr. Henson there representing himself."
Magistrate Judge Infante of course tries to monitor the situation,
but "you should be aware that it can seem intimidating."  We need
good faith on both sides.   Settle in a way both of you can live
with, the Judge enjoins.  [He is saying plainly that he does not
want Henson to be pressured into a settlement by RTC attorneys.]

        Roger Milgrim mutters indistinctly.  In reply, the Judge
refers to the exchange between Grady Ward and Tom Henson during
Ward's deposition, without actually mentioning Ward.  He does not
want anything of the kind to happen in Henson's case.

        The court reporter, a strikingly pretty young woman,
takes a chair.   The Judge rattles off the agreements so far;
with regard to the schedule [discovery cutoff and trial
date], RTC has agreed and Henson has some difficulty,
but the Judge insists on maintaining the schedule.  There is a
pending motion by RTC to modify the language in the existing
injunction regarding the distribution of NOTS to the FDA.
Henson has a disagreement with this.  The judge doesn't
want any party agreeing unless they feel it's want they
want to do.  Do you agree [to modify the language]?
Yes, everyone says.  With respect to the deposition, RTC
says it has no desire to retake the deposition with
respect to any activity on or before the date of the
deposition, if it can use the deposition that was given in
the Ward case.  Henson agrees, provided that Grady Ward
also agrees.

        Henson says he wants to modify the preliminary
injunction to remove any reference to trade secrets.
Whyte wants to decide the issue based upon submissions
he already has, but grants Henson the right to reply
to RTC's reply.  At this point Milgrim intervenes.  He
complains that Hensons's style of litigation is eccentric
and unpredicitable.  Milgrim wants to reserve the right
to reply to Henson's reply.

        Judge Whyte reminds Milgrim that it is Henson's
motion, so Henson gets the last say.  If he does something
that you consider really outrageous, the Judge goes on,
you can apply to make a reply but I won't necessarily find
in your favor.

        Documents purportedly from Sweden, to be filed
under seal, the Judge says quickly.  After some haggling
the trial date is set for early June of 1997.

        The Judge comes to his notes, "#5.  no copies;"
I can't remember what this is.  Does it sound familiar to
anyone?  No?  Let's move on.

        Henson complains that RTC has applied to place restrictions
upon his reading and other handling of the masked NOTS, which
were originally supplied to him without any conditions.

        "I haven't read this yet," Judge Whyte replies.

        Roger Milgrim:  he will have full access to a sealed
copy.  He doesn't need to use computers and various methods to
[try to reconstitute the NOTS from the masked copies].  [The
word "internet," pronounced with loathing, occurs in his
discourse.]  He reserves the right to come back in under the
rules of the court to combat infringement, violations of the
court order ... Milgrim's words trail off, but his tone
insinuates  "...and other acts of depravity which would
only occur to an Internet habitue like this defendant..."

        Tom Hogan waits for Milgrim to run down, and then
reminds the judge about the settlement.   The Judge agrees to
order Magistrate Judge Infante to have the parties discuss
a settlement, but he does not actually order the parties to
settle, as Hogan wants.

        Discussion now turns to Grady Ward, who has not appeared
for his hearing.  Arrangements had been made for a telephone
conference, but the clerk states that Ward's number has been busy.
She has been unable to reach him.  The Judge remarks that he
was doing Ward a favor by allowing the telephone conference;
now Ward may or may not get a hearing before the Judge makes a
decision.

        This is it.  Without ceremony everyone gets up and
leaves.  The court reporter brings Henson a floppy disk containing
the transcript of the August 2 hearing.  The court has entered the
20th century.

Epilog:

        Keith Henson and his friends repaired to a restaurant
to discuss the events of the day.   A netizen telephoned Grady
Ward, who was surprised and disappointed that the call from the
courtroom did not go through.  He had been waiting all morning
for it.  His line had been clear.  This mystery is as yet
unexplained.

        The high point of the hearing was the squabble over the
envelope.  Henson laughed about it over lunch.   

--------------------------

2.  A Few Words from Zenon

        First, here is the McShane Declaration, which Roger Milgrim
apparently brought along as a contingency plan but hoped he would
not have to file.   Zenon Panoussis <[email-masked]>, the
irrepressible Swedish lawyer who gave copies of NOTS to his
parliament, sent us his comments.

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY    CENTER,)        No. C-96 20271 RMW
a California non-profit corporation;    )
        )       DECLARATION OF WARREN
    Plaintiff,  )       MCSHANE

)
V.      )       Date: October 4, 1996
        )       Time: 10:30 a.m.
H. KEITH HENSON, an individual  )       Hon: Ronald M. Whyte
        )
    Defendant.  )
        )

        I, Warren McShane, hereby declare:

        1.      1 am the President of Plaintiff, Religious Technology 
Center. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth below. If 
called upon, I could and would testify competently to these facts. 

        2.      Late Thursday afternoon, October 3, 1996, I was 
advised that Mr. Henson stated to RTC's counsel, Thomas R. Hogan, that 
NOTs 34 and other NOTs materials were readily available in Sweden, 
from a public source. Mr. Henson stated that these materials had been 
provided to Parliament. 

        3.      I have personal knowledge of current developments in 
Sweden concerning NOTS, Commencing in late August 1996, until late in 
September, I was present and daily supervised litigation against a 
Swedish citizen. A Swedish Court found that individual had wrongfully 
posted a large number of NOTs issues on the Internet. The Court 
enjoined him and ordered a seizure, which was promptly executed. 

        4.      In violation of the Court's injunction, the Swedish 
defendant filed a copy of the NOTs issues in the Court file. RTC 
immediately moved to place the documents under seal. The Court, 
however, initially declined to place the documents under seal. That 
decision was immediately appealed to the Swedish Court of Appeals. It 
promptly ordered sealing of the unpublished works in controversy, and 
has explicitly denied access to them to all third parties. While 
granting access to the defendant at the courthouse for the purposes of 
his defense, the Court of Appeals has expressly denied him the right 
to copy them. The trial court, thus instructed by the Court of 
Appeals, has also sealed these documents in its file. 

        5.      I learned in the past several days that the Swedish 
defendant, in violation of the Injunction, caused a copy of NOTs and 
the exhibits to the Fishman declaration (with which the Court is 
familiar) to be lodged with the Clerk of the Swedish Parliament. That 
copy was removed in about a day, seemingly by a person within the 
Parliament. The Clerk has advised our Swedish lawyers that no one 
accessed it or made copies. 

        6.      Shortly thereafter, the Swedish Defendant, again in 
violation of the Court's order, filed another set of these documents 
with the Clerk of Parliament. I have been advised by our counsel that 
the Clerk will permit limited access to the document, but will not 
permit any copying. RTC has filed a Writ in Parliament to seal. 

        7.      Since the current filing with the Clerk, at my 
request, parishioners have been at the Clerk's office, and I am 
advised that no unauthorized person has accessed it. 

        I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the 
United States that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in San 
Jose, California the 3rd day of October 1996. 

Warren McShane

Now for Zenon's comments:

>         3.  ... A Swedish Court found that individual had
> wrongfully posted a large number of NOTs issues on the Internet.
> The Court enjoined him and ordered a seizure, which was promptly
> executed.

The court found nothing of the sort.  In a preliminary decision,
taken without my hearing, the court forbade me to *infringe upon
RTC's copyright* and ordered the *preliminary* taking into custody
of such material that the RTC has copyright to.  Later the court of 
appeals modified the latter ruling, stating explicitly that *not 
all material to which the RTC owns the copyright, but only such 
material that infringes in that copyright, is to be kept in 
custody.  The difference is that I am permitted to have the
material for personal and other use permitted by copyright law
and the ordinance on the freedom of press (OFP), while *editions*
of the same material, numbers of identical copies intended for
distribution, are to remain in custody *pending a ruling in the
case*.

In any case, it is worth noting that the rulings forbid infringement, 
which is a legal term open to later judgement, rather that forbid a 
factual act, such as the distribution of the NOTs.  The courts have 
therefore done little more than repeat the text of statute; they have 
pronounced hardly any opinion on whether my copying and/or
distribution of the NOTs actually constitutes an infringement or not.

>         4.      In violation of the Court's injunction, the Swedish
> defendant filed a copy of the NOTs issues in the Court file. 

My filing of them violated in no way any injunction.  McShame is 
making legal assertions and interpretations of Swedish law that he 
is hardly competent to make.

> RTC immediately moved to place the documents under seal. The Court,
> however, initially declined to place the documents under seal. That
> decision was immediately appealed to the Swedish Court of Appeals.
> It promptly ordered sealing of the unpublished works in controversy,
> and has explicitly denied access to them to all third parties. 

This is correct, except for the word "unpublished". It is not to the 
witness to judge what is published or not.

> While granting access to the defendant at the courthouse for the
> purposes of his defense, the Court of Appeals has expressly denied
> him the right to copy them. 

This is a direct lie.  The court of appeals has granted *me* one copy, 
which was sent to my lawyer.  The decision does not contain *any* 
restrictions on the use of that document, leaving me free to show it, 
lend it to or give it away to any other person as I may please,
although--notably--the court had the ability to place such
restrictions on me according to the law on secrecy.

> The trial court, thus instructed by the Court of
> Appeals, has also sealed these documents in its file.

The trial court (I assume he means the primary court) cannot legally 
be instructed by the court of appeals.  On the contrary, in its
decision of RTC's appeal on the matter of secrecy on September 13th,
the court of appeals clearly stated that there exists no such thing
as an a priori sealing and that a separate decision on secrecy is to
be made by the authority that has a document every time a request for
the document is made.  The primary court will decide the secrecy
issue anew every single time it receives a request for a copy and the
decision will be based on all relevant facts, including the fact that
the parliament is handing out copies of the same document.

>         5.      I learned in the past several days that the Swedish
> defendant, in violation of the Injunction, caused a copy of NOTs and
> the exhibits to the Fishman declaration (with which the Court is
> familiar) to be lodged with the Clerk of the Swedish Parliament.

Legal assertations again.  I delivered a legal copy of the NOTs (i.e.  
a copy made by the primary court, which breaks every previous chain of 
possible unlawfulness and which can be handled freely according to
OFP) to the parliament, an act that does not constitute any violation
of anything.

> That copy was removed in about a day, seemingly by a person within
> the Parliament. The Clerk has advised our Swedish lawyers that no
> one accessed it or made copies.

McShame is lying.  The parliament received the NOTs on September 20th 
and lost them on September 30th.  A large number of copies was
produced and handed out in this while; among others, all major
Stockholm newspapers have ordered, received and paid for a copy each.
I received such a copy myself, that is now in circulation and a number
of individuals ordered and received copies as well.

Besides, the parliament's copy was not "removed", it was STOLEN. 

>         6.      Shortly thereafter, the Swedish Defendant, again in
> violation of the Court's order, filed another set of these documents
> with the Clerk of Parliament. I have been advised by our counsel
> that the Clerk will permit limited access to the document, but will
> not permit any copying. RTC has filed a Writ in Parliament to seal.

Two days after the theft I delivered a new copy, again without
violating any court orders.  The parliament has promptly been copying
ever since.  Seven members of the parliament have requested and
received copies and I myself requested and received a copy of this
"second edition".  Also, the newspaper Aftonbladet published the fact
that the NOTs are available at the parliament, causing quite a rush of
individuals asking for and receiving copies.  RTC may file whatever
writs they want, but they have no formal standing as a party in the
issue of secrecy vs publicity of the document in question.

>         7.      Since the current filing with the Clerk, at my
> request, parishioners have been at the Clerk's office, and I am
> advised that no unauthorized person has accessed it.

The "parishioners" went there and delivered their "What is
Scientology" and other glossy material, causing the clerk some mild
irritation.  The Fishman tactic of creating a scieno queue to the
documents in order to prevent others from seing them does not work
here.  An authority is under obligation to meet the demand of access
to public documents, so if the scienos create a queue, they will only
force the parliament to make still more copies, so that everybody can
read them.

>         I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
> United States that the foregoing is true and correct. 

He declares shit.  Hearsay and evaluations, that's all that he
declares.  He declares that others have told him this or that and
he declares his own interpretations of Swedish law.  Does he go down
for perjury if it is proven that his interpretations were anything
but true and correct?

He also omits the fact, known to him by now, that not only the 
parliament has and hands out copies of the NOTs.  Your [Keith
Henson's] own copy of #34 comes from the Chancellor of Justice,
who is also making copies to the public, a fact proven by your own
copy.  And still more authorities are making copies, each one of
them making it increasingly harder for all the others to ever seal
this document.

Only hours after I read McShame's statement did I realize that he just 
gave himself away with it.

This is what he wrote:

>         5.      I learned in the past several days that the Swedish
> defendant, in violation of the Injunction, caused a copy of NOTs and
> the exhibits to the Fishman declaration (with which the Court is
> familiar) to be lodged with the Clerk of the Swedish Parliament.

Until the late evening of Friday 27th September, when I posted in ars 
the news that the NOTs where in the parliament, neither McShame nor 
any other scientologist had the faintest idea about it. At the time 
of my posting the parliament was closed and did not re-open until 
the morning of Monday 30th September. When the scieno delegation 
arrived there and requested to see the document, it was discovered 
that the document was missing. Thus, the official scieno delegation 
never got to see it before the theft.

I wander now how the hell can McShame know with such accuracy what that 
document contained, if neither he nor any of his people ever saw it. 
Did the thief act on McShame's orders? Did the thief hand over the 
stolen document to McShame? Or did the thief just refer the stolen 
document to McShame over the phone?

>         I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
> United States that the foregoing is true and correct.

To be translated to

          I solemnly declare that I have either commited perjury or 
been an accessory to theft, or both, under the laws of the United 
States as well as under those of Sweden.

Z

3.  Letters to the Editor:  Helena Kobrin responds to our
    previous issue

Dear Ms. Thomson,

     I have seen your message posting the Lerma decision in spite
of knowing that there was an existing court order sealing the
decision and the e-mail to you from [email-masked], asking you to
issue a cancel for this posting.

     It is outrageous that you would post a sealed document in
spite of being on notice of a court order sealing that document. 
Rule 65(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that an
injunctive order is binding upon the parties, as well as those
persons in active concert or participation with them who receive
actual notice of the order by personal service or otherwise." 
Please confirm that you have actually cancelled the postings
containing the order.

     So you understand, RTC's attorneys are pleased with the order,
and the sealing request, which was only for three sentences of the
order, was made because of certain inaccurate statements which we
have brought to the Court's attention.  We anticipate that it will
be perfectly permissible to circulate the revised order once the
Court rules on our request.  

                                   Sincerely,     
                                   Helena Kobrin

------------------------------  
The email message referenced by Ms. Kobrin arrived earlier:

>From [email-masked] Wed Oct  9 14:58:53 1996
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 07:50:11 -0400
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: **Biased Journalism** V2no19 Lerma Decision: RTC Lawyers
Humiliated!

Shelly Thomson
[email-masked]

Reference:
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing,
nl.scientology

From: [email-masked] (shelley thomson)
Subject: **Biased Journalism** V2no19  Lerma Decision: RTC Lawyers
Humiliated!
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 03:09:27 GMT
Lines: 1140
Sender: [email-masked]
============================================================
With regard to:  Religious Technology Center v. Lerma, No. 95-1107-A
                        Eastern District of Virginia
============================================================
Dear Shelly,

As you state in the above referenced you understood the Lerma Decision
was sealed by the court.  Despite this knowledge you posted copies to
four Usenet newsgroups.

I ask you to immediately issue a cancel for this post.  And further,
if you forwarded it to others please ask them erase/destroy any
copies giving as the reason the fact that the court had ordered the
document sealed.

I would respectfully ask that you also do the same with whomever sent
it to you.  

A Concerned Parishioner,
[email-masked]

--------------------------

Here's what Attorney Kobrin is complaining about.  

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA 
Alexandria Division 

RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER, 

Plaintiff, 	v.	Civil Action No. 95-1107-A 

ARNALDO PAGLIARINI LERMA, 
Defendant.

PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE MOTION TO STRIKE OR SEAL SPECIFIED PORTIONS
OF THE COURT'S OPINION 

Plaintiff Religious Technology Center ("RTC") hereby moves the Court 
ex parte to strike two sentences, plus a few words of its October 4, 
1996 opinion (the "Opinion"), or in the alternative, to seal those 
specified portions pending the outcome of its appeal of the earlier 
trade secrets ruling by the Court.
This motion addresses a total of three sentences--all of which are in 
a background portion of the Opinion, and thus not integral to the 
Court's analysis--which purport to discuss or refer to beliefs of the 
Scientology religion. Two of those sentences are at page 2, lines 
11-16, beginning with the words "Scientologists believe." The few 
words are contained in the first sentence of the next paragraph,
namely "through the creation of 'free zones."' The one additional
sentence is at page 7, lines 11-13.  The discussion and references
contained in those sentences are prejudicial to RTC because (a) they
make references to information which is a part of the trade secrets
at issue in this case; (b) while they purport to state the religious
beliefs of Scientologists, they incorrectly state those beliefs, and
irrespective of trade secret status, they are unpublished works the
context of which the owner has never permitted to be published. 

	Specifically, RTC requests that the Court delete the language
set forth above, which is unnecessary to the Court's decision. 
Alternatively, the Court should not distribute the decision as 
currently worded, but rather, pending resolution of RTC's appeal on 
the trade secret issues, that the Court redact the three sentences 
referenced above with asterisks or some other notation so that a 
misrepresentationof RTC's beliefs is not circulated and RTC's appeal 
of its trade secret claim is not compromised.

This motion is based on the attached memorandum of points and 
authorities submitted herewith. It is filed ex parte in light of the 
urgency of dealing with the requested relief.
Notice is being furnished simultaneously to defendant Arnaido Lerma.

Religious Technology Center 
By counsel J. FREDERICK SINCLAIR, P.C. 
           910 King Street 
	   Alexandria, VA 22304 
Signature  
Sinciair 

Helena K. Kobrin 7629 Fulton Avenue North Hollywood, CA 905 

-----------------

4.  Rodent Report:  "Sitting on the dock of the Bay...wasting
                     time..."

        This week took a different turn for some well-known
cybercitizens.  A mouse disclosed that the sheriff of ars has
been touring Boston with a lady visitor from the West.  The two
rode ferry boats on the Charles River, saw the USS Constitution
and enjoyed the Navy Yard.  They dropped briefly into irc,
sharing an account and a chair.  Future plans involve visiting
other netizens and some time in a hot tub.

                        --Arlene Fortiori

------------------ The End ---------------------------------------

   [**Biased Journalism** is distributed free in cyberspace.  To
   subscribe, send a message to <[email-masked]>
   with "subscribe" as the subject.  Comments, article submissions
   and hot tips should be addressed to <[email-masked]>.
   Solid mail, checks and donations go to S. Thomson, 236 Stanford
   S/C, Suite 142, Palo Alto, CA 94304.  Separate issues of
   **Biased Journalism** are available via USA domestic mail at
   $5 apiece.  Foreign rates on request.  NEW:  back issues of
   **Biased Journalism** are available on floppy disk at $2
   per issue, minimum of four issues.]

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!sthomson Mon Oct 14 12:53:30 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:56723 misc.legal.computing:2343
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing,nl.scientology
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!sthomson
From: [email-masked] (shelley thomson)
Subject: **Biased Journalism** V2no20 The Envelope, Please!
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 08:03:48 GMT
Lines: 891
Sender: [email-masked]

     **Biased Journalism** : a net magazine designed to compensate for 
     the shortcomings of the professional news media.  We cover 
     issues of interest to the citizens of cyberspace.  This is a
     community newspaper of the net.  

     Copyright 1996 Shelley Thomson; all rights reserved.  

     Mail, articles and comment may be directed to <[email-masked]>.  
     Netiquette will be observed with all communication, except for the
     following:  harassing or threatening mail will be posted to the
     net immediately.        

**Biased Journalism**  Volume 2, issue 20    October 9, 1996.  

Contents:  The Envelope, Please:  A Hearing in San Jose;  A Word From
           Zenon; Letter to the Editor [Threat Mail from RTC]; Rodent
           Report [a gossip column]

Read at your own risk.  This is **Biased Journalism**!

1.  The Envelope, Please!  San Jose:  October 4, 1996

        Netizens Keith Henson and Grady Ward were scheduled to appear
before Judge Ronald Whyte at 10:30 a.m. in San Jose.   The occasion
was a lawyers' conference rather than a formal hearing.

        Aircraft toiled through the morning mist.  Tinted with the
exhalations of a quarter of a million automobiles, it gave a buttery
tone to the light.  Commuters waited in unmoving lines on the
freeways.   We had passed these lines on August 2; to our eye, they
appeared to be exactly the same cars.  Behind the mist the sky was
bright blue, streaked with white clouds.  It promised to be a hot
day.

        The courthouse plaza was almost empty.  A few hispanic men and
women waited outside the Immigration and Nationalization Service.
This time entrants were ostentatiously scanned for weapons by
uniformed guards.  The doors behind them were covered with paper
notices taped to the inside of the glass.  This lent a faintly sad
and scruffy air to the scene.

        We successfully passed through the metal detector and
proceeded to the fourth floor.  At a few minutes after ten, the Judge
was hard at work.  A solitary netizen lounged on the bench outside the
courtroom.  On the next bench, church attorneys were gathered in
force.  Everyone looked upbeat and rested.

        Attorney Helena Kobrin wore a navy blue suit in a fabric we
guessed as sueded silk with a white blouse, attractively striped in
red and peacock blue.  The formidable attorney carried a purse in lieu
of her usual large briefcase.

        Roger Milgrim strolled past, affording us a good view of his
blue striped tie and the red handkerchief in his breast pocket.  He
looked oddly like an usher at a wedding.  Eric Lieberman wore a very
plain but nicely tailored charcoal gray suit and a forgettable but
doubtlessly expensive tie.  His round glasses accented his schoolboy
air.  The lenses were self-tinting and made frequent shifts between
clear and black.

        As soon as netizens arrived, conversation between the RTC
attorneys sank to whispers.  Milgrim, Kobrin and McShane stared stonily
ahead, ignoring the net.citizens.  Lieberman watched the Henson group
with fascinated interest, like a small boy at the circus.

        The netizens looked back at Lieberman with exactly the same
attitude.

         Everyone took turns peering through the door, trying to see
where the Judge was in his calendar.

        There was nothing to do for a moment, so we went over to
talk to Eric Lieberman.  We were immediately drilled by unfriendly
stares from McShane and the attorneys.  We introduced ourselves and
asked if he remembered us from Keith Henson's deposition.  He admitted
this, but promptly denied that he had read our article about the
deposition.  "Do you have email?" we asked hopefully.  "No!"
[<fweet!>]  The other attorneys glared at him.  The conversation
was not developing as cordially as we had hoped, so we got to what
was on our mind.  "I understand that a motion was recently filed in
the Colorado case in which **Biased Journalism** was mentioned.
Can you tell me anything about this?" "No."

        Lieberman counterattacked very quickly.  "How do you know
about it?"

        We mentioned the post Arnie Lerma had recently made to
alt.religion.scientology.  By now the stares from Kobrin and McShane
were very unfriendly.

        McShane said, "why don't you have your buddy Larry send it to
you?"  It took us a moment to realize that he must mean Lawrence
Wollersheim.  We replied that Lawrence probably did not consider us a
friend at the moment.  "Well, what about Bob Penny," McShane said
nastily.  We chose to ignore the tacit invitation to discuss our
sources.  "If I already had it, I wouldn't be asking you for it," we
pointed out reasonably.  "Well, we don't know a thing about it,"
Lieberman said.  Everyone else nodded grimly.   [We wondered if the
motion in Colorado had been sealed.  In that case Graham Berry
probably had a few words to say to the loquacious Mr. Lerma.]
Conversation lagged for a moment.

        "I don't suppose you want to give me an interview," we
said.  They gave us lizard smiles like displeased Narn.  "You got that
right," McShane said.  We looked hopefully back at Lieberman, whose
glasses had turned black again.  "I would like to represent your
point of view."   

        "I really doubt that," McShane scoffed.  "well, let's put it
to the test" we proposed.  "I would like to interview Mrs. Kobrin."
We assured Mrs. Kobrin that she would be well treated, and promised
to stay away from legally sensitive issues.  Mrs. Kobrin said sadly
that she did not trust us.  We said we hoped she would change her
mind.  

        Keith Henson had arrived, looking cheerful and distinguished
in a navy blue suit.  Under his arm he carried a brightly colored
cardboard envelope.  It proved to be an overnight airmail folder
from Sweden.   (About which, more anon)  A few more netizens
strolled in.

        RTC attorney Tom Hogan greeted Henson cordially.  He wore
his usual gray suit, but looked rested.  Whatever had gone wrong for
RTC before the previous hearing, causing them all to look tired 
and surly, had not happened this time.

        Without ceremony, everyone suddenly piled into the
courtroom.

        The room was almost empty.  Roger Milgrim was already
at the large counsel table to the left.  A tall, lean man in
an impeccable white shirt and conservative tie was fussing
with some papers at the table, his face completely intent on
his job.  He brushed against a two-foot-tall stack of manila
folders; the top third slid off the table.  "Now I've done it"
he said gloomily.  He looked familiar.  A clerk rushed over to
pick up the files.  We realized that this was the Judge.

        Henson, Hogan, Kobrin, the Judge, Lieberman, Milgrim
and a few clerks sat down at the table.  This discussion was to
be off the record; the court reporter would be summoned later to
nail down whatever was agreed to.   

        Judge Whyte began briskly.  He started with the RTC
expedited motion to clarify or modify the Preliminary Injuction.
Mr. Henson has filed papers in this too.  I have the impression
that you don't have a dispute, the Judge says hopefully.

        Tom Hogan puffs up slightly like a disturbed cat.  He
complains that Henson has, in effect, switched signals.  Henson
wanted to take the entirety of NOTs 34 to the FDA.  He, Hogan,
pleaded with Henson not to do this, or to take only parts of
the NOTs.  [In the background, Eric Lieberman looks acutely
unhappy.]

        Whyte:   is it an issue between you, or not?

        Henson says he will agree to an injunction if his
wording is accepted.  Hogan mutters something to the effect that
he will agree as long as his language is accepted.

        Whyte looks at the parties doubtfully.  "Is this something
that you're agreeing to?  If there is language that both parties
agree to-"  ['This is wierd,' we can see the Judge thinking, 'but
if they want to go ahead with it ...']  But the Judge is a
conscientious man.  The issue cannot be swept under the rug.  He
turns to Henson and explains that Henson would have various options
under Hogan's proposed language; the language Henson is proposing
is broader.

        It is hard to find out what the real issue is, the Judge
says, because the parties want to make things difficult for
the other side.  The Judge wants to find out what the real issue
is and get it settled.  Having said this, he waits to see if
someone will tell him.   Everyone stares back unhelpfully.  
'This is a fight,' their body language says, 'and we couldn't
care less about the details.'

        Henson picks the moment to say that he will agree to
an injunction that says he cannot turn over the NOTs to anyone.

        The Judge fixes Henson with an icy glare.  If what
you mean for me to do is, I agree to an order that I know is
illegal, and I want you, Judge, to enter it--I won't have any
part of that.

        The Judge's cold rage is impressive.  The attorneys
curl slightly at the edges, but Henson looks back calmly.  He
does not look contrite.   After a bit the Judge instructs
Henson to notify him prior to giving the NOTs to the FDA.

        Hogan uses his turn to complain.  Mr. Henson has made
it clear from the beginning that he is simply doing this for
entertainment; his expenses come out of his entertainment budget;
he thinks it's "a hoot"... obviously no lawyer would ever behave
like this.  Sanctions should be awarded, payable to the Court.

        Whyte:  do it under the proper rules.  You should make
a separate motion on that.

        Hogan:  [obsequiously] absolutely right.

        Henson:  [meaningfully]  me, too.

        The Judge whisks through a series of problems.  With
respect to discovery issues, application must be made through
Magistrate Judge Infante.  The request to modify the injunction
to remove reference to trade secrets should be noticed on the
calendar, or else a time should be set at which he could file
a response.  [We think it is Henson's motion and Hogan's
response.]

        They arrive at the request of the church to take Henson's
deposition.  Theoretically he should be deposed only once, in
a group of related cases.  Henson has already been deposed in the
Ward case.  [**Biased Journalism** V2no10]  Speaking for RTC, Roger
Milgrim backtracks quickly.  He explains that they only need to
make the information in the existing deposition available in
the current case;  will Henson agree?

        Henson says he will agree provided that Grady agrees.

        A discovery conference is set on the 21st; this will
be held before Judge Infante.

        Lieberman's glasses are clear again.

        Now Henson pulls his surprise.  He remarks that he has
something to file with the court.  "This is a copy of NOTS 34,
from a publicly available file in Sweden."  The Judge looks
startled.  The RTC attorneys look shocked and furious.

        Judge Whyte accepts the document gingerly, as if it is
a new type of letter bomb.  "Have you seen this?  Do you want a
copy?" he says to RTC.  Yes indeed, most definitely, the RTC lawyers
want a copy.  Lieberman, his glasses phasing again, sounds cheerful.
Milgrim sounds menacing.

        The Judge declares that the document will be filed under
seal.  Milgrim tries to argue the trade secrets issue again,
but Whyte reminds him that he is off topic and anyway, if something
is not a secret, it is not a secret.

        Milgrim:  we do not believe that is a public document.

        Whyte (to Henson):  was it unsolicited?

        Henson:  yes.

        WHyte:  can anyone get it?

        Henson:  from Zenon, presumptively.

        Whyte:  no, my question was, can anyone get this for a fee?

        Henson:  yes.

        Milgrim (suppressively):  An individual filed some
documents that were placed by the Court of Appeals under seal-

        Judge Whyte:  so this was obtained before it was filed
under seal?

        Milgrim tells the Judge that the copy is unauthorized and
the document is not available in Sweden; a person broke an
injunction to file the document with Parliament.  He says he
has a declaration to file.  [see 2. Declaration of Warren McShane]
Then he says he wants the envelope--Henson's overseas air
letter--seized.  It may contain evidence [of a dastardly crime].

        Henson shrugs.  Milgrim picks up the envelope, then
glares at Henson.  "There's something missing from it, sir."
The return address is gone.

        Henson:  It got sort of trashed in the mail.  

        Milgrim (deeply sarcastic):  Oh, really.

        Milgrim asks the Judge if he can have the envelope.  "If
he wants to give it to you," Whyte says.  "Sure," Henson says.

        Milgrim launches into a story.  He explains to the Judge
that the material provided by Henson is in violation of an
existing court order in Sweden.  Without actually calling it a
conspiracy, he suggests that Henson is involved.

        Judge Whyte is unfazed.  "Take it up in the discovery
conference," he says briskly.  [For a moment we wonder whether he
has something against Judge Infante.]

        In the background, Eric Lieberman looks relieved.  At one or
two moments during the preceding discussion he has looked, briefly,
acutely unhappy.

        Henson is now talking about the huge burden he must bear in
his case.  He has to show the criminal nature of the church of
scientology.  "-that we are dealing with a criminal conspiracy..."

        Judge Whyte [recoiling]:  but that has nothing to do
with this case.

        Henson:  it's the justification for posting what I posted.

        Whyte:  remind me what you posted.

        Henson:  NOTs 34.  (He remarks on the worldwide nature of
the conspiracy.)

        Whyte:  can't you determine criminality by looking at the
document?

        Henson:  this is just one facet of an extremely large amount
of criminal activity.

        Whyte:  well, your defense with regard to posting NOTS 34
would presumably be  1) your argument that it's not a trade secret;
and 2) that the posting was fair use.  What else is there?

        Henson responds that you can do things that are marginal,
where the public good is involved.  Whyte replies that that is covered
under fair use.

        Henson:  but to show that it is fair use, I have to show the
criminal nature of the church of scientology.

        Henson wants to expedite discovery.  Judge Whyte, looking
unhappy, refuses to oblige Henson by delaying the trial.  The
schedule calls for a trial in May.  He sees no reason to delay it.
The trial will begin on May 26th unless Henson has a conflict.
Henson says that he will go along with this if Judge Whyte will
support him in his discovery efforts.

        Whyte explains that discovery will be handled by Magistrate
Judge Infante.  An issue can be brought to Judge Whyte if either
side feels that Infante has made an error of judgment.

        Milgrim steps in.  He wants to fiddle with the schedule,
and Whyte refers him to Infante.

        Tom Hogan asks for a court order.  He wants Whyte to order
Henson and RTC to settle [this apparently concerns the wording of
the Injunction].  Whyte says that he will order Judge Infante to
discuss the issue.

        The Judge then administers, in short form, a lecture he has
given several time before.  To Hogan, and RTC in general, he says:
"you have to be very conscious regarding sensitivity--you have
1, 2, 3, 4 lawyers and Mr. Henson there representing himself."
Magistrate Judge Infante of course tries to monitor the situation,
but "you should be aware that it can seem intimidating."  We need
good faith on both sides.   Settle in a way both of you can live
with, the Judge enjoins.  [He is saying plainly that he does not
want Henson to be pressured into a settlement by RTC attorneys.]

        Roger Milgrim mutters indistinctly.  In reply, the Judge
refers to the exchange between Grady Ward and Tom Henson during
Ward's deposition, without actually mentioning Ward.  He does not
want anything of the kind to happen in Henson's case.

        The court reporter, a strikingly pretty young woman,
takes a chair.   The Judge rattles off the agreements so far;
with regard to the schedule [discovery cutoff and trial
date], RTC has agreed and Henson has some difficulty,
but the Judge insists on maintaining the schedule.  There is a
pending motion by RTC to modify the language in the existing
injunction regarding the distribution of NOTS to the FDA.
Henson has a disagreement with this.  The judge doesn't
want any party agreeing unless they feel it's want they
want to do.  Do you agree [to modify the language]?
Yes, everyone says.  With respect to the deposition, RTC
says it has no desire to retake the deposition with
respect to any activity on or before the date of the
deposition, if it can use the deposition that was given in
the Ward case.  Henson agrees, provided that Grady Ward
also agrees.

        Henson says he wants to modify the preliminary
injunction to remove any reference to trade secrets.
Whyte wants to decide the issue based upon submissions
he already has, but grants Henson the right to reply
to RTC's reply.  At this point Milgrim intervenes.  He
complains that Hensons's style of litigation is eccentric
and unpredicitable.  Milgrim wants to reserve the right
to reply to Henson's reply.

        Judge Whyte reminds Milgrim that it is Henson's
motion, so Henson gets the last say.  If he does something
that you consider really outrageous, the Judge goes on,
you can apply to make a reply but I won't necessarily find
in your favor.

        Documents purportedly from Sweden, to be filed
under seal, the Judge says quickly.  After some haggling
the trial date is set for early June of 1997.

        The Judge comes to his notes, "#5.  no copies;"
I can't remember what this is.  Does it sound familiar to
anyone?  No?  Let's move on.

        Henson complains that RTC has applied to place restrictions
upon his reading and other handling of the masked NOTS, which
were originally supplied to him without any conditions.

        "I haven't read this yet," Judge Whyte replies.

        Roger Milgrim:  he will have full access to a sealed
copy.  He doesn't need to use computers and various methods to
[try to reconstitute the NOTS from the masked copies].  [The
word "internet," pronounced with loathing, occurs in his
discourse.]  He reserves the right to come back in under the
rules of the court to combat infringement, violations of the
court order ... Milgrim's words trail off, but his tone
insinuates  "...and other acts of depravity which would
only occur to an Internet habitue like this defendant..."

        Tom Hogan waits for Milgrim to run down, and then
reminds the judge about the settlement.   The Judge agrees to
order Magistrate Judge Infante to have the parties discuss
a settlement, but he does not actually order the parties to
settle, as Hogan wants.

        Discussion now turns to Grady Ward, who has not appeared
for his hearing.  Arrangements had been made for a telephone
conference, but the clerk states that Ward's number has been busy.
She has been unable to reach him.  The Judge remarks that he
was doing Ward a favor by allowing the telephone conference;
now Ward may or may not get a hearing before the Judge makes a
decision.

        This is it.  Without ceremony everyone gets up and
leaves.  The court reporter brings Henson a floppy disk containing
the transcript of the August 2 hearing.  The court has entered the
20th century.

Epilog:

        Keith Henson and his friends repaired to a restaurant
to discuss the events of the day.   A netizen telephoned Grady
Ward, who was surprised and disappointed that the call from the
courtroom did not go through.  He had been waiting all morning
for it.  His line had been clear.  This mystery is as yet
unexplained.

        The high point of the hearing was the squabble over the
envelope.  Henson laughed about it over lunch.   

--------------------------

2.  A Few Words from Zenon

        First, here is the McShane Declaration, which Roger Milgrim
apparently brought along as a contingency plan but hoped he would
not have to file.   Zenon Panoussis <[email-masked]>, the
irrepressible Swedish lawyer who gave copies of NOTS to his
parliament, sent us his comments.

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY    CENTER,)        No. C-96 20271 RMW
a California non-profit corporation;    )
        )       DECLARATION OF WARREN
    Plaintiff,  )       MCSHANE

)
V.      )       Date: October 4, 1996
        )       Time: 10:30 a.m.
H. KEITH HENSON, an individual  )       Hon: Ronald M. Whyte
        )
    Defendant.  )
        )

        I, Warren McShane, hereby declare:

        1.      1 am the President of Plaintiff, Religious Technology 
Center. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth below. If 
called upon, I could and would testify competently to these facts. 

        2.      Late Thursday afternoon, October 3, 1996, I was 
advised that Mr. Henson stated to RTC's counsel, Thomas R. Hogan, that 
NOTs 34 and other NOTs materials were readily available in Sweden, 
from a public source. Mr. Henson stated that these materials had been 
provided to Parliament. 

        3.      I have personal knowledge of current developments in 
Sweden concerning NOTS, Commencing in late August 1996, until late in 
September, I was present and daily supervised litigation against a 
Swedish citizen. A Swedish Court found that individual had wrongfully 
posted a large number of NOTs issues on the Internet. The Court 
enjoined him and ordered a seizure, which was promptly executed. 

        4.      In violation of the Court's injunction, the Swedish 
defendant filed a copy of the NOTs issues in the Court file. RTC 
immediately moved to place the documents under seal. The Court, 
however, initially declined to place the documents under seal. That 
decision was immediately appealed to the Swedish Court of Appeals. It 
promptly ordered sealing of the unpublished works in controversy, and 
has explicitly denied access to them to all third parties. While 
granting access to the defendant at the courthouse for the purposes of 
his defense, the Court of Appeals has expressly denied him the right 
to copy them. The trial court, thus instructed by the Court of 
Appeals, has also sealed these documents in its file. 

        5.      I learned in the past several days that the Swedish 
defendant, in violation of the Injunction, caused a copy of NOTs and 
the exhibits to the Fishman declaration (with which the Court is 
familiar) to be lodged with the Clerk of the Swedish Parliament. That 
copy was removed in about a day, seemingly by a person within the 
Parliament. The Clerk has advised our Swedish lawyers that no one 
accessed it or made copies. 

        6.      Shortly thereafter, the Swedish Defendant, again in 
violation of the Court's order, filed another set of these documents 
with the Clerk of Parliament. I have been advised by our counsel that 
the Clerk will permit limited access to the document, but will not 
permit any copying. RTC has filed a Writ in Parliament to seal. 

        7.      Since the current filing with the Clerk, at my 
request, parishioners have been at the Clerk's office, and I am 
advised that no unauthorized person has accessed it. 

        I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the 
United States that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in San 
Jose, California the 3rd day of October 1996. 

Warren McShane

Now for Zenon's comments:

>         3.  ... A Swedish Court found that individual had
> wrongfully posted a large number of NOTs issues on the Internet.
> The Court enjoined him and ordered a seizure, which was promptly
> executed.

The court found nothing of the sort.  In a preliminary decision,
taken without my hearing, the court forbade me to *infringe upon
RTC's copyright* and ordered the *preliminary* taking into custody
of such material that the RTC has copyright to.  Later the court of 
appeals modified the latter ruling, stating explicitly that *not 
all material to which the RTC owns the copyright, but only such 
material that infringes in that copyright, is to be kept in 
custody.  The difference is that I am permitted to have the
material for personal and other use permitted by copyright law
and the ordinance on the freedom of press (OFP), while *editions*
of the same material, numbers of identical copies intended for
distribution, are to remain in custody *pending a ruling in the
case*.

In any case, it is worth noting that the rulings forbid infringement, 
which is a legal term open to later judgement, rather that forbid a 
factual act, such as the distribution of the NOTs.  The courts have 
therefore done little more than repeat the text of statute; they have 
pronounced hardly any opinion on whether my copying and/or
distribution of the NOTs actually constitutes an infringement or not.

>         4.      In violation of the Court's injunction, the Swedish
> defendant filed a copy of the NOTs issues in the Court file. 

My filing of them violated in no way any injunction.  McShame is 
making legal assertions and interpretations of Swedish law that he 
is hardly competent to make.

> RTC immediately moved to place the documents under seal. The Court,
> however, initially declined to place the documents under seal. That
> decision was immediately appealed to the Swedish Court of Appeals.
> It promptly ordered sealing of the unpublished works in controversy,
> and has explicitly denied access to them to all third parties. 

This is correct, except for the word "unpublished". It is not to the 
witness to judge what is published or not.

> While granting access to the defendant at the courthouse for the
> purposes of his defense, the Court of Appeals has expressly denied
> him the right to copy them. 

This is a direct lie.  The court of appeals has granted *me* one copy, 
which was sent to my lawyer.  The decision does not contain *any* 
restrictions on the use of that document, leaving me free to show it, 
lend it to or give it away to any other person as I may please,
although--notably--the court had the ability to place such
restrictions on me according to the law on secrecy.

> The trial court, thus instructed by the Court of
> Appeals, has also sealed these documents in its file.

The trial court (I assume he means the primary court) cannot legally 
be instructed by the court of appeals.  On the contrary, in its
decision of RTC's appeal on the matter of secrecy on September 13th,
the court of appeals clearly stated that there exists no such thing
as an a priori sealing and that a separate decision on secrecy is to
be made by the authority that has a document every time a request for
the document is made.  The primary court will decide the secrecy
issue anew every single time it receives a request for a copy and the
decision will be based on all relevant facts, including the fact that
the parliament is handing out copies of the same document.

>         5.      I learned in the past several days that the Swedish
> defendant, in violation of the Injunction, caused a copy of NOTs and
> the exhibits to the Fishman declaration (with which the Court is
> familiar) to be lodged with the Clerk of the Swedish Parliament.

Legal assertations again.  I delivered a legal copy of the NOTs (i.e.  
a copy made by the primary court, which breaks every previous chain of 
possible unlawfulness and which can be handled freely according to
OFP) to the parliament, an act that does not constitute any violation
of anything.

> That copy was removed in about a day, seemingly by a person within
> the Parliament. The Clerk has advised our Swedish lawyers that no
> one accessed it or made copies.

McShame is lying.  The parliament received the NOTs on September 20th 
and lost them on September 30th.  A large number of copies was
produced and handed out in this while; among others, all major
Stockholm newspapers have ordered, received and paid for a copy each.
I received such a copy myself, that is now in circulation and a number
of individuals ordered and received copies as well.

Besides, the parliament's copy was not "removed", it was STOLEN. 

>         6.      Shortly thereafter, the Swedish Defendant, again in
> violation of the Court's order, filed another set of these documents
> with the Clerk of Parliament. I have been advised by our counsel
> that the Clerk will permit limited access to the document, but will
> not permit any copying. RTC has filed a Writ in Parliament to seal.

Two days after the theft I delivered a new copy, again without
violating any court orders.  The parliament has promptly been copying
ever since.  Seven members of the parliament have requested and
received copies and I myself requested and received a copy of this
"second edition".  Also, the newspaper Aftonbladet published the fact
that the NOTs are available at the parliament, causing quite a rush of
individuals asking for and receiving copies.  RTC may file whatever
writs they want, but they have no formal standing as a party in the
issue of secrecy vs publicity of the document in question.

>         7.      Since the current filing with the Clerk, at my
> request, parishioners have been at the Clerk's office, and I am
> advised that no unauthorized person has accessed it.

The "parishioners" went there and delivered their "What is
Scientology" and other glossy material, causing the clerk some mild
irritation.  The Fishman tactic of creating a scieno queue to the
documents in order to prevent others from seing them does not work
here.  An authority is under obligation to meet the demand of access
to public documents, so if the scienos create a queue, they will only
force the parliament to make still more copies, so that everybody can
read them.

>         I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
> United States that the foregoing is true and correct. 

He declares shit.  Hearsay and evaluations, that's all that he
declares.  He declares that others have told him this or that and
he declares his own interpretations of Swedish law.  Does he go down
for perjury if it is proven that his interpretations were anything
but true and correct?

He also omits the fact, known to him by now, that not only the 
parliament has and hands out copies of the NOTs.  Your [Keith
Henson's] own copy of #34 comes from the Chancellor of Justice,
who is also making copies to the public, a fact proven by your own
copy.  And still more authorities are making copies, each one of
them making it increasingly harder for all the others to ever seal
this document.

Only hours after I read McShame's statement did I realize that he just 
gave himself away with it.

This is what he wrote:

>         5.      I learned in the past several days that the Swedish
> defendant, in violation of the Injunction, caused a copy of NOTs and
> the exhibits to the Fishman declaration (with which the Court is
> familiar) to be lodged with the Clerk of the Swedish Parliament.

Until the late evening of Friday 27th September, when I posted in ars 
the news that the NOTs where in the parliament, neither McShame nor 
any other scientologist had the faintest idea about it. At the time 
of my posting the parliament was closed and did not re-open until 
the morning of Monday 30th September. When the scieno delegation 
arrived there and requested to see the document, it was discovered 
that the document was missing. Thus, the official scieno delegation 
never got to see it before the theft.

I wander now how the hell can McShame know with such accuracy what that 
document contained, if neither he nor any of his people ever saw it. 
Did the thief act on McShame's orders? Did the thief hand over the 
stolen document to McShame? Or did the thief just refer the stolen 
document to McShame over the phone?

>         I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
> United States that the foregoing is true and correct.

To be translated to

          I solemnly declare that I have either commited perjury or 
been an accessory to theft, or both, under the laws of the United 
States as well as under those of Sweden.

Z

3.  Letters to the Editor:  Helena Kobrin responds to our
    previous issue

Dear Ms. Thomson,

     I have seen your message posting the Lerma decision in spite
of knowing that there was an existing court order sealing the
decision and the e-mail to you from [email-masked], asking you to
issue a cancel for this posting.

     It is outrageous that you would post a sealed document in
spite of being on notice of a court order sealing that document. 
Rule 65(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that an
injunctive order is binding upon the parties, as well as those
persons in active concert or participation with them who receive
actual notice of the order by personal service or otherwise." 
Please confirm that you have actually cancelled the postings
containing the order.

     So you understand, RTC's attorneys are pleased with the order,
and the sealing request, which was only for three sentences of the
order, was made because of certain inaccurate statements which we
have brought to the Court's attention.  We anticipate that it will
be perfectly permissible to circulate the revised order once the
Court rules on our request.  

                                   Sincerely,     
                                   Helena Kobrin

------------------------------  
The email message referenced by Ms. Kobrin arrived earlier:

>From [email-masked] Wed Oct  9 14:58:53 1996
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 07:50:11 -0400
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: **Biased Journalism** V2no19 Lerma Decision: RTC Lawyers
Humiliated!

Shelly Thomson
[email-masked]

Reference:
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing,
nl.scientology

From: [email-masked] (shelley thomson)
Subject: **Biased Journalism** V2no19  Lerma Decision: RTC Lawyers
Humiliated!
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 03:09:27 GMT
Lines: 1140
Sender: [email-masked]
============================================================
With regard to:  Religious Technology Center v. Lerma, No. 95-1107-A
                        Eastern District of Virginia
============================================================
Dear Shelly,

As you state in the above referenced you understood the Lerma Decision
was sealed by the court.  Despite this knowledge you posted copies to
four Usenet newsgroups.

I ask you to immediately issue a cancel for this post.  And further,
if you forwarded it to others please ask them erase/destroy any
copies giving as the reason the fact that the court had ordered the
document sealed.

I would respectfully ask that you also do the same with whomever sent
it to you.  

A Concerned Parishioner,
[email-masked]

--------------------------

Here's what Attorney Kobrin is complaining about.  

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA 
Alexandria Division 

RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER, 

Plaintiff, 	v.	Civil Action No. 95-1107-A 

ARNALDO PAGLIARINI LERMA, 
Defendant.

PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE MOTION TO STRIKE OR SEAL SPECIFIED PORTIONS
OF THE COURT'S OPINION 

Plaintiff Religious Technology Center ("RTC") hereby moves the Court 
ex parte to strike two sentences, plus a few words of its October 4, 
1996 opinion (the "Opinion"), or in the alternative, to seal those 
specified portions pending the outcome of its appeal of the earlier 
trade secrets ruling by the Court.
This motion addresses a total of three sentences--all of which are in 
a background portion of the Opinion, and thus not integral to the 
Court's analysis--which purport to discuss or refer to beliefs of the 
Scientology religion. Two of those sentences are at page 2, lines 
11-16, beginning with the words "Scientologists believe." The few 
words are contained in the first sentence of the next paragraph,
namely "through the creation of 'free zones."' The one additional
sentence is at page 7, lines 11-13.  The discussion and references
contained in those sentences are prejudicial to RTC because (a) they
make references to information which is a part of the trade secrets
at issue in this case; (b) while they purport to state the religious
beliefs of Scientologists, they incorrectly state those beliefs, and
irrespective of trade secret status, they are unpublished works the
context of which the owner has never permitted to be published. 

	Specifically, RTC requests that the Court delete the language
set forth above, which is unnecessary to the Court's decision. 
Alternatively, the Court should not distribute the decision as 
currently worded, but rather, pending resolution of RTC's appeal on 
the trade secret issues, that the Court redact the three sentences 
referenced above with asterisks or some other notation so that a 
misrepresentationof RTC's beliefs is not circulated and RTC's appeal 
of its trade secret claim is not compromised.

This motion is based on the attached memorandum of points and 
authorities submitted herewith. It is filed ex parte in light of the 
urgency of dealing with the requested relief.
Notice is being furnished simultaneously to defendant Arnaido Lerma.

Religious Technology Center 
By counsel J. FREDERICK SINCLAIR, P.C. 
           910 King Street 
	   Alexandria, VA 22304 
Signature  
Sinciair 

Helena K. Kobrin 7629 Fulton Avenue North Hollywood, CA 905 

-----------------

4.  Rodent Report:  "Sitting on the dock of the Bay...wasting
                     time..."

        This week took a different turn for some well-known
cybercitizens.  A mouse disclosed that the sheriff of ars has
been touring Boston with a lady visitor from the West.  The two
rode ferry boats on the Charles River, saw the USS Constitution
and enjoyed the Navy Yard.  They dropped briefly into irc,
sharing an account and a chair.  Future plans involve visiting
other netizens and some time in a hot tub.

                        --Arlene Fortiori

------------------ The End ---------------------------------------

   [**Biased Journalism** is distributed free in cyberspace.  To
   subscribe, send a message to <[email-masked]>
   with "subscribe" as the subject.  Comments, article submissions
   and hot tips should be addressed to <[email-masked]>.
   Solid mail, checks and donations go to S. Thomson, 236 Stanford
   S/C, Suite 142, Palo Alto, CA 94304.  Separate issues of
   **Biased Journalism** are available via USA domestic mail at
   $5 apiece.  Foreign rates on request.  NEW:  back issues of
   **Biased Journalism** are available on floppy disk at $2
   per issue, minimum of four issues.]

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!ocean.netrover.com!news1.good.net!news.good.net!news.magicnet.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!netcom.com!noring Thu Oct 24 08:23:15 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:58568 misc.int-property:772 misc.legal:18710 misc.legal.computing:2449
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology,alt.society.civil-liberty,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property,misc.legal.computing,misc.legal
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!ocean.netrover.com!news1.good.net!news.good.net!news.magicnet.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!netcom.com!noring
From: [email-masked] (Jon Noring)
Subject: [I Plan to Order the NOTS]  NOTs publicly available in Sweden
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
References: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 00:29:07 GMT
Lines: 93
Sender: [email-masked]

In article [email-masked] (Grady Ward) writes:

>On Monday, October 21, 1996 I received an unsolicited package 
>via United Parcel Service, purportedly from a Mr Lars Ek, Box 5027, 
>161 05 Bromma, Sweden.  Enclosed in the package was two separate 
>copies of the documents the plaintiff claims are the NOTs Series 1-54, 
>collectively registered under the U.S.Copyright Office as certificate TXu 
>257 326 and the subject of my preliminary injunction that I have moved 
>to dissolve.
>According to my knowledge and belief and the representation of 
>the sender of these documents, these documents are publicly available 
>throughout Sweden from at least (1) The Chancellor of Justice; (2) The 
>Department of Justice; (3) The office of the Parliament; (4) The Primary 
>Court of Stockholm. It is my knowledge and belief that the Swedish 
>constitutional principle known as "offentlighetsprincip" ("public 
>common papers") applies.  This principle guarantees that these papers be 
>forever publicly available for a standard copying fee.
>I file under seal the two documents thus publicly procured 
>(Exhibit A).  Each bears the official seal and security threads of either 
>the Chancellor of Justice ("Justitiekanslern")  or of the Department of 
>Justice. According to my correspondent, the Chancellor of Justice is the 
>highest level civil servant in Sweden. She or he has the explicit 
>constitutional duty to defend the freedom of the media and to protect the 
>principle of offentlighetsprincip. In Sweden this position is separate 
>from either the government or of parliament. Under the "law of the 
>archives" the NOTs are guaranteed to be kept as public common papers 
>in perpetuity, available for whomever requests it and pays the copying 
>fee. According to my knowledge and belief, this principle of public 
>documents is felt to be such an important constitutional cornerstone in 
>Sweden that Sweden only joined the European Community under the 
>condition that this principle be preserved.
>	Exhibit B documents the significance of the security seals and 
>stamps and gives information on both verifying and ordering these 
>materials. According to the correspondent, these copies are public 
>common papers without any relation to the RTC v Zenon Parnoussis 
>case and were not made public solely as a consequence of this case.  
>That is, the status of the case in Sweden will have no effect on their 
>permanent status as "public common papers." This exhibit also 
>impeaches the testimony of plaintiff Warren McShane in a related 
>affidavit.
>	Exhibit C is the receipt in Swedish Crowns for making ten legal 
>copies of these documents under Swedish law and having them notarized 
>by the relevant official.

IANAL, but I fully expect the cult to pour big bucks into lots of law firms
into trying to resolve this matter to their satisfaction because if they
don't it'll adversely affect their current U.S. litigation strategy claiming
trade secret protection.

It MAY also provide a legal way by which each Free Zoner can obtain the NOTS
(again, just my opinion, and IANAL -- you do so at your own risk).  It is of
course a violation of copyright to copy the document obtained from Sweden,
but it is not a violation of U.S. law, as far as I can tell (though RTC will
be forced to make that claim) to possess and read a copy secured directly
from the Swedish Parliament with the proper Swedish government stamps.  (It
would not surprise me if there are relevant international treaty obligations
the U.S. has with Sweden regarding the possession of these documents by U.S.
citizens -- and of course, people in other countries are governed by their
own country's laws and treaty obligations.  I suppose people in Germany can
get their own copy of the NOTS legally from the Swedish Parliament.  :^)  )

I hope that the trade secret and copyright experts on misc.int-property will
comment on the aspects of this situation, especially regarding the legality
of U.S. citizens of obtaining and possessing a copy of the NOTS from the
Swedish Parliament for personal use only.  I am not a lawyer, so I'm not
sure if a U.S. citizen can legally obtain and possess the NOTS document from
the Swedish Parliament.

BTW, I wonder if somebody will submit the OT materials to the Swedish
Parliament?  And maybe the other secret high-level materials once they get
exposed to the Internet?  I can't wait to get my legal copy from Sweden.

My final caveat -- I am not a lawyer -- any action you take as a result of
this post is at your own risk.  Do consult with an attorney if you are
unsure.

Jon Noring

(p.s., if I don't get a letter directly from Ms. Kobrin or other RTC
attorney telling me that it is a violation of law or RTC/CoS rights to order
my own copy of the NOTS from the Swedish Parliament, I plan to send in my
request next Monday.  How about it, Ms. Kobrin?  Do I get the letter?  Of
course, if I do, I won't order the NOTS (since I'm a nice law abiding
citizen), but I do plan to forward a copy of your letter to Keith and Grady,
which I retain the right to do as part of this notice.  I wonder if others
here plan to do the same?)

-- 
OmniMedia Electronic Books | URL:  http://www.awa.com/library/omnimedia
9671 S. 1600 West St.      | Anonymous FTP:
South Jordan, UT 84095     | ftp.awa.com  /pub/softlock/pc/products/OmniMedia
801-253-4037               | E-mail:  [email-masked]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join the Electronic Books Mailing List (EBOOK-List) Today!  Just send e-mail
to [email-masked], and put the following line in the body of the message:
     subscribe ebook-list     

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!ocean.netrover.com!news1.good.net!news.good.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!news.gate.net!NewsWatcher!user Wed Nov  6 07:58:25 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:61146 misc.int-property:791 misc.legal:19229
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!ocean.netrover.com!news1.good.net!news.good.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!news.gate.net!NewsWatcher!user
From: [email-masked] (Andrew C. Greenberg)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Seizure of Copyrights to Pay Judgements? (was Re: Swedish NOTS...)
Date: Sat, 02 Nov 1996 08:53:45 -0400
Organization: Carlton Fields
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: navajo.gate.net
NNTP-Posting-User: werdna
X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.2.0b4

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (Jon Noring) wrote:

> IP attornies welcome to *theoretically* discuss (and put in the proper
> disclaimers) regarding whether or not copyrights themselves can be seized
> in order to pay a court-ordered judgement, including international aspects.
> That is, can they be considered an asset, and what is the case history
> regarding this?

A word about "theoretical" discussions.  Saying so doesn't make it so, and
a disclaimer is not effective or dispositive in many cases.  In fact, I
have really nothing useful to say about the particular lawsuit, but can
offer the following practical remarks concerning veil-piercing and
executing on a judgment.  This area can be very jurisdiction-specific, so
the remarks below may have no relevance at all to the facts of any case,
let alone the one you arked about.

Copyrights are personal property, and all such property can be reached as
can any other asset in the execution of an appropriate judgment of a court of
competent jurisdiction.  Typically such execution would entail a public
auction of the asset to satisfy the judgment, where the judgment debtor
would bid, at least, the value of the judgment, and guess who will be
there, always, to bid at least one dollar more?  If the judgment was made
by a foreign court, for whom there is no requirement of full faith and
credit under U.S. law, then some inquiry would have to be made concerning
applicable treaties and the process for  nationalizing the judgment to the
situs of the Copyright.

More concretely, it appears that CoS has been doing pretty much "the right
thing", by giving corporations *LICENCES* with respect to the copyrights,
thus giving the licensees standing to sue. . (This is not true with many
other  forms of IP asset.)  Thus, the only judgment that could be obtained
is the intangible contract rights, which I am certain would be
non-assignable. If the actual registrant, not the  licensee, were a party
to the action, that might be another thing.

The trick is to reach the CORPORATION that holds the asset, not the asset
itself.  Of course, that is the problem.  Cracking a corporate shell has
been harder and harder these days.  On the other hand, when intentional
torts occur, particularly torts related to the copyright res itself, it
would become more and more possible.  But don't get cocky, even with a
slam-dunk case, courts are very loathe to pierce the shell.

-- 
just another view,
Andy Greenberg ([email-masked])
Carlton Fields

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!netcom.com!noring Thu Nov  7 07:41:13 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:61335 misc.int-property:792 misc.legal:19247
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal,misc.int-property
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!netcom.com!noring
From: [email-masked] (Jon Noring)
Subject: [Forward] Loopholes in copyright
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 1996 14:38:18 GMT
Lines: 145
Sender: [email-masked]

I received the following e-mail from a person in Sweden, and they asked me
to post it to Usenet.  I look forward to comments.  I've placed a few comments
and questions myself in [].

Jon Noring

************************************
(begin forwarded message)

Here in Sweden, we can't understand, why some many otherwise capable critics
of Co$ accept the 'ho's way of definition of the actual legal situation.

[note, the 'ho' is Ms. Helene Kobrin.  I will never call her that but I did
not want to edit this message.]

For example.  Someone talked about a Swedish "loophole" in the copyright laws.
There certainly exists no such thing.  Instead a Californian lawyer of
questionable reputation has tried to create a loophole in our
offentlighetsprincip.  And this is part of our constitution as well as of our
society, and especially of the daily life of our news journalists.  The
offentlighetsprincip is part of their professional pride, and has been so for
200 years.

Up to now, not a single Swedish journalist has shown kindliness to Co$ in
their covering of the case RTC vs. Zenon Panoussis.  Why?  Reverse the
sitauation:  a shady Swedish lawyer argues before an American judge, that the
First Amendment must be declared invalid in her actual case.  It can't be
applied.  A gaging order must be in place to abide for everybody in the whole
country.  Then think about the effect on the US opinion, and especially on
the journalists.

And add to this:  this shady Swedish lawyer doesn't even accept the fact that
Swedish laws don't apply at all in USA.

Helena K. Kobrin, the erudite lawyer, has attacked more than a single Swede
with OTs and NOTs on his web.  She has done it under the illusion, that the
US Constituion, and the laws of the State of California are valid in foreign
countries.  A first class lawyer simply avoids to place herself in such mess.
She will lose the case against Zenon Panoussis, and her loss will hurt her
and RTC.

Another someone has posted the following to a.r.s, which may be a
represetative quote: "...but here in the US trademark law is quirky.  You can
only keep your trademarks if you 'actively and vigoursely' make sure nobody
else uses them in a manner that would be confusing to your product, and the
term has not fallen into 'common usage'."

That explains the differencies between the legal systems in a very expressive
way.  The same could be said about the whole immaterial rights area:  Trade
marks, copyrights, patents and Trade secrets.  The same clash between the US
and Swedish legal systems could have aroused for the others types of
immaterials too.  The cause that it has not happened, is simple:  there is
exactly one madcap, who is also owner of immaterial rights:  the Church of
Scientology group of companies.  None else.  That's the reason.  And the
madcap in question happens to pretend to own a Trade Secret.  So the limelight
is focused on the Trade secret law differencies between USA and Sweden, even
if it's formally correct but erronously called a copyright issue.

[I'm not certain what this person said here.  Does anybody know what is meant
here by 'madcap'?]

You have two ways to go:

(1) You can simply keep your secrets secret without invoking the help the
    legal system to do so.  (Example:  the Freemasons.) 

(2) You can ask for the full protection of the State for your immaterial
    rights. (Example:  Co$)

In the US, you can have it both ways simultanously.  Or you can at least try
to have it both ways, which is the behaviour of Co$.  In Sweden you must
choose one of the alternatives.  (Except in certain cases.)
 
Now the differencies can be shown in few words in case(2):

- in the US you can get the protection from the State without making the
  Trade secrets public.

- in Sweden you must, sooner or later, make them public, if you are searching
  for the help of the State and the legal system. 

This is oversimplified.  There are exceptions to above also in Sweden.  But
it's wrong to say, that the difference depends only on the 
offentlighetsprincip.  The difference in the application of the immaterial
laws is not between Sweden and Europe, but between Europe and USA.  The
offentlighetsprincip makes only the publicly much faster and more total in
Sweden.  That's the difference between Sweden and the other European
countries, except Finland.

[I assume that when it is referred to as 'immaterial laws', the writer is
actually meaning 'intellectual property laws' in U.S. legal jargon.]

When you have gotten the custody from the Swedish State for your owned
immaterial rights, there's much lesser need for a Swede to sue again and 
again for infringements.  You don't lose your ownership, if you don't sue.
But there are shades from the Amercan way in Sweden too.  Somewhere there is
a limit, where the lawfull owner must sue.  If you avoid that, you don't
automatically lose the ownership.  Which, I understand, could be the effect
in USA.  Or perhaps normally is the outcome. 

The irony of the whole situation is, that Ms. Kobrin very well CAN sue for
copyright infringement under the Swedish laws, and even perhaps collect a
little money, if the culprit has had some income of it.  But she can't do
that without unlimited public attendance at the hearings, and full legal
status of all documnents as "public common papers".

In Zenon's case, the correspondent to Judges Brinkema and Whyte is Judge
(Swedish title:  radman) Olle Sorheim, divison 7 of the Primary Court of
Stockholm.  He is a nice and hardworking jurist showing obvious competence.
But, nevertheless, in the most brutal way:  the offentlighetsprincip MUST be
applied.  The narrow aim is:  is judge Sorheim impartial?  Sober?  Does he
follow the laws?  Maybe the plaintiff or the defendant have bribed him?  Is
he challengable because the plaintiff's lawyer is his mother-in-law?  And so
on.  We, not only the plaintiff and the defendant, MUST be able to exercise 
control, our OWN control, over such things.  But "we", at least most of us,
have delegated that as a duty for the journalists.  (95% of the Swedish
citizens lack the knowledge how to order a copy of the NOTs from their own
Parliament.  Remember that.  The offentlighetsprincip is powerfull, but
certainly not easy to apply against a court or an agency deliberately using
foul counterplay with all means.)

The broader scope is that the offentlighetsprincip is necessary for the common
debate and the molding of opinions in the whole society.  When a newspaper or
a TV channel let both Zenon and Tarja Vulto, spokeswoman for Co$, give their
respective versions, it's exactly how the Fathers of the Constitution meant,
that the offentlighetsprincip should function.  Zenon says, the Co$' group of
companies markets crap.  Well, with the help of the offentlighetsprincip we
can all form an idea, which of course requires reading the text of the NOTs
as public common papers.

Stop talking about "loopholes" in the Swedish copyright laws!  There are none.
We manned the barricades, when some damned foreign lawyer attacked our
Constitution.  American citizens would have done exactly the same.

We won. 

(end of forwarded message)
************************************************* 

-- 
OmniMedia Electronic Books | URL:  http://www.awa.com/library/omnimedia
9671 S. 1600 West St.      | Anonymous FTP:
South Jordan, UT 84095     | ftp.awa.com  /pub/softlock/pc/products/OmniMedia
801-253-4037               | E-mail:  [email-masked]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join the Electronic Books Mailing List (EBOOK-List) Today!  Just send e-mail
to [email-masked], and put the following line in the body of the message:
     subscribe ebook-list     

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.iosphere.net!news.supernet.net!news.magicnet.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!tomklem Sat Nov 16 10:30:04 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:62089 misc.int-property:805 misc.legal.computing:2590
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.int-property,misc.legal.computing
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.iosphere.net!news.supernet.net!news.magicnet.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!tomklem
From: [email-masked] (Tom Klemesrud)
Subject: Re: The 'ho wants the Swedish NOTs mailing label!
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Organization: Knights of Xenu, Bureau "Pueblo Uno."
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 1996 10:09:18 GMT
Lines: 69
Sender: [email-masked]

Grady Ward ([email-masked]) wrote:

: In a hilarious turn of events, Helena K. Kobrin ...
: has DEMANDED that I produce:

: "1.   All documents concerning your alleged receipt of "an unsolicited
: package via United Parcel service, purportedly from a Mr Lars Ek, Box
: 5027, 161 05 Bromma, Sweden," including without limitation, the
: mailing label, package, bill of lading, customs forms, any documents
: or other things contained in the package, and any correspondence
: regarding the package, whether by e-mail, Internet posting, or in any
: other form."

Can't you just point out the fastest way for her to get the stuff
would be to download at:

http://home.sol.no/heldal/CoS  ?

Wouldn't that save everyone--including Judge Hon. "L" Ron Whyte--
a lot of mailing, typing and general litigating activities--and save a 
few trees!

Can't Hon. Ron Whyte get access to the World Wide Web?  It would save 
everyone--especially the american taxpayers--a lot of money.  Doesn't it 
mention in the book Judge Whyte cited in a ruling:  "The Internet for 
Dummies," how to get an account?  Can't the judge manage at least that?
Doesn't the Judge have intern law clerks fresh out of law school who know 
how to work the internet; or, did he lose all his help when clerk 
Michael Levin, working the RTC v Netcom case--who talked to me prsonally 
about the case--left to join Scientologist founded Earthlink's law firm--
with the inside skinny on the case fresh in head that can be found 
smerking on the Wilson, Sonsini web site?

We know that Thomas R. Hogan's office is at 60 S. Market street, 
San Jose, CA. We also know this is the business address of Judge Whyte's 
daughter. In fact it is the address of Judge Whyte's former law firm, 
Hoge, Fenton, Jones, and Appel. In fact the firm OWNS the building 
through the shell "HFJA Pueblo Uno" for which Ronald M. Whyte was 
President, before becoming a Federal District Judge five years ago.  
It seems that Hon. Ron Whyte was Scientology Attorney, Thomas R. Hogan's 
landlord.  (In fact it was originally Thomas R. Hogan who referred to the 
Honorable Judge Ronald M. Whyte, in the more informal, "Hon. Ron Whyte" 
in an actual RTC v Netcom pleading.)

If I were still in the case, I would ask Judge Whyte if he has ever taken 
a gift from Hogan, gone golfing, or done other actvities with Hogan; or, 
had a member of his family engage in business with Hogan.

This is especially importance with reference to the landmark mail 
fraud and conspiracy to commit racketeering convictions, October 18th, 
1996 of ex-Superior Court Judges G. Dennis Adams and James Malkus, and 
civil attorney Patrick R. Frega who merely appoached the line of
judicial impropriety in the Judicial corruption case thast exposed a 
"good old boy" system of favoritism in the San Diego courts that the 
trial judge--U.S. District Judge Rafeedie of Los Angeles--said had 
been festering for years.  

(Judge Rafeedie took the case because there was no Federal Judge in 
San Diego who did not know the two accused judges, and/or the civil 
attorney.  Can I assume the judge threatening to jail Dennis Erlich at 
the behest of a Scientology-motivated ex-spouse, for refusing a financial 
disclosure order concerning child support litigation (possibly paid for by 
the "Church"), also knew the two racketeering judges, and civil attorney?)

						Tom Klemesrud SP6
						KoX

						

From elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!info.ucla.edu!agate!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!news.magicnet.net!news.good.net!news.good.net!usenet73.supernews.com!usenet65.supernews.com!news Sat Nov 16 10:30:42 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:62324 misc.int-property:814 misc.legal.computing:2607
Path: elastic!lethe!geac!onramp.ca!news2.insinc.net!news.insinc.net!news.bc.net!info.ucla.edu!agate!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!news.magicnet.net!news.good.net!news.good.net!usenet73.supernews.com!usenet65.supernews.com!news
From: [email-masked] (Grady Ward)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.int-property,misc.legal.computing
Subject: Re: The 'ho wants the Swedish NOTs mailing label!
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 1996 18:41:45 GMT
Organization: All USENET -- http://www.net-link.com
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.4.102.141
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-No-Archive:                 Yes    

On Sun, 10 Nov 1996 10:09:18 GMT, [email-masked] (Tom Klemesrud)
wrote:

>We know that Thomas R. Hogan's office is at 60 S. Market street, 
>San Jose, CA. We also know this is the business address of Judge Whyte's 
>daughter. In fact it is the address of Judge Whyte's former law firm, 
>Hoge, Fenton, Jones, and Appel. In fact the firm OWNS the building 
>through the shell "HFJA Pueblo Uno" for which Ronald M. Whyte was 
>President, before becoming a Federal District Judge five years ago.  
>It seems that Hon. Ron Whyte was Scientology Attorney, Thomas R. Hogan's 
>landlord.  (In fact it was originally Thomas R. Hogan who referred to the 
>Honorable Judge Ronald M. Whyte, in the more informal, "Hon. Ron Whyte" 
>in an actual RTC v Netcom pleading.)
>

We don't have quite enough yet under Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial
Conduct; keep investigating the financial connections of his wife and
children and their spouses ("Anyone within the third degree
relationship")

60 South Market Street is probably the key, Thomas Hogan is a renter
there, personally help select Judge Infante for the bench and Judge
Infante selected Beth Hamilton, whose offices are also at 60 South
Market to be the Special Master in my litigation.  Sure good business
for 60 South Market eh?

From elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!news.uunet.ca!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!netcom.com!sthomson Sat Dec  7 07:56:12 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:66579 comp.org.eff.talk:143 misc.legal.computing:2789
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing,nl.scientology
Path: elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!news.uunet.ca!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!netcom.com!sthomson
From: [email-masked] (shelley thomson)
Subject: Re: **Biased Journalism** V2no22 Wake for Martin Hunt
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Keywords: 
     **Biased Journalism** : a net magazine designed to compensate for 
     the shortcomings of the professional news media.  We cover 
     issues of interest to the citizens of cyberspace.  This is a
     community newspaper of the net.
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 1996 03:49:18 GMT
Lines: 136
Sender: [email-masked]

     Copyright 1996 Shelley Thomson; all rights reserved.  

     Mail, articles and comment may be directed to <[email-masked]>.  
     Netiquette will be observed with all communication, except for the
     following:  harassing or threatening mail will be posted to the
     net immediately.        

**Biased Journalism**  Volume 2, issue 22    December 6, 1996.  

Contents:  The Big Chill:  the Church Handles Martin Hunt        
           My Father: a Joe Horn essay
        
Read at your own risk.  This is **Biased Journalism**!

1.  The Big Chill:  the Church Handles Martin Hunt

        Readers of alt.religion.scientology know Martin Hunt
very well, the witty and intelligent critic who signs his posts
"cogito ergo sum."  In the middle of the week silence suddenly
fell.  The files vanished from Hunt's web page.  67 of his posts
were erased by cancellations apparently emanating from his
account.  He refused to answer his telephone.

         A net.citizen in California telephoned the local
(Canadian) police and persuaded them to check.  The police
reported that Hunt was all right.  Immediately after their
visit the concerned citizen received a letter.

        We apologize for the breach of netiquette, but we think
that this letter should be seen.  

 ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 20:24:18 -0500 (EST)
From: Martin G. V. Hunt <[email-masked]>
To: xxxxxxx
Cc: Nobody.@freenet
Subject: None.

Mr. Xxxxx,

This is to inform you that two Victoria municipal
policewomen contacted me.

I wish no more contact of any kind with you or anyone 
else in this regard ever again, and no explanation 
will be ever be offered.

I am no longer a critic of the Church of Scientology.

                                   Sincerely, 
                                   Martin Hunt.

--
Cogito, ergo sum.

---
    
        Some three hours apparently elapsed between Hunt's last post
and the wave of cancellations.  What happened to Martin Hunt during
those three hours?

       We may never know.  Hunt has chosen silence, and his choice
must be honored.  But if we _could_ know, we feel that the church
of scientology has something very serious to answer for.  

------------------

2.  Veteran's Day:  My Dad

I remember my dad. I was barely five when he held me in his arms that
last time, bounced me on his knee, wearing that white uniform.  I
remember the smell of old spice, brown, leathery, sunburned skin and
I remember that his eyes had great sadness and tears in them.  I guess
he knew that he would never see us again.

He died in a Kamikaze attack March 19, 1945 aboard the Carrier
Franklin.  His remains and effects were never found.  His death
destroyed my family, and made my mother insane, refusing to acknowlege
my and my younger brother's existence.  My brother and I were raised by
our Grandpa, who came back from being a metallurgist at Oak Ridge,
Tennessee and effectively used the rest of his remaining life and his
retirement savings to raise me and my little brother.

We got thru school, my little brother and I, enlisting regular army
and ultimately both ending up in Southeast asia, in the wrong and
corrupt Viet Nam war, not fighting for America so much as fighting for
our brothers and sisters who were already there.  We both survived two
tours each.  We always think of our Dad, whom we miss all the more
terribly because we never had him, really.  My Father, whom my younger
brother doesn't remember and our children and their children cannot
even conceive of him or what he was like.  In addition to losing his
young life and future, this was the greatest price my Dad paid, to
be unremembered by his grandchildren and youngest son, his only
memory ultimately being a collective memory that fades and dies with
the last participant or victim of that war.  We will never know the
full price we paid because we never really had him with us.  I only
know that WWII destroyed much more than countryside, buildings and
faceless soldiers.  Like all wars, it destroyed countries, families,
lives, minds, and futures.

I miss you, Dad, and I pray and hope we have not shamed you or
belittled your sacrifice in the way we have led our lives as
Americans.  I always try to remember you every day.  Please rest in
peace.  I'll always miss you.

"Out of the depths I have cried unto thee, O Lord.
Lord, hear my voice...."
                          Psalm 130

WWII Naval Casualty list: 56,206 Dead, 80,259 wounded, 8,967 missing.

Joe Horn

------------------ The End ---------------------------------------

   [**Biased Journalism** is distributed free in cyberspace.  To
   subscribe, send a message to <[email-masked]>
   with "subscribe" as the body of the message.  Comments, article
   submissions and hot tips should be addressed to
   <[email-masked]>.  Solid mail, checks and donations go to
   S. Thomson, 236 Stanford S/C, Suite 142, Palo Alto, CA 94304.
   Separate issues of **Biased Journalism** are available via USA
   domestic mail at $5 apiece.  Foreign rates on request.  NEW: back
   issues of **Biased Journalism** are available on floppy disk at
   $2 per issue, minimum of four issues.]

From elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!hkhenson Sat Dec  7 07:56:51 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:66581 comp.org.eff.talk:145 misc.legal.computing:2791
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing,nl.scientology
Path: elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!hkhenson
From: [email-masked] (Keith Henson)
Subject: Re: **Biased Journalism** V2no22 Wake for Martin Hunt
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Followup-To: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing,nl.scientology
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]>
Distribution: inet
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 1996 08:12:26 GMT
Lines: 66
Sender: [email-masked]

Bev ([email-masked]) wrote:
: shelley thomson wrote:
: > 
: >          A net.citizen in California telephoned the local
: > (Canadian) police and persuaded them to check.  The police
: > reported that Hunt was all right.  Immediately after their
: > visit the concerned citizen received a letter.
: > 
: >         We apologize for the breach of netiquette, but we think
: > that this letter should be seen.
: > 
: > Mr. Xxxxx,
: > 
: > This is to inform you that two Victoria municipal
: > policewomen contacted me.
: > 
: > I wish no more contact of any kind with you or anyone
: > else in this regard ever again, and no explanation
: > will be ever be offered.
: > 
: > I am no longer a critic of the Church of Scientology.
: > 
: >                                    Sincerely,
: >                                    Martin Hunt.
: > 
: > --
: > Cogito, ergo sum.
: > 
: > ---
: > 
: >         Some three hours apparently elapsed between Hunt's last post
: > and the wave of cancellations.  What happened to Martin Hunt during
: > those three hours?
: > 
: >        We may never know.  Hunt has chosen silence, and his choice
: > must be honored.  But if we _could_ know, we feel that the church
: > of scientology has something very serious to answer for.

: I will surely miss Martin.  But I also respect his choice to leave
: a.r.s., and wish him the best.  I just hope that he is okay in his
: heart and is not being harmed in any way.  That is the main thing.

I *really* doubt Martin is ok.  That email was the sort of thing one
might write with a gun to your head--or the head of one of your kids.
If he really wanted some time off from ars, he could have made up any
number of excuses, not shoved it in our faces in a way certain to make
some of us go balistic.

Something I have not posted about because I had no proof, but CoS is 
thought to have kidnapped a child in the last few years to get leverage 
against the family.

: That sense of dry wit and humor will be lost, but remembered fondly.

My picket sign tomorrow is going to read

WHAT HAS
SCIENTOLOGY
DONE TO
MARTIN HUNT?

And I am going to rag the shit out of any clam I can find on this issue.

Keith Henson

: Beverly

From elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.genesee.freenet.org!news.flint.umich.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!ts11.tidepool.com!not-for-mail Sat Dec  7 07:58:24 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:65641 misc.legal:20266
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.genesee.freenet.org!news.flint.umich.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!ts11.tidepool.com!not-for-mail
From: [email-masked] (Grady Ward)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal
Subject: Re: RTC vs. FACTNet intermediate decision
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 18:01:09 GMT
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts11.tidepool.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: ts11.tidepool.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 24 Nov 1996 10:59:10 -0600, [email-masked] (Anima) wrote:

>>California Court of Appeal stated earlier this year: "When one party to
>>a lawsuit continuously and unsuccessfully uses the litigation
>>process to bludgeon the opponent into submission, those
>>actions must be closely scrutinized for constututional
>>implications." Scientology of California v. Wollersheim, 42
>>Cal. App. 4 th 628, 649 (Cal. App. 1996)
>>--------- end -----
>
>Here is a case where the California Appeals Court has recognized
>explicitly the disgusting legal tactics of the Co$. And the Ninth Circuit
>governs Northern California-- including courts hearing the Ward, Henson,
>and Erlich cases, yes? 
>
>* * *
>
>>In ruling on Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary
>>injunction, I found the evidence showed the works to be
>>widely known outside the Church of Scientology through
>>multiple sources. See Religious Technology v.F.A.C.T.Net,
>>Inc., 901 F.Supp. 1519, 1527 (D. Colo. 1995). The court in
>>Religious Technology Center v. Lerma, E.D.Va. 95-1107-A
>>dismissed the trade secret count as to all defendants in
>>that case in which Lerma was sued arising out of the same 
>>posting to the Internet of the Works which triggered this
>>lawsuit.
>
>These works that the judge calls WIDELY KNOWN encompass at least some of
>the works that Erlich, Ward, and possibly Henson have been alleged to have
>misappropriated, yes?

Yes, this will be an opinion I will cite when I move for SUMMARY JUDGMENT
at discovery cut-off.  But *not* before my RICO counterclaims are in
place...  of couse I will also move for attorney's fee because of the
frivolous trade secret claim of the criminal cult, as authorized by the
UTSA.

But you see, if I have a counterclaim in place -- especially the RICO --
the criminal cult cannot just unilaterally opt out or evade discovery as
they have in the past.

For I could get a DEFAULT judgment against the cult if they do not
produce Miscavige, etc.  And the the cult will then lose their tax
deduction and be properly labeled a racketeer influenced and corrupt
organization FOREVER.

The clams should have taken my settlement offer, but I think Kobrin and
McShane want to ream David Miscavige till the impaling pole sticks out a
nostril.

But I am only a garden-variety wog, so of course I can be safely ignored.
:-)

>

From elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.genesee.freenet.org!news.flint.umich.edu!cliffs.rs.itd.umich.edu!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!hammer.uoregon.edu!news1.mpcs.com!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news Sat Dec  7 07:59:27 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:65640
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.genesee.freenet.org!news.flint.umich.edu!cliffs.rs.itd.umich.edu!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!hammer.uoregon.edu!news1.mpcs.com!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 09:29:28 -0800
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
From: Anonymous <[email-masked]>
Organization: http://www.mailmasher.com pseudonymous service
Comments: Please report abuse to [email-masked]
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: HCO BULLETIN OF 5 MAY 1980
Mail-To-News-Contact: [email-masked]
Lines: 246

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE

Saint Hill Manor.  East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 MAY 1980

LIMITED DISTRIBUTION              ISSUE I

OT VIII Course Students
OT OT VIII Auditors
OT VIII CIS*s
AO Review Auditors
AO C/Ses
OT VIII Series I

C O N F I D E N T I A L

STUDENT BRIEFING

By the time you read this I will no longer be occupying the body and identity
that you have known as Ron.  That identity continues to live in the hearts and
minds of many as well as in on-Source tech and admin centers around the
planet, and will inspire for years to come Scientologists and lovers of truth
every-where.

What follows is a story that has been withheld, for reasons which will soon be
obvious, until such time as there were enough OTs that something could be done
about it.   That time Is now.   It is not a nice or a pretty story. but I
trust
that having arrived on the OT VIII Course you are ready to hear it.   You have
undoubtedly heard pieces of data over the years that hinted at the greater
untold reality of my mission here on Earth. but the story was never written,
nor spoken. in its entirety due to security problems that have unfortunately
always plagued the organization.  It is only now that I feel it safe to
release
the information, although the time is rapidly approaching when I will have no
choice in the matter, the hour draws that near.

I an not going to delve too deeply into specifics as people have a tendency to
bog themselves down in significance. which would only serve to delay the
immediacy of the task at hand.  Therefore I will be brief.

Some eighty-odd million years ago Earth time (it actually dates at 78,395,042
but dates are & bit superfluous with this material) plans were drawn by a
group outside the MEST universe for the eventual takeover of a good portion of
this universe.  Not a particularly large nor Imaginative crew, their exterior
perspective. however. gives them considerable advantage over tho time-bound
beings of the MEST universe.   Borrowing from earlier operations
such as Helotrobus. they conceived an ongoing implant. some portions of
which have been fairly faithfully rendered in parts of the Bible.  This
implant,
laid in by carefully controlled genetic mutation at Incident Two of OT Ill and
periodically reinforced by controlled historic events since then, makes it
effectively impossible for beings on the more heavily affected planets such as
Earth to become free.  It causes progressive genetic "evolution" that gives
the subject population greater and greater susceptibility to the telepathic
impingement and direction of the controllers.   In its final stage the
progression becomes almost geometric, and it is this final stage that we are
rapidly approaching.

(0129)

Another aspect of this GE-line implant is that the  body  becomes in  effect 
a
sort of thats trap that kicks in heavily on the being should he attempt to
expand his horizons beyond that of pure  physical  universe reality.  There 
can be temporary key-outs which we have all  experienced  in  varying
degrees.  but until this area is handled it can honestly be said that there 
is
no  hope  for continued expansion.    The good news is that once this is  run
out.  expansion becomes rather effortless and almost automatic.

No doubt you are familiar with the Revelations section of the Bible where
various events are predicted.  Also mentioned Is a brief period of time in
which an arch-enemy of Christ. reforred to as the  anti-Christ, will  reign 
and
his opinions will have sway.  All this  makes  for  very fantastic, 
entertaining
reading but there is truth in it.  This  anti-Christ  represents the  forces 
of
Lucifer (literally, the "light bearers" or  "light  bringer"), Lucifer  being 
a
mythical representation of the forces of enlightenment, the Galactic
Confederacy.   My mission could be said to fulfill the Biblical promise
represented by this brief anti-Christ period.     During this period there  is
 a
fleeting opportunity for the whole scenario to  be.  effectively derailed. 
which
would make it impossible for the mass  Marcabian  landing (Second  Coming)  to
 take place.  The Second Coming is designed, among  other  things,  to
trigger  a  rapid series of destructive events.

With the exception of the original Buddhism,  virtually  all religions  of 
any
consequence on this planet, mono- and pantheistic  alike.  have
been  instruments to speed the progress of this "evolution of consciousness" 
and bring  about  the eventual enslavement of mankind.  As you  know, 
Siddhartha Gautama  never  claimed to be anything more than a man.  Having
caught  on  to  this operation,  he postulated his own return as Metteyya,
part of which  prophecy will  have  been fulfilled upon the passing of L. Ron
Hubbard.

For those of you whose Christian toes I may have stepped on.  let
me  take  the opportunity to disabuse you of some lovely myths.     For
instance,  the  historic Jesus was not nearly the sainted figure has been made
out to be.      In  addition to being a lover of young boys and men. he was 
given  to uncontrollable  bursts of temper and hatred that belied the general
message  of  love, understanding  and other typical Marcab PR.  You have only
to look  at  the  history his  teachings inspired to see where it all
inevitably leads.     It Is historic fact and  yet  man still clings to the
ideal. so deep and insidious  is  the biologic  implanting.

It Is a good joke that the Calactic Confederacy is  associated with  the 
Serpent in the Garden, the beast and other emissaries of the "Prince of
Darkness".      Yet in certain passages and esoteric interpretations of the
Bible
(much  of  which has been taken out and effectively suppressed for  centuries)
 as well  as  the Cabbalah, the truth reveals itself quite nicely for the
clever and the ungullible.

So it really is a race against time and one that we happen to  be losing  at 
the
moment, as the implant drama inexorably plays itself out in spite of  the
breakneck pace I've managed to keep up these last thirty-five years.

I had an inkling, but only that, of the insidiousness of  this material  as 
far
back as 1945.   Later. in charcteristic over-optimism,  I thought  that  R6 
would be the end of it.  But that was followed by  NOTs  and  the Purification
 Rundown and still the string continued to unwind with the ball at the end  of
 it  just out of sight.   It makes ons wonder about such things as  fate and 
destiny,  such was the resolve with which I managed to cling to that string.
not
often knowing how close I was to falling into the abyss myself.  but  destiny
it  merely  the rationalization of feeble minds.  Things don't just  happen,
they  are  caused. And causative beings can undo the plans of madmen  and 
would-be enslavers,  no matter how long those plans may have been in the
making.

I will soon leave this world only to return and complete my mission with
another Identity.  Although I long to stretch my arms  back  in repose  on 
some distant star in some distant galaxy.  It appears that  is  one dream 
that  will have to wait.  But my return depends on people like  you  doing
these  materials thoroughly and completely so that there will  be  a 
genetically
uncontaminated body for me to pick up and resume where I left off.  A  body
free  of  religious mania, right/wrong dichotomy and synthetic karma.  The 
job
ahead  is  far  too tough to even contemplate doing with your standard --
courtesy of certain other-dimensional players and their Marcab pieces, many of
whom are  right  here In the general populace -- genetically altered body.

Without the biogenetic meddling of those who stand outside time (who cannot 
yet directly influence our world and must work through others) the dwindling 
spiral is not nearly as automatic and self-perpetuating     as it appears. 
There are regions even in isolated parts of the Milky Way where poets  are
free  to  poet and magicians can paint reality with their magic wands and
exteriorize  without body kickback.  But these areas unfortunately are fewer
and fewer.

I will return not as a religious leader but a political  one. That  happens 
to
be the requisite beingness for the task at hand.  I will not  be known  to 
most
of you, my activities misunderstood by many, yet along with your constant
effort in the theta band I will effectively postpone and then halt a  series 
of
events designed to make happy slaves of us all.

So there you have it.  The secret that I have kept close to my chest  all 
these
years.  Now you too are part of this secret and I  no  longer have  to 
shoulder
the burden alone or live with the possibility of body death before all the 
data
could be released.  And with this briefing I entrust to each of you the
 responsibility for this material until such time as I an  able to  return. 
For
we have no help from any other quarter in this matter.  The handful  of 
secret
societies throughout history that have caught on to this game have  long 
since fallen by the wayside or been taken over and become instruments of
the very menace they were set up to combat.

The rundown is long and can be arduous, but it must be done thoroughly if 
there is to be any effect not only on the body of the pre-OT but the body  of 
his  or her progeny as wall.  There is some danger, but with OT VII
thoroughly  complete It is not nearly so great as the danger witnessed by
assorted unfortunates  who happened to stumble into this area in their sleep
or in moments of  reverie  or anaten, experiencing an hitherto mysterious 
phenomenon  known as  "spontaneous combustion".

CAUTION:  DO NOT BE PTS WHILE TRAVERSING THIS THIRD AND FINAL WALL OF FIRE

But the area is well charted. the rundown many years in secret development, 
and by the time you read this undoubtedly completed on  myself.  The wins 
awaiting you are like none that you have ever experienced, not just for you.
but for your children. your children's children and the whole of mankind, if
we
succeed.  And we will.  If we had time we should pity the many poor  souls, 
from 1950 to PT, who chose such an exactly inopportune moment to drop
off the road to truth and disconnect from reality, the full burst and glory of
OT
practically within their grasp.  But we haven't the time to "wax philosophic"
or ponder might have beens.

The rundown follows.  Again I say, do it thoroughly and completely, for it is
your ticket to the stars.  And beyond!

L. RON HUBBARD
FOUNDER

LRH:lrh
Copyright (c) 1980
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

of  venue  now
sought t       
L. RON HUBBARD
FOUNDER

LRH:lrh
Copyright (c) 1980
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

From elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.rns.net!news.van.rns.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-13.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeed1.aimnet.com!news.aimnet.com!swhitlat.com!steve Sat Dec  7 08:07:00 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:65875
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.rns.net!news.van.rns.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-13.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeed1.aimnet.com!news.aimnet.com!swhitlat.com!steve
From: [email-masked] ()
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Fraud, Tax Evasion and the Co$ on British TV
Followup-To: alt.religion.scientology
Date: 29 Nov 1996 20:04:12 GMT
Organization: Steve Whitlatch, Inc.
Lines: 89
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial-milp-27.iway.aimnet.com
X-newsreader: xrn 8.03-beta-17

	Thanks for this great news post. Please post more of the same!

In article <[email-masked]>, John Ritson <[email-masked]> writes:
|> The ITV programme 'The Big Story' had another peak-hour expose of
|> Scientology and its methods on Thursday 28 Nov. The programme-makers
|> (who produced the hidden-camera expose 'Inside the Cult' last year) were
|> contacted by former scientologists who described the money-grubbing
|> monster that is the Co$.
|> The Co$ advertisement that is now legal to show in the UK as the ITC
|> have classed the criminal cult as a 'real' religion was used as a
|> repeated theme (the one where smiling faces repeat 'Trust' over and over
|> again) as events were described that contradict the very idea of trust.
|> 
|> "We lied to banks, people obtained loans under false pretences. It was
|> whatever we could do to raise money." said Andrea Catt who was registrar
|> at the Bournemouth mission 1988-95. "People were persuaded to re-
|> mortgage their homes, sell their homes, cash in the policies supposed to
|> pay off their mortgages, borrow against pensions, sell family jewels,
|> borrow from their families, sell their cars. Anything you can possibly
|> imagine that a person could do to raise money, people were persuded to
|> pay into Scientology. If a person filled a loan form in saying the money
|> was for Scientology, they'd get as very negative response so people were
|> encouraged to say that the money was for a management training course, a
|> computer, a car, a boat. Sometimes we'd fill it in for them. Then they'd
|> sign it and it would be submitted to the bank on a completely false
|> basis." The 'Church' keeps supplies of loan application forms
|> conveniently at hand for such occasions. The bank found out in one case,
|> and Ms. Catt was made the scapegoat and dismissed, but soon re-instated
|> where she went on to win an award 'The Gross Income Cup'. 
|> She described how at Thurday meetings members were targeted 'There would
|> be some people  - maybe their mother had just died and they were very
|> depressed or their girlfriend had just left them - these would be prime,
|> prime targets.'. The process known as 'finding the ruin' was explained,
|> and victims told of being pressured to tell their most intimate secrets,
|> later to be used as blackmail against them.
|> 
|> The events that drove a 24-year-old to jump off the Clifton Bridge after
|> only half-a year in Scientology were described. The 'Purification
|> Rundown', the borrowing to pay for courses, the endless letters and
|> phone calls from Scientologists. Mike Rinder appeared giving the usual
|> Scientology damage-limitation line about Scientology not being
|> responsible just because someone 'had some involvement with Scientology
|> in the past'. This was rather contradicted by the letters written to the
|> victim by Scientologist Tony Clark even after the suicide. 10 British
|> recruits have committed suicide in the last twelve years.
|> 
|> The British hands-off approach was contrasted to that in Europe. The
|> French trial result was reported (including the judge's comment that
|> 'Amassing money is one of the essential concerns, if not the only
|> concern of the Church of Scientology') as was the German policy, and the
|> Spanish prosecution of Heber Jentzsch and others for tax evasion and
|> inducement to suicide.
|> And Mike Rinder?  He compared the trials to the crucification of
|> Christ...
|> That old R6 implant still active?
|> 
|> The really dangerous stuff for the cult came from another ex-
|> Scientologist from Bournemouth, Roger Tuffin, treasury secretary from
|> 1991. "Nobody knew where the money came from. So receipts were made up
|> to account for that money... completely bogus receipts". The
|> Scientologists were evading Value Added Tax by describing money paid for
|> courses (incidentally the only glaring error in the programme was
|> underestimating the cost of 'the Bridge' by a factor of ten) as
|> 'donations'. He was posted to the 'Freewinds' as director of
|> communications and estimates their revenues as half-a-million dollars
|> per week.
|> 
|> Falsifying accounting documents is a serious crime in the UK and as for
|> those 'gnarly OT powers', they are as nothing to the 'VAT powers' of
|> Customs and Excise. An Englishman's home is not his castle where they
|> are concerned, not even Saint Hill. Interestingly, in Tuesday's Budget
|> Statement, the Chancellor of the Exchequer changed policy from the usual
|> 'public spending automatically bad' to 'Spend to Save' and is proposing
|> to pay for some of his pre-election tax cuts by spending money on a
|> massive clampdown on tax evasion.
|> VAT at 17.5 percent on all course revenues? Backdated? With fines for
|> deliberate evasion? Or will they pay back anyone who feels that their
|> payment was not really a donation, and provide courses for genuine
|> donations in future?
|>           
|> John *** "Make Money, Make More Money, Make others produce so as to Make More
|> Money" L. Ron Hubbard*** 

-- 
Honesty cures scientology.

From elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.genesee.freenet.org!news.flint.umich.edu!news.eecs.umich.edu!panix!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sgi.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-stkh.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!nntp-oslo.UNINETT.no!nntp-trd.UNINETT.no!online.no!news Sat Dec  7 08:10:48 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:66104
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.genesee.freenet.org!news.flint.umich.edu!news.eecs.umich.edu!panix!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sgi.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-stkh.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!nntp-oslo.UNINETT.no!nntp-trd.UNINETT.no!online.no!news
From: [email-masked] (Andreas Heldal.Lund)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,no.org.efn.diskusjon
Subject: Re: Letter to Helena Kobrin
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 1996 04:43:07 GMT
Organization: Telenor Online Public Access
Lines: 91
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: stavanger207.online.no
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/32.230

On 29 Nov 1996 20:57:46 GMT, [email-masked] wrote:

> Yesterday I posted the handwritten OT III-material in the newsgroup
[snip]

Martin, enjoy the companionship of a winning team. 
All respect to you! :)

I believe HRH Kobrin is to busy with her clusters by now,
we are just bugs to her. This battle was won ages before she
understood that. On the other side, she will probably never 
understand it, she'll just be to busy with her auditing!

The feeeling of victory is sweet, but even if she would
have been so stupid as to advice her client to use the
law again to attack a critic in Europe, she would only 
end up looking even more like a fool.

This is not America, here justice usually wins in the
end. I got a connection to the net and the protection of
my government, what a sad story this will be. For CoS 
that is......

I'm still awaiting the threats from Kobrin to come alive,
I'm getting more prepared each day. At the moment I'm
really looking forward to address my case in front of
a Norwegian judge. It will be a pleasure that I 
most probably never will have the advantage of having
again as long as I live. I'm prepared for the worst,
even the possebility of loosing in court. Whatever the
outcome will be, CoS in Norway will loose big time! 

I'll soon be able to celebrate 1 month now, 1 month
giving the world the truth behind all the lies. I would
appreciate to be able to go all the way, into court that 
is. So would my lawyer and his connections. The
tremendous support from official sources, organisations
and the public only proves one thing; this fight is
lost by CoS, whatever they now try to do. In Norway 
there will no longer be to their benefit to scare and 
destroy the critics, it's over, we have seen enough. 
_Please_ try to prove that I'm wrong, please! If you 
read this Helena K. Kobrin, use your sense of "justice" 
and advice your client RTC to attack me! Do what you
threaten me to do, or be prepared to stand up and
answer to your threats! You may have managed to find out 
what kind of position I have at work, just reading my 
home page will give you all the details in my life. 
Are you wondering if I'm prepared to gambel with all 
of that? Please take the chance and test me, see how 
far I'm prepared to go, demand to see what cards I've 
got! 

Since I know what you, dear Kobrin, will face if you
do this, I dare to take the risk. If you still have
the fantasy that you can fight the net, you will be
supprised of the reaction _if_ you manage to shut me 
down. I'm just the top of the iceberg, there are 
thousands of eager people behind me willing to do even 
more. I may be proud, but there are many that are 
braver than me. It's 1996, the truth about CoS is out 
here. You have lost, but we are preparing as if you 
didn't know. 

Time to go to bed in Norway. I'm going to bed with
a good feeling inside, judging from what I've learned
the last month it's so nice going to sleep knowing
I'm doing what is right. I could never be a lawyer if
that meant I'd have to defend everybody. I'm an
ordinary human, becoming adult by acting responsible.
If life is more than this, which I do not believe, I 
hope whoever rules will find mercy on people like 
Kobrin, she will surely need it. If not, she will
only have to face herself, which could be even 
more difficult.....

Getting sleepy, with Ibsen's words in my mind:
"To think it, to want it - but do it too???"

And finishing of with the lyrics from a Swedish 
song (Wiehe):
"So that you can tell your children when they ask,
you were one of those who stood up against it."

Sweet dreams everybody,
Andreas Heldal-Lund 
-----------------------------------------------------------
   OPERATION CLAMBAKE -- http://home.sol.no/heldal/CoS/
      STOP THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY!  ACT NOW!!!!!!

   --S---p---r---e---a---d------T---h---e------W---o---r---d--

From elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.rns.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-13.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc!szdc!news Sat Dec  7 08:11:40 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:66116 alt.religion.scientology.xenu:1749
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.rns.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-13.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc!szdc!news
From: [email-masked] (Marina Chong)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.religion.scientology.xenu
Subject: ANNOUNCE: A.R.S. Web Page Summary  [30 November 1996]
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 1996 08:36:12 GMT
Organization: The Knights of Xenu
Lines: 500
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227

http://home.pacific.net.sg/~marina/misc/arshtml.htm
http://www.cl.ais.net/trc/mchong.htm
http://www.thur.de/religio/server/webpag.html

Welcome to Marina's A.R.S. Web Page Summary!
[last update: 30 November 1996]

If you've ever asked:

*  What is Scientology?
*  Why is Scientology attacking the Internet, and how?
*  Why are Scientologists called clams?
*  What do all these strange abbreviations and terms mean?
*  Who are all these people who post here?
*  How does Scientology deal with criticism?
*  How will I get any useful information with A.R.S. clogged with ClamSpam[tm]?
*  [etc]

Take heart, for all is revealed in the following Web pages:

MY FAVOURITE PAGES:

Modemac:          http://www.tiac.net/users/modemac/cos.html
                  http://wit397105.student.utwente.nl/cos.htm (Asasas)
                  [for newcomers to a.r.s.]

Ron Newman:       http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/home.html
                  [the ultimate page]
                  http://www.xs4all.nl/~kspaink/rnewman/home.html
                  [Netherlands mirror, courtesy of Karin Spaink]

David Dennis:     http://www.amazing.com/scientology/
                  [a fun page, but with *no* updates :( ]

Karin Spaink:     http://www.xs4all.nl/~kspaink/

Sister Clara:     http://www.magpie.co.uk/

Tilman Hausherr:  http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/

Xenu's Page:      http://www.xenu.org
                  [all hail xenu!]

Marina's Manor:   http://home.pacific.net.sg/~marina/index.html

"Clear Baby" pages:
                  http://www.avalon.demon.co.uk/heidrun.htm
                  [Lance Buckley]
                  http://www.icon.fi/~marina/clrbaby/index.htm
                  [Marina Chong]

FAQs AND OTHER RESOURCES:

a.r.s. opinionated micro-FAQ for the confused lurker  [David Gerard]
     http://suburbia.net/~fun/scn/links/ufaq.txt
ARS Acronym/Terminology FAQ v3.1:
     http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~av282.HomePage.termfaq
A.R.S. Dictionary [Lance Buckley, based on Martin Hunt's Terminology FAQ]
     http://www.avalon.demon.co.uk/arsterm.htm
A.R.S. FAQ [Martin Hunt]
     http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/ars.FAQ2.html
A.R.S. FAQ [Rod Keller]
     http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/ars.FAQ.html
ARS Week in Review:
     http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/ars-summary.html (Germany)
     http://www.thur.de/religio/publik/arsfaq.html (Germany))
     http://www.eecs.nwu.edu/~mallen/scn/arswr/ars-summary.html (USA)
Biased Journalism archive:
     http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/biased/
Book List [Martin Hunt]
     http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~av282/HomePage.books.html
Celebrities in Scientology [Tilman Hausherr]
     http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/celeb.txt
Clam FAQ [William Barwell]
     http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/clam.FAQ.html
     http://home.pacific.net.sg/~marina/misc/clamfaq.txt
Essay on Scientology [David John Carter]
     http://gil.ipswichcity.qld.gov.au/~carterd/essaycos.html#con
Introduction to $cientology [Modemac]
     http://www.tiac.net/users/modemac/cos.html
NOTs Scholars' Page [Dave Touretzky]
     http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/NOTs
     http://www.xs4all.nl/~kspaink/NotsStudy/index.html
     http://www.sidaway.demon.co.uk/dst/
NOTs Scholars' Page [Dave Touretzky] (Download only)
     http://copper.ucs.indiana.edu/~sgoehrin/scientology/dst-nots.zip
     http://copper.ucs.indiana.edu/~sgoehrin/scientology/dst-nots.tar.gz
Scientology FAQ -- A Skeptic's View [Jim Bianchi]
     http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/skeptics.FAQ.html
Social Control in Scientology [Bob Penny]
     http://www.demon.net/castle/xenu/scs.html  
     http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Fishman/Xenu/scs.html  
     http://www.xs4all.nl/~txtbreed/scs.html  
Who's Who on ARS [Martin Hunt]
     http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~av282/who.htm  

CRITICS' PAGES [in alphabetical order]:

Alex:             http://www.europa.com/~alex/scientology.html
Andreas Heldal-Lund:
                  http://home.sol.no/heldal/CoS/
Anti Cult:        http://www.users.wineasy.se/zerpe/index.htm
Arnaldo Lerma:    http://www2.dgsys.com/~alerma/
Bill deCarle:     http://w3.ietc.ca/home/bill/scieno.htm
Bob Bingham:      http://www.sky.net/~sloth/sci/sci_index.html
                  http://www.sky.net/~sloth/sci/organized.html
Brett Achorn:     http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~achorn/cos/cos.html
Bruce Scott:      http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/COS/COS.html
Chris Owen:       http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/audit/index.html
Cornelius Krasel: http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/
Daniel Deimert:   http://www.dtek.chalmers.se/%7Ed1dd/cos
Daniel Tobias:    http://www.softdisk.com/comp/dan/sosueme.html
Dave Bird:        http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/clam/index.html
Dave Touretzky:   http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Fishman/
Dave vanHorn:     http://www.cedar.net/users/dvanhorn
David Carter:     http://gil.ipswichcity.qld.gov.au/~carterd/essaycos.html
David Gerard:     http://suburbia.net/~fun/scn/
                  http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~gerard/
David Lawless:    http://www.the-spa.com/david.lawless/cof$/cof$.htm
David D. Rogers:  http://www.lightlink.com/drogers/cults/
David C. Smith:   http://starbase.neosoft.com/~dcs/scieno1.html
Deirdre:          http://www.sover.net:80/~deirdre/secrets.html
Deana Holmes:     http://www.xmission.com/~mirele/index.html
Don Lindsay:      http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~lindsay/scientology/faqs.html
Felipe (XS4ALL):  http://www.xs4all.nl/~felipe/cos/
Frank Copeland:   http://daemon.apana.org.au/~fjc/scn/home.html
Frode Opheim:     http://borderline.no/~tiger/
Hendrik Zimmermann:
                  http://www.islandnet.com/~hendrik/coscrap/
Ignaz Wanders:    http://www-astronomy.mps.ohio-state.edu/~ignaz/fishy/
Jerod Pore:       http://www.well.com/user/jerod23/clam.html
Jesper Toftegaard:
                  http://home3.inet.tele.dk/toffer/
Jessie Blalock:   http://www.clark.net/pub/jcblal/jcbcos.html
Jeff Jacobsen:    http://www.primenet.com/~cultxpt/index.htm
Jeff Lee:         http://www.gate.net/~shipbrk/Co$/
Jim Diver:        http://users.aimnet.com/~jdiver/scieno.htm
Jim Lippard:      http://www.primenet.com/~lippard/pis.html
Jens Tingleff:    http://www.imaginet.fr/~jensting/muslinger/
Joe Larabell:     http://www2.gol.com/users/larabell/
Joe Muldoon :     http://www.cyberconnect.com/jmuldoon/cos.htm
Jonas Flygare:    http://www.algonet.se/~flax/scientology.html
Jorge Martins:    http://alfa.ist.utl.pt/~dif/ic
Jukka Santala:    http://kauhajoki.fi/~jusantal/cos.html
Karin Spaink:     http://www.xs4all.nl/~kspaink/
Katinka van der Linden:
                  http://www.mpikg-teltow.mpg.de/people/katinka/home.html#co$
Keith Bennett:    http://www.best.com/~dkeith/scam.htm
Kwantem:          http://members.aol.com/scienolib/
Lance Buckley:    http://www.avalon.demon.co.uk/
Mark Allen:       http://www.eecs.nwu.edu/~mallen/scn/scam.html
Martin Hunt:      http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~av282
Martin L Poulter: http://www.xs4all.nl/~kspaink/mpoulter/scum.html
Maureen Garde:    http://superlink.net/~mgarde/opinions.html
Michael Gormez:   http://www.xs4all.nl/~mikeg/
Mickael Tussier:  http://www.mygale.org/01/tussier/sciento.htm
Modemac:          http://www.tiac.net/users/modemac/cos.html
Morten Welinder:  http://www.diku.dk/~terra/Co$.html
Pascal Barufke:   http://home.pages.de/~passi/
Patricia Savenije:http://www.xs4all.nl/~txtbreed/Co$.htm
Paul Moloney:     http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~pmoloney/scientology.html
Paul Sears:       http://www.egr.uh.edu/~sears/CoS/
Rasta Robert:     http://huizen.dds.nl/~rr/scilink.htm
Ray Randolph:     http://www.ezlink.com/~rayr/scieno.htm
RBOC              http://www.ccnet.com/~pbxtalk/clam_pg.html
Rod Swift:        http://www.nether.net/~rod/html/sub/scienos.html
Ramon Kolb:       http://eng.bu.edu/~ramonk/pers/scientology/index.html
                  http://eng.bu.edu/~ramonk/pers/scientology/bu/index.html
Richard Shand:    http://marlowe.wimsey.com/~rshand/streams/gnosis/otiii.html
Ron Newman:       http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/home.html
Sam Gorton:       http://www.empire.net/~sgorton/co$/
Samuel Kaplin:    http://sluggo.iaxs.net/skaplin/
Scott Goehring:   http://copper.ucs.indiana.edu/~sgoehrin/scientology/
Sherilyn:         http://www.icon.fi/~marina/sherilyn/
Sirilyan:         http://www.io.com/~sirilyan/inwo/cos.html
Sister Clara:     http://www.magpie.co.uk/
Steve A:          http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/scientology.html
Steve Marinick:   http://www.primenet.com/~stevem/scieno_java.html
Steven Fishman:   http://www.xs4all.nl/~fishman/
Stuart P Derby:   http://blkbox.com/~sderby/scieno/cult_of_greed.html
Sylvia borin:     http://huizen.dds.nl/~merula/cos/index.html
Teodor Vaananen   http://www.algonet.se/~teodor/Cults/
Taneli Huuskonen: http://www.helsinki.fi/~huuskone/Scn/
The Badger:       http://www.mnsinc.com/weyr/kalkin/scieno/index.html
Tilman Hausherr:  http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/
Tony Bosnakoudis: http://w4u.eexi.gr/~antbos/SCIENTOL.HTM
Triad:            http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/Fishman.html
Winfried Mueller: http://www.thur.de/religio/
Xenu:             http://www.xenu.org
Zed:              http://www.zeta.org.au/~hendersn/
Zenon Panoussis:  http://www.wineasy.se/weesp/cos.htm
                  [this page has been CENSORED] 

NON-ENGLISH LANGUAGE SITES:

Andreas Heldal-Lund:
[Nowegian]        http://home.sol.no/heldal/CoS/intro.html
Daniel Deimert:   http://www.dtek.chalmers.se/%7Ed1dd/cos
[Swedish]]
Mickael Tussier:  http://www.mygale.org/01/tussier/sciento.htm
[French]
Pascal Barufke:   http://home.pages.de/~passi/
[German]
Winfried Mueller: http://www.thur.de/religio/
[German]

MEDIA:

American Lawyer: http://www.counsel.com/spotlight/scien2.html
BBC:             http://www.bbcnc.org.uk/tv/the_net/TN950515/svi.html
                 http://www.bbcnc.org.uk/tv/the_net/TN950703/anonymity.html
CNN:             http://www.cnn.com/US/scientology/index.html
                 http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9511/scientology/index.html
Felipe (XS4ALL): http://www.xs4all.nl/~felipe/cos/
Karin Spaink:    http://www.xs4all.nl/~kspaink/indexcos.html
Internet World:  http://pubs.iworld.com/iw-online/Dec95/scientol.html
New York Times:  http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/0120online.html
Reason Magazine: http://www.reasonmag.com/reason/9604/Fe.POST.text.html
Skeptic Magazine:http://www.skeptic.com/03.3.jl-jj-scientology.html
Spy:             http://miso.wwa.com/~vickie/cos/spy.html

Biased Journalism archive:
[Cornelius Krasel]  http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/biased/

Martin Poulter's Media Page:
       http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/media.html
Ron's Media Page:
       http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/media/home.html
Washington Post Articles:
       http://www.singnet.com.sg/~marina/washpost/index.htm
Watchman Fellowship:
       http://rampages.onramp.net/~watchman/13_2.htm
WIRED:           
       http://www.hotwired.com/wired/3.12/features/alt.scientology.war.html

BOOKS:

1. Atack, Jon -- The Total Freedom Trap
   [Katinka van der Linden]

http://www.mpikg-teltow.mpg.de/people/katinka/fishy/TFTrap.html
   [Tilman Hausherr]  http://www.inx.de/%7Etilman/j/tftrap.html
   [Patricia Savenije]http://www.xs4all.nl/~txtbreed/Co$.htm

2. Cooper, Paulette -- The Scandal Of Scientology
   [Dave Touretzky]   http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Fishman/cooper-scandal.txt
   [henry]            http://www.nyx.net/~anon2c9e/scandal.txt
   [Patricia Savenije]http://www.xs4all.nl/~txtbreed/scandal.htm

3. Miller, Russell -- Bare Faced Messiah   [Draft HTML version]
   [Dean Benjamin]    http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/bfm/
   [Karin Spaink]     http://www.xs4all.nl/~kspaink/rmiller/index.html
   [Katinka van der Linden]

http://www.mpikg-teltow.mpg.de/people/katinka/fishy/bfm/bfmcover.htm
   [Marina Chong]     http://www.icon.fi/~marina/bfm/index.htm
   [Paul Sears  ]     http://www.egr.uh.edu/~sears/CoS/bfm/bfmconte.htm
   [Remco van de Meent]

http://cal052012.student.utwente.nl/scientology/miller/index.html

   [download site #1] http://www.cl.ais.net/trc/bfm_html.zip
                      http://www.cl.ais.net/trc/bfm_pics.zip
   [download site #2] http://www.egr.uh.edu/~sears/CoS/bfm/bfm_html.zip
                      http://www.egr.uh.edu/~sears/CoS/bfm/bfm_pics.zip
   [download site #3]
http://www.mpikg-teltow.mpg.de/people/katinka/fishy/bfm_html.tar.gz

http://www.mpikg-teltow.mpg.de/people/katinka/fishy/bfm_pics.tar.gz

4. Penny, Bob -- Social Control in Scientology
   [Patrica Savenije] 
                   http://www.xs4all.nl/~txtbreed/scs.htm

5. Pignotti, Monica -- My Nine Lives in Scientology
   [Dean Benjamin] http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/9lives/
   [Marina Chong]  http://www.icon.fi/~marina/1stpersn/mp01.htm

6. Roos, Otto -- The Otto Roos Story
   [Dean Benjamin]
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/Web/People/dst/Library/Shelf/roos/
   [Patricia Savenije]
                   http://www.xs4all.nl/~txtbreed/roos.html

7. Vosper, Cyril--The Mind Benders
   [David Gerard]     http://suburbia.net/~fun/scn/books/vosper.txt
   [Marina Chong]     http://www.singnet.com.sg/~marina/books/vosper/bender.html
   [Michael Gormez]   http://www.xs4all.nl/~mikeg/mind.html
   [M Gormez (zipped)]http://www.xs4all.nl/~mikeg/mind.zip
   [Patricia Savenije]http://www.xs4all.nl/~txtbreed/Co$.htm

8. Wakefield, Margery--The Road to Xenu
   [Curtis R. Anderson]
      LaTeX, MS-DOS   ftp://ftp.servtech.com/pub/users/cra/sc.zip
      LaTeX, UNIX     ftp://ftp.servtech.com/pub/users/cra/sc.tar.gz
   [Dave Touretzky]   http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Fishman/Xenu/xenu.html   
   [Katinka van der Linden]

http://www.mpikg-teltow.mpg.de/people/katinka/fishy/road2Xenu.txt
   [Steve A]          http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/xenu/xenu.html
   [Patricia Savenije]http://www.xs4all.nl/~txtbreed/xenu.htm
===

9. Hubbard, Lafayette Ronald -- History of Man
   [Sylvia borin]     http://huizen.dds.nl/~merula/cos/hom/index.XENU.html

EX-SCIENTOLOGISTS SPEAK:

Most of these stories can be found on Tilman's Hausherr's page. Here's are some
of my favourites: 

Ariane Jackson  http://www.icon.fi/~marina/1stpersn/index.htm#AJackson
"Basics"        http://home.pacific.net.sg/~marina/stories/basics01.txt
"Black Lensman" http://www.singnet.com.sg/~marina/lensman/index.htm
Chris           http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/mystory/chrisjl.txt
Joe Muldoon     http://www.icon.fi/~marina/1stpersn/index.htm#JMuldoon
Kim Baker       http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/mystory/#02
                http://www.icon.fi/~marina/1stpersn/index.htm#KBaker
Monica Pignotti http://starbase.neosoft.com/~dcs/factnet/monica2.txt
Patrick Jost    http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/mystory/jost.txt
Ted Mayett      http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/mystory/#24
Troy Miranda    http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/mystory/#20
Wayne Whitney   http://www.icon.fi/~marina/1stpersn/index.htm#WWhitney
                [Wayne's story is a work in progress]

LEGAL:

Casey Hill vs. Scn:

http://www.droit.umontreal.ca/CSC/arrets/1995/vol2/ascii/manning.en.txt
EFF:                 http://www.eff.org/pub/Censorship/CoS_v_the_Net/
FACTnet Legal Page:  http://www.lightlink.com/factnet1/pages/memo830.html
Faegre & Benson:
                     http://www.faegre.com/scien/scien.html
Hagenbaugh & Murphy:
                     http://seamless.seamless.com/hm/nb0296.html
Maureen Garde:       http://superlink.net/user/mgarde/opinions.html
Government Reports on Scientology (Anderson, Australia; Foster, UK; Lee, Canada)
[Chris Owen]:
                     http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/audit/reports.html

FACTNET:

New home:            http://www.lightlink.com/factnet1/

FACTNET kit:         http://www.xenu.org/factnet/
[Xenu's Page]        [complete (almost) archive]

FACTNET kit:         http://www.xs4all.nl/~gjansen
[Govert Jansen]

FACTNET kit:         http://homepage.cistron.nl/~dvdweide/
[Red Dog]

PRO-SCIENTOLOGY:

Official Co$:        http://www.scientology.org/
                     http://www.dianetics.org/
                     http://www.lronhubbard.org/
Leisa Goodman:       http://www.theta.com/goodman
                     [semi-official Co$]
Brian W:             ftp://FTP.PCNET.COM/users/brianw
                     [FTP site]
R E Brooks:          http://www.crl.com:80/~rebrooks/relighst.html
Bruce Gilham:        http://www.datadepot.com/~brusky/success.htm
*More links*:        http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/prolinks/
                     [courtesy Tilman Hausherr]

FREE ZONE:

Free Zone Homepage:            http://www.freezone.org
International Viewpoints:      http://www.oslonett.no/home/trone/IVy.html
Scientologie Homepage:         http://www.scientologie.de

SUPPORT GROUPS AND OTHER RESOURCES:

American Family Foundation (AFF): http://www.csj.org/
Cult Awareness Network (CAN):     http://www.xnet.com/~can/can.html
                                  http://www.icon.fi/~marina/can/
                                  http://www.magpie.co.uk/can.html

Dave Touretzky's NOTS Scholars Home Page:
                                  http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/NOTs
Ex-Cult Archive:                  http://www.ex-cult.org/
Ingo Michehl:                     http://www.channel1.com/users/ingo/
The Margaret Thaler Singer Foundation:
                                  http://www.singer.org/
The Neural Surfer:                http://weber.ucsd.edu/~dlane/
reFOCUS network:                  http://www.nwrain.net/~refocus/
Steve Hassan:                     http://virtumall.com/mindcontrol/
Watchman Fellowship               http://rampages.onramp.net/~watchman/
Winfried Mueller:                 http://www.thur.de/religio/engstart.html

IRC CHANNEL #SCIENTOLOGY (was #CLAMBAKE):

Jessie Blalock             http://www.clark.net/pub/jcblal/irc1.html

GRADY WARD AND KEITH HENSON DEPOSITIONS (Real Audio):

Dave vanHorn:                     http://www.cedar.net/users/dvanhorn

SCARFF DECLARATION:

Patricia Savenije          http://www.xs4all.nl/~txtbreed/scarff.htm

HUMOUR:

A.R.S. Central Committee Archive  
    http://www.icon.fi/~marina/arscc/index.htm
A.R.S. Jokers and Degraders Archive
    http://www.icon.fi/~marina/funnies/index.htm
David C. Smith's Joking and Degrading Pages
    http://starbase.neosoft.com/~dcs/posts/funindex.html
    http://starbase.neosoft.com/~dcs/posts/otherndx.html
Helena Kobrin Love Page
    http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/helena/   
Remco van de Meent's Song Page
    http://cal052012.student.utwente.nl/scientology/misc/hubbard_song.html   
SP Cartoons by WAA and friends
    http://huizen.dds.nl/~waa/fishman/cartoon.html
SP Songbook
    http://home.pacific.net.sg/~marina/spsongs/index.htm
    http://home.pacific.net.sg/~marina/spcarols/index.htm
Tilamn Hausherr's Fun Page
    http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/cos_fun/

FISHMAN AFFIDAVIT:

Sorry! There are so many of these sites (>100) that I can no longer include
them in this list.

Check out Dave Touretzky's ClamBed for a list of Fishman sites:

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Fishman/ClamBed.html

And these:

http://www.iaehv.nl/users/paul/fishman/ (The FishPond)
http://www.iaehv.nl/users/paul/fishman/fishnet.html (The FishNet)

@@
IMPORTANT:
Please e-mail and/or post URLs I have missed.
Please e-mail and/or post changes to URLs.

@@

--
Marina Chong                    SP4(*), KoX, GGBC#13, KBM#5, Joker/Degrader
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scientology is an abusive cult that responds to criticism with harassment,
barratrous lawsuits, home invasions, intimidation and conspiracy to murder.
Usenet:                       alt.religion.scientology
World Wide Web:               http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/home.html
Marina's Manor:               http://home.pacific.net.sg/~marina/index.html
IN MEMORIAM:   Noah Lottick  Richard Collins  Albert Jaquier  John Buchanan
               Patrice Vic   anon.penet.fi    utopia.hacktic.nl
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[email-masked]     [email-masked]      [email-masked]

From elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!nntp.portal.ca!news.bc.net!info.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!204.89.181.3!en.com!news.dgsys.com!usenet Sat Dec  7 08:18:03 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:65668 comp.org.eff.talk:121
Path: elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!nntp.portal.ca!news.bc.net!info.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!204.89.181.3!en.com!news.dgsys.com!usenet
From: [email-masked] (Arnaldo Lerma)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: CULT vs. CAN front page WASH POST A1
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 1996 01:10:10 GMT
Organization: FACTNet
Lines: 456
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lermaelec.dgsys.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227

FRONT PAGE WASHINGTON POST
SUNDAY 1 DECEMBER 1996 page A1 

Anti-Cult Group Dismembered
 As Former Foes Buy Its Assets
 Network Forced Into Bankruptcy After Legal Battle

 By Laurie Goodstein
 Wash Post staff writer

 BARRINGTON, Ill.--For 20 years, the Cult
 Awareness Network ran the nation's best-
 known hot line for parents who grew distraught
 when an unconventional religious group they
 neither trusted nor understood suddenly won
 the allegiance of their children.
 From its offices here in a Chicago suburb, the
 network (known as CAN) answered more than
 350 telephone inquiries a week, counseled rela-
 tives at conferences attended by thousands, and
 gave news interviews to everyone from small-
 town daily newspapers to "Nightline."
 As CAN's influence rose, so did the ire of its
 foes, who were furious at being depicted as dan-
 gerous cults.
 In particular, Church of Scientology members
 fought CAN with a barrage of lawsuits. One
 high-stakes suit, handled by a lawyer who has
 frequently represented the church, succeeded,

 and a jury ordered CAN to pay as much as $1.8
 million. The group file~for bankruptcy.
 Now CAN's assets are up for sale, and last
 week its name, logo, Post Office box and tele-
 phone number were finally sold to the highest
 bidder: a Los Angeles lawyer named Steven L.
 Hayes, who is a Scientologist. Hayes says he is
 working with a group of people "united in their
 distaste for CAN" who plan to reopen the group
 so it "disseminates the truth about all religions."
 "It kind of boggles the mind," said David Bar-
 din, an attorney who has represented CAN in
 Washington. "People will still pick up the CAN
 name in a library book and call saying, 'My
 daughter has joined the Church of Scientology.'
 And your friendly CAN receptionist is someone
 who works for Scientology."
 It is a turn of events applauded by the Church
 of Scientology, whose literature calls CAN "a
 hate group in the tradition of the KKK and the
 See CULT, A22, Col. 1

Page A22 cont:

 neo-Nazis." The Rev. Heber
 Jentzsch, president of the Church of
 Scientology International, said in an
 interview: "I just don't think a hate
 organization has a right to operate in
 america with impunity, and obvious-
 ly the courts feel the same way."
 Hostile takeovers are nothing new
 in the corporate world, but this is an
 exceptional tale of the hostile take-
 over of a nonprofit organization. The
 anti-cult advocacy group is gradually
 being dismembered and absorbed by
 its adversaries, who attorneys say
 have deftly outmaneuvered CAN in
 the courts.
 CAN's fate also highlights the
 crippled state of what was once a
 prominent nationwide movement
 that for years kept america's unor-
 thodox religious groups on the de-
 fensive. For years CAN's charges of
 cult mind-control and brainwashing
 helped shape the public's impres-
 sions of groups like Scientology, the
 Unification Church, the Hare Krish-
 nas, Boston Church of Christ, Tran-
 scendental Meditation and others.
 But with each passing decade,
 these religious groups have become
 increasingly mainstream and even
 institutionalizedwopening new
 houses of worship, buying universi-
 ties and other properties, attending
 interfaith events. Now it is the anti-
 cult camp that no longer has an insti-
 tution of its own.
 Next up for auction could be 270
 boxes of CAN files that former staff-
 ers say are stuffed with confidential
 information about current and for-
 mer cult members, efforts to extri-
 cate them and private testimonies of
 anguish and abuse. Kendrick L.
 Moxon, the lawyer who has fre-
 quently represented Scientologists,
 is actively pursuing a purchase of
 these files, says the trustee handling
 the bankruptcy.
 "The fear [is] that this list of infor-
 mation could be bought by the high-
 est bidder," said Bob Grosswald, a
 Long Island dental supply salesman
 who contacted CAN when his son
 joined the Church of Scientology,
 ~And could only be used to harass
 people, to make people feel uncom-
 fortable, and to further damage the
 relationships people have to family
 members still inside these cults.
 How a court could even consider
 selling such a thing is beyond me."
 The modern anti-cult movement
 was born in the 1960s when Ameri-
 can youth were experimenting with
 Eastern religions and alternative
 spirituality. The Citizens Freedom
 Foundation, CAN's predecessor, be-
 came a nonprofit group in 1978, the
 year that 9I.~ foffowers of the Rev.
 Jim Jones died in a mass suicide at
 the People's Temple compound in
 Guyana. In 1986 the group changed
 its name to CAN. The next year,
 Cynthia Kisser, who had turned to
 CAN when her younger sister joined
 an obscure Bible-based group, was
 named executive director

From its suite on the ground floor
of a Tudor style building it shared
with a few accountants, CAN took 
telephone inquiries from around the
 world about hundreds of controver-
 sial groups. Every request for help,
 whether from a relative or reporter,
 a congressman or police officer, was
 logged and filed. Aside from Satanic
 groups, more callers asked about
 Scientology than about any other
 group, according to a 1992 tele-
 phone log that CAN supplied to Con-
 gressional Quarterly.
	 But CAN did not just supply infor-
 marion. It also gave some parents.
 references to self-styled "depro-
 grammers," whom CAN maintained
 were skilled at extricating devotees
 from cults by systematically chal-
 lenging cult teachings and undermin-
 ing beliefs. But there were repeated
 cases of deprogrammers convicted
 for using force or other criminal
 means to wrest their targets away
 from the cults. The CAN board ar-
 ticulated a policy advocating only "le-
 gal methods" of deprogramming, but
 the stigma of associating with crimi-
 nals left CAN vulnerable to its de-
 tractors.
 	The Scientology magazine Free-
 dom last year devoted a special issue
 to CAN, beadJJned: "The serpent of
 hatred, intolerance, violence and
 death." An inside story called CAN's
 executive director Kisser "the moth-
 er of the serpent" and purported to
 expose her past as a topless dancer,
 which she has denied. The magazine
 highlighted alleged deprogramming
 excesses and quoted scholars de-
 fending new religions such as Scien-
 tology. "The time has come to do
 something about the Cult Awareness
 Network and its anti-religious cru-
 sade," Freedom concluded. "This or-
 ganization has plagued the American
 people for too long."
	 Beginning in 1991, CAN and its
 local affiliates and staff were hit with
 a series of lawsuits filed by several
 dozen members of the Church of
 Scientology and others. In one week
 in 1992, Scientologists filed 12 suits
 against CAN, Kisser said. 'Td open
 the door, a process server would
 hand me a suit, I'd say thank you,
 close the door, fax it to the attor-
 ney," said Kisser, a thin, intense
 woman who speaks at a machine-gun
 clip. "Then another knock would
 come on the door. It was ridiculous."
 Most of the suits were civil rights

 claims, according to attorneys on
 both sides. People who identified
 themselves in the lawsuits as Scien-
 tologists alleged that the group de-
 nied them membership or participa-
 tion in CAN conferences. Others
 sued because CAN would not allow
 them to volunteer in its national of-
 fice here. Some self-identified Scien-
 tologists sued after they attempted
 to form local CAN chapters and use
 the CAN letterhead, and the national
 CAN office refused to recognize
 them. Kisser said many of these
 were "cookie-cutter lawsuits," in
 which only the plaintiff's name was
 changed.
	 Moxon, whose law firm filed many
 of the suits against CAN, said: "What
 would you do if you had a religious
 belief and somebody was intentional-
 ly trying to destroy your church and
 destroy your belief and destroy your
 family? I'm a lawyer. People hired
 me to go to court and vindicate their
 rights. What could they be expected
 to do when there's somebody out
 there who's bent on destroying
 them?"
 	Many of these lawsuits were dis-
 missed, but CAN was cannibalizing
 its $300,000 annual budget to de-
 fend itself, and the five-member
 staff, only one of whom worked full
 time, grew increasingly absorbed by
 the litigation, Kisser said. What's
 more, she said, CAN's insurance
 carrier refused to renew its policy
 because of all the lawsuits, and no
 other insurer would agree to cover
 the group.
 	CAN struck back in 1994 with a
 counter-suit against the Church of
 Scientology, 11 individual Scientolo-
 gists and the Los Angeles law firm of
 Bowles and Moxon. The group's
 "malicious harassment" suit alleged
 that the Church of Scientology or-
chestrated the filing of 45 unfounded
and frivolous lawsuits in an attempt
to drive CAN into bankruptcy.
CAN’s suit was dismissed by the
Cook County Circuit Court, but an
appeal is pending in the Illinois Su-
 preme Court.
	 The lawsuit that succeeded in
 driving CAN into bankruptcy in-
 volved an 18-year-old from Bellevue,
 Wash., named Jason Scott. In 1991,
 Scott's mother hired a "cult depro-
 gramruer" and two assistmits in an
 attempt to get him to renounce his
 membership in the Life Tabernacle
 Church, a Pentecostal group.
 Scott alleged in the suit that he
 was kidnapped for five days at a
 beach house, handcuffed, gagged
 with tape and forced to watch video-
 tapes about religious cults. Scott
 feigned conversion, and when his de-
 programmeers took him to a restau-
 rant, he ran off and went to police. In
 late 1993, the county prosecutor
 brought charges against the depro-
 grammer. who was acquitted.
 But the case lived on in civil court.
 The lawyer who took the case on
 Scott's behalf was Moxon, a Sciento-
 logist and a frequent attorney for the
 church in high-profile cases, who has
 been sued by CAN for allegedly fil-
 ing malicious lawsuits.
 	This time, Scott sued not only the
 deprogrammer and his two assis-
 tants, but also CAN. Scott main-
 tained the woman who referred his
 mother to the deprogrammer did so
 as a local CAN volunteer.
 The Scott case essentially put the
 anti-cult movement on trial. Testify-
 ing for the prosecution, Anson
 Shupe, a sociologist at Indiana-Pur-
 due University, told the jury that
 CAN's persecution of Scientology
 was born of the same irrational big-
 otry that .Sanericans earlier directed
 toward Baptists, Methodists, Irish
 Catholics, Jews and Mormons.
 "Are you saying the anti-cult
 movement is a cult?' Moxon asked.
 "It has all aspects of it, yes,” Shupe
replied.
	A jury found all the defendants lia-
ble and awarded Scott more than $4
million in damages, CAN was or-
 dered to pay as much as $1.8 mil-
 lion; the group has appealed.
 Paul Lawrence, an attorney for
 CAN, acknowledges that Scott suf-
 fered an "unfortunate" deprogram-
 ~mng attempt. But CAN "did not de-
 serve to be swept up" in the case
 because the volunteer who referred
 Scott's mother to the deprogram-
 ruer did so without CAN's knowl-
 edge, he said.
 "It is extremely unusual for a non-
 profit organization to be hit with pu-
 nitive damages based on the actions
 of a volunteer member," said Law-
 rence, who is president of the Amer-
 ican Cidill Liberties Union in Wash-
 ington state. "This is a dangerous
 precedent for a wide range of non-
 profit associations .... Most non-
 profits have tens or thousands of
 members out there acting in a way
 that the nonprofits can't hope to
 illOllitor."
 Several nonprofit groups, includ-
 /rig Mothers Against Dnmk Dri~fing,
 have filed friend-of-the-court briefs
 i~ the case.
 In the meantime, CAN filed for'
 Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in
 October 1995, hoping to develop a
 reorganization plan that would allow
 it to keep operating while pursuing
 the appeal. CAN's main creditor is
 Jason Scott. Moxon, Scott's lawyer,
 contested CAN's plan in bankruptcy
 court, and the judge refused to ap-
 prove it. In an attempt to protect its
 assets, CAN filed for Chapter 7
 bankruptcy last June, which meant
 that it transferred control of its as-
 sets to an independent trustee.
 The trustee is Philip R. Martino, a
 plain-speaking Chicago attorney.
 "CAN doesn't exist," Martino said in
 an interview. 'whatever power CAN
 had is now mine."
	The CAN Staffers were last in 
thier office here on June 22, when
Martino phoned to say he was com-
ing over. He brought a locksmith
who changed the locks. he told the
 staff to take only their personal be-

 longings and leave. Kisser took pho-
 tographs of her son and her collec-
 tion of turtle statues given to her
 over the years by supporters as a re-
 minder to "go slow and stick your
 neck out." She was not allowed to
 remove her nine appointment dia-
 ties; Martino considered them CAN
 assets.
 Martino sold CAN's name and
 logo, telephone number and P.O.
 box--the essence of its identity--
 along with CAN's office furniture
 and computers (stripped of their
 hard drives) for $20,000. CAN tried
 to contest the sale, but dropped the
 attempt this week after the judge re-
 quired the group to post a $30,000
 bond first. Martino says he put
 CAN's name-brand assets on the
 auction block only because Kisser
 herself asked to buy them. Her high-
 est bid was $19,000.
 "I have an asset to sell. It's a
 name," Martino said. "I sell it to the
 highest bidder. What the bidder does
 with it is not my concern. It can't be
 my concern. Congress didn't make it
 my concern. And if I made it my con-
 cern, I would be rewriting the bank-
 ruptcy law."
 ú The attorney who bought CAN's
 identity, Steven Hayes, said in an in-
 terview that he represents a group
 of several people he cannot name
 without "permission." He said they
 put up money of their own and mon-
 ey "from this country and other plac-
 es." Hayes said he is a Scientologist,
 not an employee of the Church of
 Scientology. Hayes also had sued
 CAN in the early 1990s on behalf of
 several Scientologists who wanted
 to attend CAN's national confer-
 ence, according to CAN attorneys.
 Hays said his group intends to re-

 vamp CAN so that "religions that
 have been attacked in the past would
 have an opportunity to at least show
 what they believe the truth to be."
 The anti-cult movement has now
 turned to the Internet to share infor-
 mation. A small meeting of anti-cult
 activists gathered at a Newark hotel
 earlier this month to discuss how
 best to carD' on the cause, but the
 meeting was marred when a coterie
 of Scientologists showed up uninvit-
 ed, several participants say.
 Cynthia Kisser is suing the
 Church of Scientolo~' for libel. She
 says she was never a topless dancer.
 Scientologist Jentzsch, for his
 part, says that Kisser is "in the busi-
 ness of spreading the bubonic
 plague, and she feels bad that some-
 one stopped her."
 Little remains of CAN now but
 600 feet worth of fries.
 CAN's trustee, Martino, says that
 Moxon has already mentioned his in-
 terest in bidding for those. Martino
 said he won't sell the files until
 names and personal information are
 removed, a process that he esti-
 mates will cost about $50,000, to be
 paid by the buyer.
 People who were heavily involved
 with CAN could ask to have their
 names removed, Martino said.
 "Scientology. will pay anything to
 get their hands on those f~les," said
 Robert Vaughan Young, a former
 Scientologist who served as a church
 spokesman for 20 years before he
 quit and became a church critic.
 "We always figured that CAN was
 the nexus for all the rest of the prob-
 lems [Scientology had]," he said. "So
 the idea of getting the files is similar
 to the KGB being able to buy the
 files of the CIA."

From elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!n4ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!winternet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!noring Sun Dec  8 14:45:18 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:66754 comp.org.eff.talk:151 misc.legal.computing:2799
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.law-enforcement,misc.legal.computing,comp.org.eff.talk
Path: elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!n4ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!winternet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!noring
From: [email-masked] (Jon Noring)
Subject: --> Whoever anonymously mailed Martin Hunt about Clearwater murder, feel free to e-mail me.
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 1996 21:19:33 GMT
Lines: 253
Sender: [email-masked]

Hello,

It is my belief, looking at the circumstantial evidence, that Martin Hunt, a
noted *long-time* Usenet critic of the Church of Scientology, was "silenced"
because he was receiving anonymous communications about a Clearwater murder
investigation that may not show the Church of Scientology in a very good light.

Thus, if this anonymous person would like to send me anonymous mail instead,
go right ahead.  I may at my discretion post an anonymous excerpt of it (or
reword it), but of course I'll keep your i.d. (even if it is an anon id) a
secret.  All e-mail sent to me will be PGP-encrypted as soon as I receive it.
And I'll probably forward what you send me to the Clearwater police (unless
of course, I believe you are not the person who mailed Mr. Hunt -- I will put
a caveat to that effect in whatever I send Clearwater and/or the FBI since
disinformation is always possible).

Now, a message to OSA.  I plan to watch a lot more carefully the next few
days regarding surveillance of me, unusual net activity, including mail or
unusual charges to Netcom staff (I'm going to send a copy of this post to
Netcom staff to pre-empt you), and anything else.  In fact, any anomalous
activity against me the next few weeks will be immediately posted to several
newsgroups and if egregious enough will most likely be seen by the net.
community (not to mention law-enforcement) as strong evidence that your
"silencing" of Martin Hunt was done because of the murder investigation, and
that the silencing was based on blackmail and false charges.  And of course
I'll keep the authorities and possibly my friends at EFF (if pertinent)
apprised of the evolving situation.

But maybe I won't receive any anonymous e-mail on this topic, then what do
you have to worry about me?  :^)

(Note to ars'ers -- who is/are the detectives at the Clearwater police
investigating this murder?  And their phone numbers/address/e-mail address?
Is the FBI now looking into this as well?  If anybody here has FBI contacts,
do forward the information we have so far to them -- maybe they'll take
an interest.  And of course there's always the Royal Mounties.)

Jon Noring

(p.s., here's a fews posts for those of you who don't know what's going on.
Do read alt.religion.scientology.  Big things are happening on many fronts.)

From www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com![email-masked] Sat Dec  7 12:52:25 PST 1996
Article: 292535 of alt.religion.scientology
Path: netcom.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com![email-masked]
From: [email-masked] (Rasta Robert)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing,nl.scientology
Subject: Re: **Biased Journalism** V2no22 Wake for Martin Hunt
Date: Sat, 07 Dec 1996 19:53:11 GMT
Organization: Hi-Tek & Organic
Lines: 95
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dyna149.dial.dds.nl
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: netcom.com alt.religion.scientology:292535 comp.org.eff.talk:92290 misc.legal.computing:27985 nl.scientology:3822

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

This just doesn't feel good. 
It makes me very suspicious that Martin Hunt didn't
post any kind of goodbey or a reasonable explanation
when he suddenly left a.r.s. There is no logic in this,
suddenly around 4-5 december over 60 of his articles
were being cancelled, than the webpages dissappeared
and than just this via-via e-mail in BJ-V2no22, of which it is
impossible to verify it's authentity. It leaves
many open questions behind.

Something's in the dark here, and I would very much like
to see that a big spotlight will shine into this darkness.

Has this to do with anything the CofS is doing to Martin,
which would show that in practice the 'Fair Game' policy,
which they claim again and again to have been cancelled,
is still in effect? Is it the CofS that got to Martin?
The way it appears now can do little else than raise the
suspiciousness that Co$ has yet again shuddered a critic
into silence.

I would expect, if , by any chance, Martin would have had
some sudden insight, that changed his mind about being a
$cientology-critic, that he would have made a posting, explaining
his changed perspective. Martin has not shown himself to
be too shy to speak his mind. It is truely puzzling and
frightening.

Can someone with acces to a newsserver that doesn't honor cancels
dig up messages posted by Martin after december 3rd, and maybe repost
them or take a scrutinious look at them for any clues?
Rasta Robert
  --//->

 ================================
In msg <[email-masked]> 
on Sat, 07 Dec 1996 07:51:30 GMT, 
[email-masked] (Ted Mayett  (KoX)) wrote 
in nl.scientology:

>On Sat, 7 Dec 1996 03:49:18 GMT, [email-masked] (shelley thomson)
>wrote:

>>Mr. Xxxxx,
>>
>>This is to inform you that two Victoria municipal
>>policewomen contacted me.
>>
>>I wish no more contact of any kind with you or anyone 
>>else in this regard ever again, and no explanation 
>>will be ever be offered.
>>
>>I am no longer a critic of the Church of Scientology.
>>
>>                                   Sincerely, 
>>                                   Martin Hunt.

>>Cogito, ergo sum.
>>

>"No explanation will ever be offered."

>There is no joy in this statement.  What kind of stuff is this?
>I've heard from one critic who says they are off the internet and
>loving it.  Well that is joyful.

>This "no explanation" stuff is garbage.  And guaranteed to keep the
>subject open.  This is a real mystery.

>So is the cult behind this, and did Martin manage to get a final
>message out.

>This is not an intelligent way to get out of the NG, and Martin is
>intelligent.  So I'm confused.
[snip]
  ====================================================

--
Subject: Re: Make $5 from a $50,000 investment!
If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell!
http:/www.xs4all.nl/~kspaink/LRH-bio/lrhpaper.htm

From netcomsv!uu3news.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!portc02.blue.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail Sat Dec  7 12:52:55 PST 1996
Article: 292556 of alt.religion.scientology
Path: netcom.com!netcomsv!uu3news.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!portc02.blue.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [email-masked]
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Martin Hunt being cancelbunnied?
Date: 7 Dec 1996 07:55:56 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: [email-masked]

It just occurred to me, reading the posts in the Clearwater murder thread,
that the silencing of Martin might be related to the message below.

It would obviously have been very inconvenient for the CoS if Martin  had
begun sending a series of posts from his anonymous informant giving
evidence about the Clearwater murder.

I'm a little worried--this is serious stuff.  Has anyone gotten hold of
him yet? 

Margaret H.

~~~

Subject: more on clearwater murder
Date: 3 Dec 1996 01:12:34 -0800
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

Anonymous email sent to me today:

According to people in the know, two of the three people they are
looking for have broken with scientology. Which two of the three
is not known. The cops are being stonewalled by scn, which claims
officially that they don't know where the people are. (They certainly
know where the one who has not broke with them is.) It may be possible
that more information about (for example) the coroner's report will
be released shortly.

[posted by express permission]
[please forward to Clearwater police]

-- 
Cogito, ergo sum.

~~~

PS--As I mentioned in another thread, I'm once again *not* trying to evade
killfiles with this moniker; it's a long, off-topic story, so never mind. 

MH

From www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!207.65.96.4!news.planetc.com!news!rayr Sat Dec  7 12:53:31 PST 1996
Article: 292521 of alt.religion.scientology
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Path: netcom.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!207.65.96.4!news.planetc.com!news!rayr
From: [email-masked] (Abdjalil - Clam Hunter)
Subject: Hunt And the Clearwater Murder
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Organization: EZLink Internet Access Fort Collins Colorado
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 1996 18:07:33 GMT
Lines: 24

It was mentioned in IRC this morning (Dec. 7th) that Martin Hunt
was discussing the clearwater murder at the time that he did his
vanishing act.  

Although there may be no connection, it may be worthwhile to 
Contact the clearwater police with this information.  Hunt's
silence may not be unrelated.  The Detectives on this case
WILL be interested enough to ask some questions, so whomever
contacts them, be sure to have the whole story and information
on how to contact Hunt.

The CoS should be deeply afraid of this Murder situation.  If
it can be shown that they have sheltered these people, then
it opens the door for criminal RICO.

-Ray (BlackPR)

-- 
"we will successfully bring the following facts into public
consciousness ... People who attack Scientology are criminals ... 
if one attacks Scientology he gets investigated for crimes ... 
If one does not attack Scientology ... one is safe." - L. Ron Hubbard
-- 
OmniMedia Electronic Books | URL:  http://www.awa.com/library/omnimedia
9671 S. 1600 West St.      | Anonymous FTP:
South Jordan, UT 84095     | ftp.awa.com  /pub/softlock/pc/products/OmniMedia
801-253-4037               | E-mail:  [email-masked]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join the Electronic Books Mailing List (EBOOK-List) Today!  Just send e-mail
to [email-masked], and put the following line in the body of the message:
     subscribe ebook-list     

From elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news3.idirect.com!n2tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!nntp.portal.ca!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-10.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!omni2!rkeller Sun Dec  8 14:49:31 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:66761
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news3.idirect.com!n2tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!nntp.portal.ca!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-10.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!omni2!rkeller
From: [email-masked] (Rod Keller)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,nl.scientology
Subject: A.r.s Week in Review - 12/1/96
Date: 2 Dec 1996 01:33:28 GMT
Organization: Voicenet - Internet Access - (215)674-9290
Lines: 624
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: omni2.voicenet.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Alt.religion.scientology
Week in Review Volume 1, Issue 32
12/1/96
by Rod Keller [[email-masked]]
copyright 1996

Alt.religion.scientology Week in Review summarizes the most significant
postings from the Usenet group Alt.religion.scientology for the preceding
week for the benefit of those who can't follow the group as closely as
they'd like. Out of thousands of postings, I attempt to include news of
significant events, new affidavits, court rulings, new contributors,
whatever. I hope you find it useful. Like many readers of a.r.s, I have a
kill file. So please take into consideration that I may not have seen some
of the most significant postings. 

The articles in A.r.s Week in Review are brief summaries of the articles. 
Many include an excerpt, and all include message IDs for the articles I
cover. This may or may not be useful to you, depending on how long your
site stores articles in the newsgroup before expiring them. 

Free A.r.s Week in Review subscriptions are available, just email me at
[email-masked]
It is archived at:
        http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/ars-summary.html
        http://user1.i1.net/~mallen/scn/arswr/ars-summary.html
        http://www.amazing.com/scientology/ars-summary.html
        http://users.aimnet.com/~jdiver/scieno.htm
        http://www.thur.de/religio/publik/arsfaq.html

#####

> NOTS Web

The Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet published an article on Scientology's
war against NOTS web pages. 

"Many are scared when they get mile long letters from American lawyers who
claim copyright and threaten to prosecute, says lawyer Knut Vigeland.
Vigeland has just won a case in High Court (Lagmannsretten) where a client
who had been swindled now has been awarded compensation from the Church of
Scientology in Oslo. Vigeland has because of this case become well-known
with the methods used by the Church of Scientology. 

"First of all you should demand that any accusations are in Norwegian.
Threats of prosecution is meaningless if there is no documentation of
copyright according to Norwegian law and they refer to the actual
Norwegian laws that have been violated. In USA there are 50 states and
none of them have the same laws. In Norway we follow Norwegian laws, says
lawyer Vigeland. He emphasizes that the Church of Scientology is not a
church, but a business enterprise. 

"Several Norwegian Internet providers have closed down Heldal-Lund's home
pages when the Church of Scientology have contacted them and threatened
with American laws of copyright. Nettguiden in Ostfold has however had the
secret Scientology documents available since the 15th of November. 

"'I will let the documents be available here until I get a Norwegian court
order that says what we do is illegal. I have received a big number of
calls from USA. Recently I got a mail from a Norwegian lawyer who
represents the church.'

"'She claims that the church has been given approval in similar cases both
in Sweden and Denmark. This I have asked the lawyer to substantiate', says
Oivind Robbestad who is editor of Nettguiden." 

Copies of Andreas' NOTS site are appearing on other web sites. 

"I have been asked to tell that there is now yet another mirror of
Andreas' operation clambake: http://130.236.236.30/CoS/index.html" 

Per Lundquist maintained a mirror of the site in Sweden. 

"Yesterday afternoon I've got a phone call from the Chief of Security at
Linkopings University. He had got a fax from a law firm in Sweden
representing the Co$. They had noticed my mirror of Andreas Heldal-Lund's
Operation Clambake. 

"They demanded that the files CoSdocs.zip and all the other Co$-files
would be removed. Today I had a very long and interesting talk with the
Chief of Security. He told me that even though he sympathized with me the
university wouldn't at any cost get involved in this case. 

"I was asked to remove my pages and there would be no action taken against
me. At 15.00 today (Swedish time) I removed my pages. At 19.00 a new
improved and 'legal' page is up and running." 

Andreas posted other news about NOTS web site maintainers. 

"Jesper Toftegaard in Denmark is accused by the Danish CoS lawyer to be an
accessory to a crime when he links from his home page to mine!" 

David Bromage created an Australian mirror of the NOTS site. He received
this message from his system administrator. 

"I have removed access to your public_html directory, due to complaints
from the Church of Scientology. After we have verified their claims, and
who they are we may wish to meet with you and discuss the matter." 

The administrator was reacting to this message from Vicki Hanna, who
describes herself as Legal Officer, Church of Scientology. 

"[T]he specific materials concerned are in fact owned by the Religious
Technology Centre (RTC), the owner of the confidential Advanced Technology
of the Scientology Religion and holder of the exclusive rights under the
copyrights applicable to the Advanced Technology materials. The Advanced
Technology materials are confidential, unpublished, copyrighted works. RTC
works include, among others, the individual works comprising levels known
as 'NOTS'. 

"As these postings violate copyright laws of the USA and Denmark and as
they are on your computers I therefore request your assistance and ask
that immediate action is taken to remove these materials and that Mr,
Bromage (who is a student of the University) is informed that he is not
authorized to post these materials. 

"We are currently involved in litigation in the United States, Holland and
Sweden over the same and similar materials in several lawsuits.
Injunctions have been granted in each case recognizing RTC's rights to
these materials." 

The conclusion this week: 

"ITS examined numerous Web sites around the world and read court findings
provided by many ars readers. On the basis of these findings they decided
that there is uncertainty whether any Australian copyright laws have been
broken as the items in question are freely available from public records.
However they have neither the time nor the resources (i.e. money) to
pursue the matter with Co$. 

"The CoS has been informed that the files will be removed on the
University's rules regarding the use of computing facilities and _not_ as
a result of their claim to ownership of trade secrets and copyright." 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Arnie Lerma

A filing on behalf of Arnie Lerma by attornies David Masselli and William
Lane was posted this week. It argues against awarding attornies fees to
Scientology, or issuing a permanent injunction against Arnie. 

"RTC Did Not Comply With the Statutory Requirements for an Attorneys' Fee
Award. 

"As explained in its Motion for Summary Judgment, RTC registered the Works
with the Copyright Office by the deposit of 'masked' copies, unavailable
to public inspection. The legality of that registration is highly
questionable.  Even if this form of registration is lawful and suffices
for bringing suit under the law, it does not suffice for obtaining an
award of attorneys' fees. Under 17 U.S.C. 412, public registration prior
to the date of the alleged infringement is a prerequisite to certain
remedies under the copyright act: 

"RTC Is Not the Prevailing Party. 

"A 'prevailing party' is one 'who succeeds on a significant issue in the
litigation that achieves some of the benefits the party sought in bringing
suit'. Success on a claim that is 'purely technical or de minimis does not
qualify him as a prevailing party'. 

"RTC began by seeking $100,000 per violation. Its summary judgment motion
claimed 33 infringements. Thus it was seeking millions from Mr. Lerma. 
The legal resources mobilized by the plaintiff were consistent with this
view of the case, and with its history of attempting to steamroll
opponents with extensive litigation. More importantly, RTC, itself,
defined the aim of litigation as stopping the 'publication and exposure of
these material.' By that measure, they lost. 

"The mere fact that, after claiming numerous violations of both copyright
and trade secret laws, RTC was able to prevail against Mr. Lerma on five
non-willful copyright violations does not mean that it is the prevailing
party. A party found guilty of copyright infringement can be the
prevailing party, if it successfully defends against significant claims
litigated in the action. Taking only the copyright claims in this case
into consideration, in which the Court found five violations but the
defendant defeated the claim of willfulness, the Court should find that
RTC was not the prevailing party. 

"An Analysis of the Bills Submitted by RTC Shows That They Are Not
Reasonable

"Although copyright issues were generally a footnote in this case, RTC
asks for approximately $483,059.24 in attorneys' fees for the services of
thirteen attorneys from six law firms. These lawyers have been
characterized in RTC's Exhibit C as 'Local Trial Counsel,' 'Local
Intellectual Property Counsel,' 'Summary Judgment Copyright Counsel,'
'Constitutional and Summary Judgment Copyright Counsel,' and
'Co-ordinating Attorney and Litigator.' This is clearly excessive. 

"Crowded Benches: There were ten hearings in this case. At each hearing
except the last, a minimum of three lawyers, at least two from out-of-town
appeared. Now RTC seeks to bill for this overlawyering, including the
travel time. Even Ms. Kobrin, whose rates are otherwise quite reasonable,
has managed to log a number of twenty hour days due to travel. 

"RTC proposes a permanent injunction, relief appropriate only when a
continuing violation otherwise threatens. Lerma uploaded OT II and III in
the mistaken belief that they were proper to do so; his downloads were
innocent infringements. Unlike infringers in cases cited by plaintiff, Mr.
Lerma does not compete with RTC or produce the same product. While Mr.
Lerma does not object to impoundment of any remaining copies of the five
subject works in his possession, he presents no danger of continuing
violation and no reason for a permanent injunction." 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Clam Web

Tilman Hausherr continues to seek out Scientologists on the web. 

"Len Williams design, in Glendale of course. http://www.lwdesign.com/

"http://www.lwdesign.com/about_lwd.html
Look at 'Our purpose' for the most blatant example

"http://www.lwdesign.com/basic_infosheet.html
Look at 'your publics'"

"http://www.onelook.com/
http://www.studytech.com/

"Isadore Chait
http://www.inna.net/imc/cbio.html
http://www.inna.net/imc/
$250,000 donation to the IAS."

The operator of the techsell.com website, Peter Letterese, wrote a bizarre
and threatening letter to Tilman objecting to the listing as a
Scientologist. 

"You have published a defamation of the Galileo(R) Registered Trademark.
It is registered with the United States Patent & Trademark Office.  You
have suggested it belongs to someone else or that it purports to be
something it is not. Since you have no firsthand knowledge of our company
nor any knowledge of what may have gone into its materials, you seem to
have chosen to ascribe our use of any number of common words of the
English language to someone else's specialized vocabulary, which
vocabulary you apparently purport to be expert on. Clearly, you have
little knowledge of the lexicon of selling or sales. It goes back to the
year 1610. I don't think the religion Scientology, which you seem to
dislike, was around back then!  You have no expertise in OUR materials.
Who knows what you may or may not know about those belonging to the
religion Scientology. 

"I have very high-priced Trademark attorneys. They stand ready to defend
our trademarks against any libelous attack such as yours. If you continue
to defame our organization or its trademarks, I will commission my
attorneys to find you, sue you and take every one of the few pennies you
may have accumulated, should any of your drivel harm my organization in
any monetary way. 

"You seem to make fun of people and their ideas as your stock in trade. We
stand ready to act should you foolishly decide to make us a target." 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Dennis Erlich

Scientology defendant Dennis Erlich posted some developments in his life
as he continues to fight his court cases. 

"I am working now for (Chicago) Tribune, Inc., owner of KTLA Channel 5 in
LA as Assistant to the Producer of the Hollywood Christmas and Rose Parade
telecasts. 

"Tribune has thrown up a web site (their first?) to promote the parade. 
The URL is - http://www.ktla.com/christmas

"You will note that our favorite internet spammer/cancellers are parading
their wares before the public using the name 'Concerned Businessmen's
Association', and pumping the Way to Happiness booklet. Their 'float' is
well back, toward the end of the parade, for anyone who will be able to
tune in. 

"Monday I will have to be in front of yet another new San Diego County
Family Law Court judge and answer to the motion to revoke my 40 days in
jail suspended sentence for paying my child support later than the due
date. 

"The house I am living in has been sold and I will need to move before
Christmas. I do not know where." 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> French Criminals

A list of recently convicted Scientologists in France was posted this week
from Le Progres. 

"Jean-Jacques MAZIER: Three years in prison, of which 18 months suspended.
500,000FF in fines. Five years suspension of civic, civil, and family
rights, including exclusion from public markets. 

"Corinne MEDELIN: Two years suspended sentence, 50,000FF in fines.
Louis-Michel BROLLES: 16 months suspended sentence, 20,000FF in fines.
Pierre and Sylvie TEDESCHI: 15 months suspended sentence, 20,000FF fine,
three year ban from commercial management. 

"Alain BAROU: One year suspended sentence, 15,000FF in fines. Ghislaine
HUET (nee PEYRONNEL): 18 months suspended sentence. Damien CALVIN: 9
months suspended sentence, 10,000FF fine. Henri CAILLAUD and Denise
POMPIDOR (nee ROBERTY): 18 months suspended sentence, 25,000FF fine. 

"Pascale DULLIN, Laurent QUOISSE, Marie-Annick ROBERT (nee BAUDRY), Yves
VEAU, Evelyne CHABERT (nee TIRABOSCHI): 8 months suspended, 10,000FF
fine." 

German television show Kennzeichen D broadcast a show about the trial,
including the news that Scientology appears to have stolen documents from
the French parliament. 

"The main prosecutor on the case was interviewed, stating that 'the courts
have now done their duty, and now it is time for the politicians to act'. 
The off-voice then stated, that the French parliament has now a
parliamential commission (?? German: Untersuchungsausschuss), that will
investigate Scientology further. 

"The report went on to say, that the politicians on this commission
already got a first impression of the difficult task, that lies ahead of
them:  Recently, some documents regarding Scientology have suddenly
disappeared from the rooms of this parliamential commission." 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Grady Ward

Grady Ward posted a series of filings to the court in the Scamizdat trial.
He is appealing several decisions of Judge Infante. 

"[T]he defendant objects and appeals to the District Judge the order of
the Magistrate Judge of November 15, 1996 denying the defendant's motion
for certain necessary costs of discovery to be prepaid by the court or by
the adverse party. 

"The defendant asks the District Judge to remand this Order back to the
Magistrate Judge to decide, what, if any cost-shifting is appropriate in
this litigation." 

"[T]he defendant objects and appeals to the District Judge the order of
the Magistrate Judge of November 15, 1996 compelling the deposition under
Rule 45 of the defendant's wife, Felicity Wasser. The defendant's Motion
and Reply contain the vital arguments and precedent for adequately
protecting a person whose only relationship to the instant litigation is
that she is privy to privileged communications between her and her
husband, the defendant. 

"My wife is fearful of the scientologists, with good reason, but will
cooperate willingly with a deposition limited to one or two hours or to
discovery by other methods." 

"[T]he defendant objects and appeals to the District Judge the order of
the Magistrate Judge of November 15, 1996 denying the defendant's motion
to compel answers to certain interrogatories. The defendant believes the
order denying further answers by plaintiff to Interrogatories numbers 2
and 3 is mistaken in law because by depriving me the means of verifying
each element of whether the plaintiff has taken reasonable precautions to
maintain the confidentiality of its Advanced Technology is the nexus of
this litigation and would prevent me from demonstrating that the plaintiff
has failed in its extraordinary burden of keeping reasonably confidential
'trade secrets' that it admits sells to 'thousands' of 'parishioners.'" 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Jon Atack

Martin Poulter posted an update on Jon Atack, the author of Scientology
expose A Piece of Blue Sky. 

"He has been extensively sued and 'Fair Gamed' and has been driven
bankrupt by the costs of his legal cases. Jon himself is unwilling to talk
about the cases - he's taking a well-earned rest from cult related work to
write a novel - but I did manage to find out that the cult's two actions
against him are still in pre-discovery stages. The cult's lawyers were
trying to find evidence of assets that they could claim, and subjected him
to four days of examination in court. They found *no* evidence of assets,
so the cult has gained nothing. 

"Jon should be out of bankruptcy in May of next year." 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Julf

Peik Stromsholm posted that Johan Helsingius is still battling Scientology
over his intention to withhold the identity of the poster of Scamizdat 11,
which contained nearly all Scientology secrets posted in all the other
Scamizdat issues. 

"The issue is: should Julf be forced to reveal the email addresses used by
the person(s) that posted parts of Scamizdat #11 (selected Scientology
scriptures) through the anon.penet.fi server? The lower court said yes,
but Julf has appealed. 

"Julf is represented by Markku Ropponen, esq, from the law firm
Scandinavian Law Offices. Scientology through its litigation arms RTC,
Bridge Publications Denmark and CST are represented by Jussi Savonen, esq,
from one of the largest law firms in Finland, Peltonen, Orndahl, Ruokanen
& Itäinen. 

"Helsingius has filed declarations from professors such as Scheinin
(constitutional law), Viljanen (criminal and procedural law) and Jyranki
(constitutional law and international law). Savonen has filed declarations
by professors Lappalainen (procedural law) and Saraviita (constitutional
law). Savonen has also filed a translation of a declaration in English by
Douwe Korff, who is 'a Dutch human rights lawyer living in Cambridge',
regarding the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights. 

"The question about how the Internet is to be defined and understood has
also been a subject of several declarations and quotes from different
sources. The well known Finnish computer expert Petteri Jarvinen has been
quoted, as well as emeritus professor Osmo A. Wiio. 

"As you probably remember, the lower court decided that Julf should be
forced to reveal the names to the police within 30 days. On appeal Julf
asked that the execution of this order should be stayed until the Court of
Appeals reaches a decision. The Court of Appeals granted this request. 

"If the Court of Appeals decides against Helsingius, he may appeal to the
Supreme Court of Finland and again ask for a temporary stay of the order
of the Court of Appeals. If the Supreme Court chooses to consider the case
(they only consider about 10% of the appeals) it's most likely they will
stay the order of the lower courts until they have reached a decision." 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Clearwater Murder

Jeff Jacobsen this week discovered the City of Clearwater's web site,
which contains an appeal from the police department for information
regarding the murder of a Scientologist. Several Scientologists are sought
for questioning, and have apparently fled the country. 

"Clearwater police have a web page at:
http://public.lib.ci.clearwater.fl.us/police/

"http://public.lib.ci.clearwater.fl.us/police/homicide.html has case #3
that is apparently related to Scientology, regarding the homicide of Lisa
McPherson." 

"Case # 3 - Offense # 95-29158

"Victim Lisa McPherson, a white female, date of birth 2/10/59, died while
being transported by several associates to a hospital in New Port Richey,
Florida on December 6, 1995. Ms. McPherson's manner of death has been
undetermined. The Clearwater Police Department has attempted to contact
three of these associates for interviews. Thus far, all attempts to locate
these individuals have been unsuccessful. The last known address of Ms.
McPherson and these associates was 210 S. Fort Harrison Avenue in
Clearwater. The three associates are: 

"1. Suzanne Schnuremberger (possible married name of Green). Information
indicates that Ms. Schnuremberger may now be living in Switzerland or
Germany. 

"2. Ildiko Cannovas. Information indicates that Ms. Cannovas may now be
living in Hungary. 

"3. Laura Arrunada. Information indicates that Ms. Arrunada may now be
working in the medical field in Mexico. 

"Please contact Detective Sergeant Wayne Andrews at at [email-masked]
or (813) 462-6085 (collect if necessary) if you have information regarding
Suzanne Schnuremberger, Ildiko Cannovas, or Laura Arrunada." 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Travolta

John Travolta appeared on the Oprah Winfrey show on Nov 26th, and
discussed Scientology with an uncritical Oprah and audience. 

"OPRAH: ... really misunder... Every time you say the word people get... 
I know back there my producers are going OOHH my God Scientology... 

"TRAVOLTA: You can be a Catholic Scientologist ...and a Protestant
Scientologist and a Baptist Scientologist. We have every denomination. 

"OPRAH: So what is the center... I never understand, what is it... 

"TRAVOLTA: It's mainly to help you survive better on the planet. We're in
trouble on this planet, you know, in a lot of ways... 

"OPRAH: So is it... It's not a religion? 

"TRAVOLTA: Well it is technically, because by law, and by the dictionary,
you have to go... that term. Because it deals with the spiritually end...
through spiritually and physically at times... Like Dianetics is the
body... It deals with injuries, and emotional upsets, and things like
that... That's very specific and it deals with the body, and the mind. 
And the Scientology deals with church... of the trade, to survive better,
on the planet." 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Big Story

The UK television program The Big Story ran a second show exposing
Scientology this week. A.r.s posters provided a summary. 

"'We lied to banks, people obtained loans under false pretenses. It was
whatever we could do to raise money.' said Andrea Catt who was registrar
at the Bournemouth mission 1988-95. 'People were persuaded to remortgage
their homes, sell their homes, cash in the policies supposed to pay off
their mortgages, borrow against pensions, sell family jewels, borrow from
their families, sell their cars. Anything you can possibly imagine that a
person could do to raise money, people were persuaded to pay into
Scientology. If a person filled a loan form in saying the money was for
Scientology, they'd get as very negative response so people were
encouraged to say that the money was for a management training course, a
computer, a car, a boat. Sometimes we'd fill it in for them. Then they'd
sign it and it would be submitted to the bank on a completely false
basis.' The 'Church' keeps supplies of loan application forms conveniently
at hand for such occasions. The bank found out in one case, and Ms. Catt
was made the scapegoat and dismissed, but soon reinstated where she went
on to win an award 'The Gross Income Cup'. 

"The events that drove a 24-year-old to jump off the Clifton Bridge after
only half-a year in Scientology were described. The 'Purification
Rundown', the borrowing to pay for courses, the endless letters and phone
calls from Scientologists. Mike Rinder appeared giving the usual
Scientology damage-limitation line about Scientology not being responsible
just because someone 'had some involvement with Scientology in the past'.
This was rather contradicted by the letters written to the victim by
Scientologist Tony Clark even after the suicide. 10 British recruits have
committed suicide in the last twelve years. 

"Roger Tuffin, treasury secretary from 1991. 'Nobody knew where the money
came from. So receipts were made up to account for that money...
completely bogus receipts'. The Scientologists were evading Value Added
Tax by describing money paid for courses as 'donations'. He was posted to
the 'Freewinds' as director of communications and estimates their revenues
as half-a-million dollars per week." 

"There was additional information about the suicide of Richard Collins,
who, it would seem, was subject not merely to lots of phone calls and
letters prior to his death, but extremely threatening letters, containing
references to his PC folder: letters sent to another ex-Scn (happily
alive) contained similarly vile threats." 

"The cult fucked up so badly with Richard Collins that they were still
sending him aggressive hand-written notes even after his death." 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

#####

> Swedish Parliament

Zenon Panoussis posted developments concerning distribution of the secret
NOTS levels by the Swedish Parliament. 

"I have learned that the CoS lawyer Per Magnusson has written to people
that ordered the NOTs from the Swedish parliament, demanding that they
'return' these to him. His letters appear to contain knowingly false
statements and explicit threats. 

"To those that have received such letters: please mail a copy to me at the
following address

Hogbergsgatan 64
SE-118 54 Stockholm
Sweden 

and ignore Magnusson. Your parliament NOTs copies are perfectly legal to
own, to possess, to lend to others, to copy as long as the copy is
intended for your own use, and to give away or sell." 

"I threatened him with a report to the bar association. Unfortunately I
didn't have a chance to report him. I learned from the TV 4 news on
Thursday that some recipients of these letters had already reported him.
The story of the threatening letters was also reported on national radio
news. 

"The TV 4 news interviewed Tom Thyblad, chief of the parliament's office
of the chamber. Thyblad criticized Magnusson's letters in very strong
terms and advised the public to make their NOTs requests anonymously. 

"The people of the parliament have been subjected to a really great deal
of shit from the CoS, ranging from fax bombs through daily visits through
aggressive letters to delegations of 'international experts'. They have
put up with it and they have not given one inch of way to the pressure." 

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

-end-

From elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.rns.net!maggie.ionsys.com!news.corpcomm.net!funny.bahnhof.se!seunet!news2.swip.net!mn6.swip.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-11.sprintlink.net!news.dx.net!news Sun Dec  8 14:56:36 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:66661
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news.rns.net!maggie.ionsys.com!news.corpcomm.net!funny.bahnhof.se!seunet!news2.swip.net!mn6.swip.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-11.sprintlink.net!news.dx.net!news
From: [email-masked]
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: The 'S' Files  - Big Story Transcript [REPOST]
Date: 2 Dec 1996 21:12:49 GMT
Organization: The Astro-Net
Lines: 514
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.190.73.125
X-Posting-Software: WSSoup 0.81 (UNREGISTERED)

I had a hard time reading the original message so I've put some
spaces between sentences where I thought they belonged, and
I've did some minor "clean-up." I did this so that I could
print out the message and give it to an ex- victim of the
Business of $cientology, who has begged for such material in
her exit-counseling sessions.

============================================================

ORIGINAL From: John Ritson <[email-masked]>
ORIGINAL Subject: The 'S' Files  - Big Story Transcript
ORIGINAL Date: Sun, 1 Dec 1996 19:41:25 +0000
ORIGINAL Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

'The Big Story' Thursday March 28 7:30 pm

Title "The S Files" [S as in Scientology Logo]

[Presenter Dermot Murnaghan (DM: henceforth) no relation to any
other DM]

"Tonight we're going to expose serious financial crime in one
of the Scientology cult's most successful operations in Britain.

We show how they cooked the books, made false statements to
obtain bank loans, and changed invoices to fiddle their VAT."

[Extract from "Trust" ad"]

"This advert for the Church of Scientology was recently shown
on cable TV. It was a major breakthrough for the cult. The cult
persuaded the Independent Television Commission that it was a
'proper' religious organisation fit to be allowed on TV. It
also has the right to advertise on the ITV network itself,
giving it direct access to the entire British population, and
the Scientologists hope they'll soon be officially accepted as
a charity. But the inside evidence we have obtained raises
serious doubts about their new public image. Last year The Big
Story secretly filmed inside the Bournemouth mission.

[shots from that film - smiling recruiter - whimpering trainee]

We showed the wierd psychological techniques they use and how
they get people to spend thousands of pounds on their books and
courses. The revelations in that programme convinced two former
Bournemouth mission officials that they should come to us with
their inside story of financial scams."

[SCAM 1 - Cooking the Books] [Voices saying "Trust"]

"Roger Tuffin left Scientology when he decided to come out as
gay and now lives with his partner John."

[two blokes sorting out washing]

"He joined the Bournemouth Mission when he was just 20 and
desperately confused about his sexuality"

[1991 -according to an interview in "The Guardian"]

"Roger had worked in a bank so he soon found himself in a key
role in the mission's treasury department - cooking the books"

[shot of bloke putting food under grill]

"Normal accounting practices and financial law went by the
board." RT "Nobody knew where the money came from so receipts
were made up to account for that money. But of course the
receipts were being made up about three years later with
fictitional names, fictitional amounts and courses - and
completely bogus receipts."

DM: "At the time Roger Kay was the boss - his deputy was Debbie
Pine"

[Film of them taken inside the mission]

Tuffin says they both knew what was going on, but the cult's
international HQ denies this" Mike Rinder - Director CSI "..a
comlete lie. I don't think that there is an example you can
ever find - of somebody in the Church of Scientology that has
done something improper that has not been dealt with internally
within the Church"

DM: "Poole High St. ten days ago. Our secret camera watches the
Scientologists out and about trying to pick up new members"

[shot of street from above]

[for non-UK readers Poole and Bournemouth form a South Coast
conurbation]

Recruiter "...we operate for the benefit the public so it's up
to you"

DM: "Scientology is essentially a money-making enterprise. And
they want that money so much that in the Bournemouth mission
they were prepared to employ a woman who admitted she'd been
involved in financial malpractice in the past"

[woman using PC - pages of HCOBs 10 Sept ?? 'PTSness and
Disconnection', 21 Feb ?? 'Choosing PE and Registration', about
'Control and Income']

Andrea Catt "The Scientologists knew that I had been involved
in professional malpractice and that I knew how money worked
and how to get money, how to move money around, and as the
years progressed I got dragged back more and more into the
world of finance"

DM: "But the Scientologists claim they put her into the job to
give her a second chance"

MR: "Someone comes into a church and says that they have
reformed their ways it would be uncharitable and not religious
to say to them 'I'm sorry, we don't believe anthing that you're
saying. I'm sorry because of your past we don't believe that
you can change' " [wrinkles nose]

DM: "According to Andrea by 1991 the Bournemouth mission was
broke and under enormous pressure from the cult's head office
to sell more and more Scientology courses"

[AC: sorting through Scientology books]

AC: "And as the pressure became greater and greater it became
apparent to all concerned that the only way to do things which
were effectively more malpractice"

[Shot through mission windows]

DM: "In the Bournemouth mission every Thursday evening the
executives met to draw up a list of emotionally vulnerable
recruits to be targeted that week."

AC: "There'd be some people - maybe their mother had just died
and they were very depressed or their girlfriend had just left
them and those would be prime, prime targets"

DM: "Alex Bowernan was a prime target"

[shot of man cleaning garden pond]

DM: "He is still trying to recover both financially and
mentally. In 1995 he enrolled for a £125 Scientology
counselling course"

AB: "They told me that I was in a very depressed state of mind.
I had to do something about it otherwise it was just downhill
from there. I had to put a stop to that"

[Cover of "The Scientologist's Guide to Dissemination" then
overleaf 'Finding a Ruin']

AC: " You talk to him about the things which are 'ruining his
life'. You basically make the person feel really, really bad
about the condition they're in. You take their problems and you
magnify them. You look at how that's going to affect them in
the future and you get the person into a state where they feel
that their future is nothing unless they do something and then
you tell them that the only thing that they can do is
Scientology"

DM: "Debbie Pine 'ruined' Alex Bowerman. In a set of gruelling
interviews she persuaded him to start the Bridge - a set of
courses allegedly designed  to 'clear' a person of his problems.

[Picture of 'The Bridge to Total Freedom' course charts.]

AB: "I was taken for re-interviews starting about ten o'clock
at night and finishing at about four in the morning and during
this process I was persuaded that this was the best course to
take"

DM: "The bridge costs more than £20,000. Alex was persuaded to
cash in an insurance policy. He was told it had to be done
immediately."

AB: "I had spoken to the insurance company and I'd been told
that there was no way I could get it that week. It would take
two or three weeks minimum. So I went back to Scientology and
they said 'Oh no, this is not correct. We have done this
before. You just say that this is your money, you want it. You
can get it"

DM: "They were right. When Alex insisted he wanted the money
quickly, the insurance company paid up. The Senior Registrar -
Stephanie Powell

[shot of Stephanie Powell through the mission window]

went with him to collect the money. But even though Alex handed
over more than £23,000

[shot of Scientology receipts for Alex's payment - total
£23,474.79]

she still wan't satisfied. Within days he'd been persuaded he
needed more training courses, tapes and books amounting  to a
further £2,000"

AB: "They played me for a puppet. They managed within the space
of a week to get £25,000 off me. That's more than my bank's
ever managed to do"

DM: "Alex's story is not unique. According to Andrea it happens
all the time"

AC: "People were persuaded to re-mortgage their homes, sell
their homes, cash in the policies supposed to pay off their
mortgages, borrow against pensions, sell family jewels, borrow
from their families, sell their cars. Anything you can possibly
imagine that a person could do to raise money, people were
persuaded to do to pay into Scientology."

MR: "You can talk to thousands of people and they will tell you
that nothing even remotely similar to that ever happened to
them. It is just a story that is made up now to sound
sensational and give you some fodder for your programme that
will make the Church in some way look bad."

DM: "If targets had no ready cash or property to sell they'd be
persuaded to take out a loan. To make borrowing easier
Registrars kept a handy stock of forms from all the major
lending financial institutions. They then persuaded people to
lie about the purpose of the loans. This constitutes criminal
deception"

[SCAM 2 DECEIVING THE BANK] ["Trust" voices]

AC: "I knew full well, and so did all the other Registrars that
if a person filled a loan form in saying the money was for
Scientology, they'd get a very negative response so people were
encouraged to say the money was for a management training
course, a computer, a car, a boat, anything other than for
Scientology.

Sometimes the person would fill the form in for themselves,
sometimes we'd fill it in with them, or for them. Then they'd
sign it and it would be submitted to the bank on a completely
false basis."

Coopers and Lybrand accountant - Rick Helsby "If the Church of
Scientology itself assisted a member Scientologist in deceiving
a bank into advancing a loan which the bank otherwise would not
or might not have given then that is conspiracy to cheat and
that is an extremely serious criminal offence"

DM: "In 1993 a loan application purporting to be for a computer
was filled out by by a young recruit in the Bournemouth mission"

AC: "The bank found out that he'd used the money for
Scientology and threatened to go to the police. The mission
needed a scapegoat. I was the scapegoat. I was told to write a
report of all the things that had happened in the mission
financially that were irregular."

[Shot of Statutory Declaration]

DM: "Andrea says she was forced into signing a full confession
taking all the blame onto herself even though other people were
also involved in the financial scams.

MR: "I can't give you any information whatsoever about that. I
just don't. You know, you're talking to me and I have certain
information about things.

But the Bournemouth Mission is a long, long, long way away from
the central activity of the Church of Scientology on an
international basis."

DM: "Andrea was suspended for six months, but then she was
reinstated. Back in her old apartment it was business as usual.
She was so successful she even won awards from head office"
[The "Gross Income Cup" according to "The Guardian"]

[SCAM 3 Fiddling the VAT]["Trust"]

DM: "It wasn't just the banks that Scientology officials
defrauded. In the early '90s the cult's accountants realised
the Church had failed to register for Value-Added Tax and owed
thousands of pounds to Customs and Excise. This resulted in
some creative book-keeping.

The scam was simple. The courses the cult sells are subject to
VAT but donations are not.

[shot of course leaflets]

RT: "If there was a receipt for a course, say about £4,000, part
of that's your tax which has to be deducted. But then the
receipt would be changed, that receipt taken out and destroyed
and a new receipt made to make it into a donation." RH "If the
Church is deliberately falsifying its accounting records,
destroying receipts and the like so that its trading income or
income from services is understated to the Customs and Excise
then that is an extremely serious criminal offence. It could be
theft, false acccounting and could be subject to many years of
imprisonment"

MR: "Now I will say this to you over and over and over. If
someone was doing something unethical that is not acceptavble
to me, it is not acceptable to anyone in the Church and we take
responsibility for straightening those things out"

["Trust" ad again]

DM: [standing outside org] "Scientology staff, under constant
pressure to make money, live in fear of any of their recruits
leaving the cult. A recruit who drops out represents a drop in
income. Even worse, he might demand a refund. So officials need
to keep all members under their control and to do this the use
an insidious technique. All recruits are persuaded to divulge
any dark secrets from their past for their own good.

Those secrets are recorded, and can, if neccessary be used
against them in the future.

Stuart Parkinson is one of the mission's most senior officials.
One day he took Alex Bowerman aside for a confidential chat,
telling him that to get over his problems he should admit to
all his past wrongdoings"

[shot of Stuart P through window]

AB: "Stuart asked for all sorts of information about my
background. Anything I was upset about or embarrassed about,
that was holding me back on the line. And I divulged all kinds
of stuff that I would not normally divulge to anybody, indeed
stuff that I had not told anybody up to that point. Having
written them all down he read them and they went into my file."

DM: "That confession was to have serious consequences for Alex.
After he left the cult he was pestered for six months with
letters and calls. Then they discovered he'd instructed a
solicitor to take action to get his money back."

AB: "Within the next couple of days we had a letter from the
mission. It was not very pleasant"

DM: "The letter referred to the secrets that Alex had divulged,
suggesting 'the way out for you

[shot of letter]

'is to confess everything you did to your wife and the Police
and suffer the consequences' "

AB: "It was basically telling me that they had stuff on me"

DM: "Then Hodgkin and Co., Scientology solicitors passed on the
letter to the Legal Aid Board"

AB: "I was devastated, just reading that letter I felt as if my
whole world had collapsed in one go"

DM: "The fear that personal confidences might be divulged can
ruin a life or even end it"

[shot of gravestone]

"Last November, Richard from Christchurch [near Bournemouth]

[shot of smiling young man apparently celebrating birthday]

"was recruited into the Bournemouth mision. Within a few month
he'd borrowed £3,000 to pay for Scientology courses. Richard's
sister Jennifer describes what he was like before he met the
Scientologists" Jennifer "I would describe him as a very
thoughtful, caring, intelligent sensitive person.

He seemed to enjoy life, went out a lot with his friends."

DM: "Richard underwent the Scientologists Purification Rundown,

[shots of pill-guzzling, running and saunas, labelled as
Reconstruction]

"Supposedly a form of detoxification, involving taking massive
doses of vitamins, then going for a vigorous half-hour run.
They then sit in a sauna for up to five hours a day.

This punishing regime is repeated daily for at least two to
three weeks. People start to hallucinate, allegedly because
their bodies are getting rid of impurities, but in fact because
of the damage being done to their metabolism.

It was all too much for Richard, both physically and mentally.
Alan, one of Richard's workmates witnessed what happened when
he decided to quit Scientology,

Alan: "When he initially wanted to leave they phoned him four
times a day, five times a day, up to an hour each time. And
when he was on the phone he was shaking, obviously frightened
of something, but only the Scientologists and Richard would
know what that conversation was.

DM: "Tony Clark, and other Bournemouth mission officials, wrote
Richard several letters"

[Shot of Tony Clark through window]

"Some of them distressed Richard so much that he tore them up
on the spot, others warned him of the consequences and asked
him to come into the mission"

[shots of letters]

"Andrea knows the routine. It's called 're-ruining'"

AC: "He might be shown write-ups he'd done of past misdeeds
that he'd done and strongly reminded that those things still
existed within his emotional difficulties and he'd be brought
to a very low emotional point. All the influence the Church had
prior would be really brought to bear and the indoctrination
would be hammered in harder"

DM: "Richard's sister was on a visit home in July. She saw him
on the morning of his death"

Sister: "Richard was anxious about the fact that he was wanting
to leave Scientology, and he was concerned that they were not
letting him leave, and that they were threatening to print
personal information about him. That is what he voiced to me"

DM: "Later, Richard left home saying he was going to visit a
friend. He stopped off at a garage for petrol and cigarettes
but he never arrived at the friend's house."

[shot of Clifton Suspension Bridge]

DM: "For several hours that night his movements are unaccounted
for but much later that night he parked his car near the
Clifton Suspension Bridge in Bristol. At ten minutes to
midnight he jumped to his death." Sister "The family feel that
Richard would be alive today if he had not become involved with
the Church of Scientology, and I feel they have a
responsibility for people that they are recruiting. If people
want to leave the organisation, then they need to give people
that freedom to leave without harassment and without threat"

MR: "The fact that he committed suicide is a tragedy. But the
fact that people would then make an allegation that because he
had at some point an involvement in the Church of Scientology,
that therefore the Church of Scientology is responsible - is
reprehensible, is disgusting."

DM: "Even after Richard had died, the harrassment continued.
Unaware of the suicide, Tony Clark sent increasingly angry and
threatening letters"

[Shot of letter 'I'm not the one who will miss out. In ten
years time I will not be thinking life is awful and want to
kill myself.. so why not be bloody ethical and get yourself
sorted. See you soon. Best Regards TC']

DM: [in front of org]"Ten British recruits to Scientology have
committed suicide in the past twelve years. But despite the
disturbing evidence in cases like Richard's Britain has been
tolerant of the cult. It's a very different story in Europe.

There the authorities have taken strong action against
Scientology because of public outrage".

[coverage of French trial]

MR: "The formation of the Christian religion  was fraught with
intolerance.

Jesus Christ was tried by a court not unlike the court in
France. He was tried in a court and found guilty and he was put
to death. Today they don't do that anymore. Today we've got the
media to do that to people"

[German and Spanish coverage]

[Pictures of Saint Hill]

DM: "Back in Britain, in 1993 Roger Tuffin joined the Sea
Organisation, Scientology's elite corps"

[shot of 'Why continue to be part of a dying world? Join the
Sea Org' leaflet]

RT "The only way that I could really get out would be for me to
move up by joining the Sea Org, which would be looked as a
positive thing to do in Scientology.

I could escape the finances and all the trouble that was there.
I didn't agree with it but I couldn't win a one-man battle on
sorting it out."

DM: " Roger was posted to Scientology's ship 'Freewinds' in the
Caribbean. There he looked after the cult's war-chest, amassed
from the huge donations collected worldwide."

RT "It certainly ran into hundreds of millions of dollars.
They'd make at least half a million dollars per week worldwide"

[Trust]

AC: "When I saw the 'trust' ad I was horrified. I've not been
the most trustworthy person in my life, and having made this
programme I may get into serious trouble.

I felt that people needed to know the truth. Scientology is not
an organisation that you can trust"

=--=

John *** "Make Money, Make More Money, Make Others Produce so
as to Make More Money" -L. Ron Hubbard ***

From [email-masked] Sat May 11 21:19:05 1996
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:9928
Path: elastic!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!news3.idirect.com!news2.toronto.istar.net!news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.telebyte.net!usenet
From: [email-masked] (Zane Thomas)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: NOTS SOLICITATION
Date: Sat, 04 May 1996 06:04:57 GMT
Organization: Telebyte North West Silverdale, Wa
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.53.162.222
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99d/32.182

Ed,

Further reading for you:

http://www.sky.net/~sloth/sci/sci_index.html
http://mail.bris.ac.uk/~plmlp/scum.html
http://www.snafu.de/~tilman
http://www.primenet.com/~lippard
http://amazing.cinenet.net/scientology.html
http://users.aimnet.com/~jdiver/scieno.htm
http://www.tezcat.com/~tina/pages.me/sci/
http://copper.ucs.indiana.edu/~sgoehrin/scientology/home.html
http://www.algonet.se/~teodor/cult/welcome.htm
http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/
http://www.eff.org/pub/Censorship/CoS_v_the_Net/
http://www.webcom.com/~dtobias/sosueme.html
http://www.well.com/user/jerod23/clam.html
http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/scientology.html
http://home.pacific.net.sg/~marina/welcome.htm

To name a few.  Should I go on?

Zane --- Taking out the trash.

From elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!n4ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!nntp.portal.ca!newsfeed.direct.ca!portc01.blue.aol.com!portc02.blue.aol.com!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!not-for-mail Wed Jan  1 12:14:40 1997
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:69071 comp.org.eff.talk:481 misc.int-property:1003 misc.legal:21430 misc.legal.computing:2865
Path: elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!n4ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!nntp.portal.ca!newsfeed.direct.ca!portc01.blue.aol.com!portc02.blue.aol.com!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!not-for-mail
From: [email-masked] (Rev. Dennis L Erlich)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal,misc.legal.computing,misc.int-property
Subject: One Battlefield Too Many?
Date: 30 Dec 1996 21:32:01 -0700
Organization: inFormer Ministry
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
X-Posted-By: @204.212.59.185 (inform)
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99g/16.339
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

From ELECTRONIC MEDIA - Jan 2, 1997

The Insider 
by Greg Spring

What's in a name?

Seems someone thought Tribune Entertainment's "Gene Roddenberry's
Battleground Earth," is uncomfortably close in title to "Battlefield
Earth," a series of science-fiction novels penned by that other prolific
science-fiction writer, L. Ron Hubbard, who founded the Church of
Scientology.  At one point an affiliated group of the church -- which is
know for vigorously defending its properties in the legal arena -- had
contacted Tribune to voice concern about the similarity in titles.
Hollywood sources say "Battlefield Earth" has been in development as a
potential feature film.  [DE note: since the late 70's]  However Tribune
sources said, once they explained that their project will always be
referred to as "Gene Roddenberry's Battleground Earth," they haven't heard
from the church group since.  Officials with the Church of Scientology
could not be reached for comment.

---------------------

Co-incidentally, I currently am an employee of Tribune Entertainment.

The scienos also claim to hold trademarks on the words "Freedom" and
"Ability".  <snort>

             Rev. Dennis L Erlich    * * the inFormer * *
                     <[email-masked]>
                         <[email-masked]>

From elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!uunet!in2.uu.net!205.252.116.190!feed1.news.erols.com!worldnet.att.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!sthomson Wed Jan  1 12:38:00 1997
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:68048 comp.org.eff.talk:266 misc.legal.computing:2838
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing,nl.scientology
Path: elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!uunet!in2.uu.net!205.252.116.190!feed1.news.erols.com!worldnet.att.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!sthomson
From: [email-masked] (shelley thomson)
Subject: Re: **Biased Journalism** V2no24 Zenon's Raid Report
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Keywords: 
     **Biased Journalism** : a net magazine designed to compensate for 
     the shortcomings of the professional news media.  We cover 
     issues of interest to the citizens of cyberspace.  This is a
     community newspaper of the net.  
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 09:51:32 GMT
Lines: 316
Sender: [email-masked]

     Copyright 1996 Shelley Thomson; all rights reserved.  

     Mail, articles and comment may be directed to <[email-masked]>.  
     Netiquette will be observed with all communication, except for the
     following:  harassing or threatening mail will be posted to the
     net immediately.        

**Biased Journalism**  Volume 2, issue 24     December 20, 1996.  

Contents:  Raiding Zenon: Amplified Article; Correcting the Record

Read at your own risk.  This is **Biased Journalism**!

1.  A Net Citizen Describes the Raid

Thanks for posting the great bulletin. It was pretty cool, I just
came home by train from Stockholm and found the bulletin on ARS.
Things sure move fast...

I can give a more detailed account now perhaps. I arrived at 8.45,
at the same time as the TV4 team.  Zenon was really nice, and had
good taste in music too.  He had opened his balcony door to get rid
of the smoke smell inside his apartment, but it got real cold after
a while *shudder*.  The coffee was great.

A middle aged man was present, he didnt say much but he helped Zenon
with inserting new printer paper and stuff.  First arrived a middle
aged woman, I think Zenon said that she was a "neutral observer"
from the bailiffs office.  She looked tired, and like she would
rather be somewhere else, and when Zenon rubbed his hands and said:
"Well, lets get down to work now shall we?  This is going to take
a while!" with a big grin, she looked positively intimidated.

The TV4 team was pretty nice, we chatted a little with them about
the NOTS and the internet.

Critics present was myself, Brian and Anti-Cult.  I knew that
Anti-Cult was coming and filming with a videocamera, but when a young
guy was lurking in the hallway taking snapshots of people, I thought
I was getting my first view of a real, in the flesh clam.  It turned
out it was Brian who was taking shots to be scanned later.

The big moment came when the chief bailiff arrived, she was a rather
no-nonsense woman.  Her male assistant hardly spoke a word during the
proceedings, I dont know if he said anything in the kitchen.

First big showdown happened in the living-room with everyone present.
The cameraman switched on the light on his camera and started running
the tape, the light was almost blinding.  The bailiff and Zenon
started arguing in lawyer-speak, so I didnt understand much.  :-)

She didnt like that it was a "public spectacle" with us critics there,
but Zenon retorted that it was his apartment so there he did what ever
damn he pleased.

Zenon talked a lot, he has obviously studied law at school some time
or another.  At one time the discussion became a bit heated, they
were talking at the same time, and the bailiff finally said "Ok, Ok!
Zenon, you have studied my brief carefully, could I get a moment to
study yours in peace!?"

Zenon offered her to sit down at his kitchen table and offered her
some coffee. "I can do without coffee THANK you."  The three
bailiffs, Zenon and the older man went into the kitchen and closed
the door behind them.  Zenon and his friend came out now and
then (I think... Perhaps I should do some clam courses to improve
my memory), the bailiffs stayed in there for 10-15 minutes.  The
cameraman was filming Brian as he was typing on IRC, and when Brian
turned around to explain to the journalists what IRC was (they knew
about WWW already) and how the NOTS were wandering around different
homepages, I got my 30 seconds of fame at the keyboard.  :-)

The cameraman did a real long nice close up of the cover of a Swedish
pulp translation of one of ElRons early masterpieces, "Slave-ess (it
can be in feminine form in Swedish) for sale!"  On the cover was a
busty woman smiling seductively at the reader.  Appearently someone
had sent it to Zenon when his named started to appear in the
newspapers.

[In our bulletin, Volume 2 no 23, we said:

>         The raid was scheduled to take place at 0800 GMT on December
> 17.  Anxious netizens gathered on irc channel #scientology to wait
> for news.  It was determined that 0800 GMT was equivalent to 12
> midnight in California.
> 
>         Midnight in California is 3 a.m. in Virginia.  Arnie Lerma
> struggled to hold out, but folded at a few minutes after midnight.
> Fate willed that the first reports from Zenon's raid came in about
> 15 minutes later.

Pretty typical.  :-/

>         We asked what Zenon ate for breakfast. "Coffee and
> cigarettes," the netizen guessed.

Judging from the over-flowing ashtrays.  :-)

>         Then the bailiffs came out of the kitchen.   They announced
> that they were leaving.  Execution of the [raid] order was
> terminated.  TV4 filmed the scene, including the moment when the
> visibly unhappy chief bailiff refused to shake hands with Zenon.  

Everyone came out into the living room.  "So, thats settled then."
Zenon and the bailiff shook hands, she even smiled (albeit briefly
and not very warmly).  The cameraman turned to the journalist and
asked if he should shoot the bailiffs leaving, the journalist asked
the bailiff if they could shake hands again while they were filming.
The bailiff looked a bit annoyed and said something along the lines
"I hardly think that is necessary..." and walked out. Zenon joked
something about "well, I dont think it would be good for either of
our reputations if we were seen together."

> The bailiff agreed to an interview but declined to do it in the
> presence of Zenon and his fans, so the bailiffs and TV4 went
> outside.

The news crew wasnt sure if they would send the clip or not,
we will see later this evning. I dont think the camera was
ever pointed at me, but perhaps I can be seen lurking in 
the background for a split second or two....

Lars
----

2.  Zenon Tells The Story

This was a day.

People begun to arrive just after 8.30. Not many, but enough to
crowd my one-room apartment.  A team from TV4 added the element
of a pleasant surprise.  Then came the bailiff, represented by
three officials.  They were not very pleased at the crowd, and
even less were they pleased at all the video cameras and tape
recorders, but I suppose they saw it as one of these extra
hardships one has to go through sometimes.

As promised, I had made coffee.  Although adversaries in the
formal situation, both the bailiff officials and I could keep the
social situation at an almost cordial level.  It's good when people
can make the distinction between work and person.

I set Netscape's disk cache to 0 kb, connected to Andreas' Clambake
site and started printing NOTs.  Just as I said.  I had borrowed a
laser for the occassion, whose capacity is rather more impressive 
than that of my old tired bubble jet.  A stack of 1500 sheet of paper
was calculated to last the working day.  I then handed a brief to the
bailiff.  Brian (BOG) logged into the IRC and gave a live 
account of the action to about a dozen people there. 

Good idea, Ron.

I don't know if I should go into the legal aspects of the situation;
they are complicated enough to give anyone a headache.  I'll try to
simplify.

In a decision one and a half month ago, the  bailiff ordered me to
hand over all material that was targeted by the courts' decision of
seizure.  That decision is in turn worded in a way that specifies 
the material in legal, rather than in factual terms.   It says that
"infringing material" is to be taken into custody.  Nowhere,
neither in the courts' nor in the bailiff's decision, is it
specified just which material is infringing.  The sanction in case 
I do not comply with the order of the bailiff is a monetary penalty. 

So I turned to procedural rules. I said that, as the order does not
specify certain physical material in an unequivocal way, it is left
to me to interpret it and decide just which material is infringing.
I deny copyright infringment in general, but for the purposes of the
discussion of this order (only), I will accept that the RTC 
has copyright to my version of the OTs and NOTs.  That still doesn't
make my possession of them an infringement.  For the mere
possession to be infringing, it is additionally required that the 
material has not been legally publicized, which I claim that it has
been.

So with this view I agree - only for the purposes of this
discussion - that an edition of the OTs and NOTs intended for
spreading to the public would be infringing and that I would have to 
hand it over.  Private copies not.  Then I point at the fact that,
if the bailiff has a different opinion on this subject, there is
still nothing she can do **within the frame of the execution 
of the old order**, [other] than motion in court for the penalty to
be levied.  I argue that in order to take any other action, such as
a seizure against my will, the bailiff has to make a new decision.

The bailiff is in principle free to make a new decision at once,
communicate it to me verbally and execute it immediately.  Against
immediate execution I argued that, considering the fact that I am
fully cooperative and, although fighting, yet not illegally evading
the bailiff's orders, the bailiff should not execute any new
decision at once, but give me time to appeal it before it's
executed.  I have a point in this argument.

So while I do have a pretty good (but not totally unbreakable)
argument, the bailiff is begining to become conscious of the futility
of a seizure in way far more manifest than what briefs can ever cause:
that printer spitting out NOTs is screaming for some common sense to
be added to the case. The bailiffs retire to the kitchen and close
the door.

I will never know, but I believe that the stack of 750 pages of NOTs
on the table, 90% of them fake, and the knowledge that there are NOTs
in the garbage too, did play a certain role in the final decision.
The bailiff simply agreed with my view that, not possessing any
material intended for distribution, I had complied with her orders 
despite the fact that I didn't hand in anything.  We shook hands and
they left.

This is a total victory for today, but means  nothing one way or
another in the long run.  The scienos are bound to inundate the
bailiff with new demands of new orders and seizures etc.  The bailiff
can stick to her indirect acceptance of my claim that the NOTs have
been publicized, or she can go to her office and write a new order, 
specifying the material that I am supposed to hand over in a way
that leaves less room for my interpretations.  As I had anticipated
a new order to surrender material or a decision of seizure to be
made on the fly today, my replying brief is already written; I'll
just have to change the date if I need it.  Then we'll see. 

I intended to put the whole proceedings on the net in RealAudio.
Unfortunately, the person that took care of the recording forgot to
switch on the microphone.  We have recorded 45 minutes of perfect
silence.  Sorry.  But if Anti Cult's video camera worked as it
should, BOG will be putting some stills on the net this evening.

It turned out that one of the bailiff officials reads ars.  I find
that reassuring; at least I know that there is one person in the
authority that I don't have to explain the background  of things to.
Whether this affects decisions or not is another story.  Decisions
are supposed to be made strictly on the basis of the filed material,
but then again, few are those officials that can resist being
influenced by their personal knowledge from outside a case. 

Later the mail arrived. And with it a decision of the supreme court
not to hear an appeal by the scienos.  It's about something that
the scienos lost in both the primary court and in the court of
appeals, but believe me, I just don't know any more what that
something is.  In the constant barrage of motions and appeals and 
new separate cases, I'm beginning to lose track. 

I also noticed this when the TV reporter asked me how many cases I
have right now. I couldn't answer, I had to use my fingers and try
to count.

Z

oracle@everywhere: The ephemeral source of the eternal truth...

---

3.  Correcting the record

        We wrote that the chief bailiff had refused to shake
hands with Zenon.  This was true, but it was not the whole
truth.   Our observer did not see the entire sequence.  We
apologize to the bailiff for an unwitting injustice.

Here is what Zenon said about it:

  The events are described as well as they could be from
  the irc, but there is one thing I'd like you to correct
  when you have the opportunity:

  >   Then the bailiffs came out of the kitchen.   They
  >   announced that they were leaving.  Execution of the
  >   [raid] order was terminated. TV4 filmed the scene,
  >   including the moment when the visibly unhappy chief
  >   bailiff refused to shake hands with Zenon.

  This is unfair to the bailiff (and probably due to the
  confusion on irc). She did shake hands with me,
  spontaneously and without reservation. Only when the
  TV camera missed it and the reporter asked us to do it
  again for the sake of the camera, did the bailiff refuse.
  What she was refusing was not shaking hands, but acting.

  I do hold some things against that bailiff, but I also
  have to give her credit for others. She has for instance
  a high ambition to be correct and impartial in her work
  (although she sometimes fails) and she has the same
  ambition to be correct in the social context (and hasn't
  failed once in this). The only person so far that has
  refused to shake hands with me is McShame, and I *really*
  don't want to compare the bailiff to him.

  Z

Raid pictures are available at:

http://www.users.wineasy.se/bog/scient.htm 

------------------ The End ---------------------------------------

   [**Biased Journalism** is distributed free in cyberspace.  To
   subscribe, send a message to <[email-masked]>
   with "subscribe" as the body of the message.  Comments, article
   submissions and hot tips should be addressed to
   <[email-masked]>.  Solid mail, checks and donations go to
   S. Thomson, 236 Stanford S/C, Suite 142, Palo Alto, CA 94304.
   Separate issues of **Biased Journalism** are available via USA
   domestic mail at $5 apiece.  Foreign rates on request.  NEW: back
   issues of **Biased Journalism** are available on floppy disk at
   $2 per issue, minimum of four issues.]

From elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!uunet!in2.uu.net!205.252.116.190!feed1.news.erols.com!worldnet.att.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!sthomson Wed Jan  1 12:45:28 1997
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:68048 comp.org.eff.talk:266 misc.legal.computing:2838
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing,nl.scientology
Path: elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!uunet!in2.uu.net!205.252.116.190!feed1.news.erols.com!worldnet.att.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!sthomson
From: [email-masked] (shelley thomson)
Subject: Re: **Biased Journalism** V2no24 Zenon's Raid Report
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Keywords: 
     **Biased Journalism** : a net magazine designed to compensate for 
     the shortcomings of the professional news media.  We cover 
     issues of interest to the citizens of cyberspace.  This is a
     community newspaper of the net.  
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 09:51:32 GMT
Lines: 316
Sender: [email-masked]

     Copyright 1996 Shelley Thomson; all rights reserved.  

     Mail, articles and comment may be directed to <[email-masked]>.  
     Netiquette will be observed with all communication, except for the
     following:  harassing or threatening mail will be posted to the
     net immediately.        

**Biased Journalism**  Volume 2, issue 24     December 20, 1996.  

Contents:  Raiding Zenon: Amplified Article; Correcting the Record

Read at your own risk.  This is **Biased Journalism**!

1.  A Net Citizen Describes the Raid

Thanks for posting the great bulletin. It was pretty cool, I just
came home by train from Stockholm and found the bulletin on ARS.
Things sure move fast...

I can give a more detailed account now perhaps. I arrived at 8.45,
at the same time as the TV4 team.  Zenon was really nice, and had
good taste in music too.  He had opened his balcony door to get rid
of the smoke smell inside his apartment, but it got real cold after
a while *shudder*.  The coffee was great.

A middle aged man was present, he didnt say much but he helped Zenon
with inserting new printer paper and stuff.  First arrived a middle
aged woman, I think Zenon said that she was a "neutral observer"
from the bailiffs office.  She looked tired, and like she would
rather be somewhere else, and when Zenon rubbed his hands and said:
"Well, lets get down to work now shall we?  This is going to take
a while!" with a big grin, she looked positively intimidated.

The TV4 team was pretty nice, we chatted a little with them about
the NOTS and the internet.

Critics present was myself, Brian and Anti-Cult.  I knew that
Anti-Cult was coming and filming with a videocamera, but when a young
guy was lurking in the hallway taking snapshots of people, I thought
I was getting my first view of a real, in the flesh clam.  It turned
out it was Brian who was taking shots to be scanned later.

The big moment came when the chief bailiff arrived, she was a rather
no-nonsense woman.  Her male assistant hardly spoke a word during the
proceedings, I dont know if he said anything in the kitchen.

First big showdown happened in the living-room with everyone present.
The cameraman switched on the light on his camera and started running
the tape, the light was almost blinding.  The bailiff and Zenon
started arguing in lawyer-speak, so I didnt understand much.  :-)

She didnt like that it was a "public spectacle" with us critics there,
but Zenon retorted that it was his apartment so there he did what ever
damn he pleased.

Zenon talked a lot, he has obviously studied law at school some time
or another.  At one time the discussion became a bit heated, they
were talking at the same time, and the bailiff finally said "Ok, Ok!
Zenon, you have studied my brief carefully, could I get a moment to
study yours in peace!?"

Zenon offered her to sit down at his kitchen table and offered her
some coffee. "I can do without coffee THANK you."  The three
bailiffs, Zenon and the older man went into the kitchen and closed
the door behind them.  Zenon and his friend came out now and
then (I think... Perhaps I should do some clam courses to improve
my memory), the bailiffs stayed in there for 10-15 minutes.  The
cameraman was filming Brian as he was typing on IRC, and when Brian
turned around to explain to the journalists what IRC was (they knew
about WWW already) and how the NOTS were wandering around different
homepages, I got my 30 seconds of fame at the keyboard.  :-)

The cameraman did a real long nice close up of the cover of a Swedish
pulp translation of one of ElRons early masterpieces, "Slave-ess (it
can be in feminine form in Swedish) for sale!"  On the cover was a
busty woman smiling seductively at the reader.  Appearently someone
had sent it to Zenon when his named started to appear in the
newspapers.

[In our bulletin, Volume 2 no 23, we said:

>         The raid was scheduled to take place at 0800 GMT on December
> 17.  Anxious netizens gathered on irc channel #scientology to wait
> for news.  It was determined that 0800 GMT was equivalent to 12
> midnight in California.
> 
>         Midnight in California is 3 a.m. in Virginia.  Arnie Lerma
> struggled to hold out, but folded at a few minutes after midnight.
> Fate willed that the first reports from Zenon's raid came in about
> 15 minutes later.

Pretty typical.  :-/

>         We asked what Zenon ate for breakfast. "Coffee and
> cigarettes," the netizen guessed.

Judging from the over-flowing ashtrays.  :-)

>         Then the bailiffs came out of the kitchen.   They announced
> that they were leaving.  Execution of the [raid] order was
> terminated.  TV4 filmed the scene, including the moment when the
> visibly unhappy chief bailiff refused to shake hands with Zenon.  

Everyone came out into the living room.  "So, thats settled then."
Zenon and the bailiff shook hands, she even smiled (albeit briefly
and not very warmly).  The cameraman turned to the journalist and
asked if he should shoot the bailiffs leaving, the journalist asked
the bailiff if they could shake hands again while they were filming.
The bailiff looked a bit annoyed and said something along the lines
"I hardly think that is necessary..." and walked out. Zenon joked
something about "well, I dont think it would be good for either of
our reputations if we were seen together."

> The bailiff agreed to an interview but declined to do it in the
> presence of Zenon and his fans, so the bailiffs and TV4 went
> outside.

The news crew wasnt sure if they would send the clip or not,
we will see later this evning. I dont think the camera was
ever pointed at me, but perhaps I can be seen lurking in 
the background for a split second or two....

Lars
----

2.  Zenon Tells The Story

This was a day.

People begun to arrive just after 8.30. Not many, but enough to
crowd my one-room apartment.  A team from TV4 added the element
of a pleasant surprise.  Then came the bailiff, represented by
three officials.  They were not very pleased at the crowd, and
even less were they pleased at all the video cameras and tape
recorders, but I suppose they saw it as one of these extra
hardships one has to go through sometimes.

As promised, I had made coffee.  Although adversaries in the
formal situation, both the bailiff officials and I could keep the
social situation at an almost cordial level.  It's good when people
can make the distinction between work and person.

I set Netscape's disk cache to 0 kb, connected to Andreas' Clambake
site and started printing NOTs.  Just as I said.  I had borrowed a
laser for the occassion, whose capacity is rather more impressive 
than that of my old tired bubble jet.  A stack of 1500 sheet of paper
was calculated to last the working day.  I then handed a brief to the
bailiff.  Brian (BOG) logged into the IRC and gave a live 
account of the action to about a dozen people there. 

Good idea, Ron.

I don't know if I should go into the legal aspects of the situation;
they are complicated enough to give anyone a headache.  I'll try to
simplify.

In a decision one and a half month ago, the  bailiff ordered me to
hand over all material that was targeted by the courts' decision of
seizure.  That decision is in turn worded in a way that specifies 
the material in legal, rather than in factual terms.   It says that
"infringing material" is to be taken into custody.  Nowhere,
neither in the courts' nor in the bailiff's decision, is it
specified just which material is infringing.  The sanction in case 
I do not comply with the order of the bailiff is a monetary penalty. 

So I turned to procedural rules. I said that, as the order does not
specify certain physical material in an unequivocal way, it is left
to me to interpret it and decide just which material is infringing.
I deny copyright infringment in general, but for the purposes of the
discussion of this order (only), I will accept that the RTC 
has copyright to my version of the OTs and NOTs.  That still doesn't
make my possession of them an infringement.  For the mere
possession to be infringing, it is additionally required that the 
material has not been legally publicized, which I claim that it has
been.

So with this view I agree - only for the purposes of this
discussion - that an edition of the OTs and NOTs intended for
spreading to the public would be infringing and that I would have to 
hand it over.  Private copies not.  Then I point at the fact that,
if the bailiff has a different opinion on this subject, there is
still nothing she can do **within the frame of the execution 
of the old order**, [other] than motion in court for the penalty to
be levied.  I argue that in order to take any other action, such as
a seizure against my will, the bailiff has to make a new decision.

The bailiff is in principle free to make a new decision at once,
communicate it to me verbally and execute it immediately.  Against
immediate execution I argued that, considering the fact that I am
fully cooperative and, although fighting, yet not illegally evading
the bailiff's orders, the bailiff should not execute any new
decision at once, but give me time to appeal it before it's
executed.  I have a point in this argument.

So while I do have a pretty good (but not totally unbreakable)
argument, the bailiff is begining to become conscious of the futility
of a seizure in way far more manifest than what briefs can ever cause:
that printer spitting out NOTs is screaming for some common sense to
be added to the case. The bailiffs retire to the kitchen and close
the door.

I will never know, but I believe that the stack of 750 pages of NOTs
on the table, 90% of them fake, and the knowledge that there are NOTs
in the garbage too, did play a certain role in the final decision.
The bailiff simply agreed with my view that, not possessing any
material intended for distribution, I had complied with her orders 
despite the fact that I didn't hand in anything.  We shook hands and
they left.

This is a total victory for today, but means  nothing one way or
another in the long run.  The scienos are bound to inundate the
bailiff with new demands of new orders and seizures etc.  The bailiff
can stick to her indirect acceptance of my claim that the NOTs have
been publicized, or she can go to her office and write a new order, 
specifying the material that I am supposed to hand over in a way
that leaves less room for my interpretations.  As I had anticipated
a new order to surrender material or a decision of seizure to be
made on the fly today, my replying brief is already written; I'll
just have to change the date if I need it.  Then we'll see. 

I intended to put the whole proceedings on the net in RealAudio.
Unfortunately, the person that took care of the recording forgot to
switch on the microphone.  We have recorded 45 minutes of perfect
silence.  Sorry.  But if Anti Cult's video camera worked as it
should, BOG will be putting some stills on the net this evening.

It turned out that one of the bailiff officials reads ars.  I find
that reassuring; at least I know that there is one person in the
authority that I don't have to explain the background  of things to.
Whether this affects decisions or not is another story.  Decisions
are supposed to be made strictly on the basis of the filed material,
but then again, few are those officials that can resist being
influenced by their personal knowledge from outside a case. 

Later the mail arrived. And with it a decision of the supreme court
not to hear an appeal by the scienos.  It's about something that
the scienos lost in both the primary court and in the court of
appeals, but believe me, I just don't know any more what that
something is.  In the constant barrage of motions and appeals and 
new separate cases, I'm beginning to lose track. 

I also noticed this when the TV reporter asked me how many cases I
have right now. I couldn't answer, I had to use my fingers and try
to count.

Z

oracle@everywhere: The ephemeral source of the eternal truth...

---

3.  Correcting the record

        We wrote that the chief bailiff had refused to shake
hands with Zenon.  This was true, but it was not the whole
truth.   Our observer did not see the entire sequence.  We
apologize to the bailiff for an unwitting injustice.

Here is what Zenon said about it:

  The events are described as well as they could be from
  the irc, but there is one thing I'd like you to correct
  when you have the opportunity:

  >   Then the bailiffs came out of the kitchen.   They
  >   announced that they were leaving.  Execution of the
  >   [raid] order was terminated. TV4 filmed the scene,
  >   including the moment when the visibly unhappy chief
  >   bailiff refused to shake hands with Zenon.

  This is unfair to the bailiff (and probably due to the
  confusion on irc). She did shake hands with me,
  spontaneously and without reservation. Only when the
  TV camera missed it and the reporter asked us to do it
  again for the sake of the camera, did the bailiff refuse.
  What she was refusing was not shaking hands, but acting.

  I do hold some things against that bailiff, but I also
  have to give her credit for others. She has for instance
  a high ambition to be correct and impartial in her work
  (although she sometimes fails) and she has the same
  ambition to be correct in the social context (and hasn't
  failed once in this). The only person so far that has
  refused to shake hands with me is McShame, and I *really*
  don't want to compare the bailiff to him.

  Z

Raid pictures are available at:

http://www.users.wineasy.se/bog/scient.htm 

------------------ The End ---------------------------------------

   [**Biased Journalism** is distributed free in cyberspace.  To
   subscribe, send a message to <[email-masked]>
   with "subscribe" as the body of the message.  Comments, article
   submissions and hot tips should be addressed to
   <[email-masked]>.  Solid mail, checks and donations go to
   S. Thomson, 236 Stanford S/C, Suite 142, Palo Alto, CA 94304.
   Separate issues of **Biased Journalism** are available via USA
   domestic mail at $5 apiece.  Foreign rates on request.  NEW: back
   issues of **Biased Journalism** are available on floppy disk at
   $2 per issue, minimum of four issues.]

From elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!n4ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!uniserve!newsfeeds.sol.net!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.mathworks.com!news-xfer.netaxs.com!en.com!news.dgsys.com!usenet Wed Jan 15 23:18:42 1997
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:69694 comp.org.eff.talk:582 misc.legal:21687
Path: elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!n4ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!uniserve!newsfeeds.sol.net!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.mathworks.com!news-xfer.netaxs.com!en.com!news.dgsys.com!usenet
From: [email-masked] (Arnaldo Lerma)
Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology,alt.religion.scientology,comp.org.eff.talk,alt.wired,misc.legal,misc.journalism
Subject: Press release - RTC vs Lerma - Court awards no Fees
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 19:37:10 GMT
Organization: FACTNet
Lines: 99
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lermaelec.dgsys.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227

         SCIENTOLOGY FEE REQUEST DENIED IN INTERNET CASE

     The federal court in Alexandria, Virginia today declined to award
attorneys' fees to the an arm of the Church of Scientology, stemming
from minor copyright violations on the Internet committed by a vocal
opponent of the Church. Making a final ruling in
Religious Technology Center v. Lerma, Civil Action No. 95-1107-A
(E.D.Va.),
U.S. District Judge Leonnie M. Brinkema found that 
the copyright violations were a "close call," and that
the public interest would not be served by making any award to the
Religious Technology Center, which is a subsidiary of the
controversial Church of Scientology.

     The case began when Defendant Arnaldo Lerma, a former
Scientologist, posted on the Internet a court document known as the
Fishman Affidavit which contained excerpts from Scientology scripture
authored by L. Ron Hubbard, which is called 
"Advanced Technology.". Lerma believed, after consulting with a
lawyer, that because the document was an open court record, it could
be transmitted without violating the Copyright laws. He was promptly
sued for more than $3 million dollars by RTC which obtained a seizure
warrant -- normally used to confiscate books or tapes which are
copyright violations -- and searched his home and took away his
computer, including business records and e-mail.

RTC also claimed that the material in the Fishman Document was a trade
secret. When the Washington Post wrote a story about the seizure which
included a discussion of the Fishman Affidavit, RTC sued the Post as
well.

     The Court dismissed the case against the Post in November 1995
and, in December  1995, ruled that the Lerma had not committed any
trade secret violations. In January 1996, the Court ruled that Lerma
had committed a small number of non-willful copyright
violations. A lengthy Opinion was issued by Judge Brinkema on October
4, 1996 ordering Lerma to pay $2,500 for five violations of the
Copyright Act. RTC sought to have the opinion sealed on the grounds
that it contained an incorrect discussion of Scientology doctrine.
After obtaining an initial sealing order, the Opinion was released to
the public. Shortly thereafter, RTC moved for an attorneys fee award
of nearly $500,000. 

     In reaching her decision, Judge Brinkema weighed the motives of
the parties, the novel questions raised by the case and the public
interest. She also issued an injunction which prohibited Lerma from
copying or disseminating Advanced Technology, but made it clear that
his right to criticize Scientology would not be limited, nor would his
right to make "fair use" of small portions of Advanced Technology, if
done in the context of criticism or comment.

     Lerma's attorney, David Masselli of Masselli & Lane, P.C. stated:
" We are pleased that the court recognized that this relatively minor
copyright violation did not merit the heavy-handed litigation
generated by the Church of Scientology or the payment of
exorbitant attorneys' fees. Mr. Lerma is prepared to pay his $2,500
penalty. He realizes that he made a mistake when he uploaded the
Fishman Affidavit. However, he will not curtail his advocacy with
respect to bringing public scrutiny to bear on the practices of the
Church of Scientology. He will just be certain, in the future, not to
violate the copyright laws."

     Lerma, contacted at his home in Arlington, Virginia, was pleased
with the result. "Scientology sought to crush me and prevent me from
raising my voice by waging war through litigation. This ruling
completes a major victory for supporters of free
speech. The Court has declared that facts about the inner workings of
Scientology are not trade secrets, it supported my right to expose the
Church to the Washington Post and, today, it denied the Church's
attempt to crush me financially. I will continue my opposition to the
Church." Asked about the injunction, Lerma stated, "I never knowingly
put copyrighted church material on the Internet. I think the Court
recognized that I only uploaded the Fishman Affidavit because I
thought it was a public document. I can certainly continue my
opposition to Scientology without violating copyright law and I intend
to do so."
 
     RTC claimed to have spent more than $1,740,000 in prosecuting the
case.

 For more information Contact:
 
 David Masselli  703-741-0975
 [email-masked]

 Arnie Lerma  703-241-1498
 [email-masked]

arnie lerma
ex-sea org slave, 'clear 3502'
http://www2.dgsys.com/~alerma
I'd prefer to die speaking my mind than live fearing to speak
Secrets are the mortar, binding bricks of lies together,
into prisons for the mind..

From elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!nntp.portal.ca!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!dciteleport.com!usenet.logical.net!node2.frontiernet.net!news.his.com!news.walltech.com!hsnx.wco.com!news.wco.com!news Wed Jan 15 23:20:15 1997
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:69783 comp.org.eff.talk:613 misc.legal:21807
Path: elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!nntp.portal.ca!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!dciteleport.com!usenet.logical.net!node2.frontiernet.net!news.his.com!news.walltech.com!hsnx.wco.com!news.wco.com!news
From: [email-masked] (Grady Ward)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Affidavits of Scientology Harassment Needed Immediately (District Court hearing January 24, 1997)
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 18:27:36 GMT
Organization: +1 707 826 7712
Lines: 70
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts03.tidepool.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99g/32.339

Needed immediately --

documentary evidence demonstrating harassment by Religious Technology
Center or any other arm of scientology or its attorneys, private
investigators or other agents.

Newspaper articles.
Government documents.
Court case citations.

and most importantly -- your sworn affidavit based upon *personal
knowledge*.

I am eager to see material covering lawful and unlawful harassment by
Eugene Martin Ingram or other scientology P.I.s, instances where deceit and
fraud have been elements of scientology "actions," articles and statements
connecting Ingram and other to Religious Technology Center or its attorneys
such as Moxon, Bowles, Kobrin, Cooley, Drescher, Lieberman, and others.

Here is the simple thing you need to add to your statement to make it
admissible in federal court. If you live outside the United States, your
testimony is *just* as good -- just use the form prescribed in the second
paragraph below.

28 U.S.C. § 1746. Unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury

Wherever, under any law of the United States or under any rule, regulation,
order, or requirement made pursuant to law, any matter is required or
permitted to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the sworn
declaration, verification, certificate, statement, oath, or affidavit, in
writing of the person making the same (other than a deposition, or an oath
of office, or an oath required to be taken before a specified official
other than a notary public), such matter may, with like force and effect,
be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the unsworn declaration,
certificate, verification, or statement, in writing of such person which is
subscribed by him, as true under penalty of perjury, and dated, in
substantially the following form: 

•(1) If executed without the United States: ''I declare (or certify,
verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United
States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on
(date). (Signature)''. •(2) If executed within the United States, its
territories, possessions, or commonwealths: ''I declare (or certify,
verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct. Executed on (date). (Signature)''. 

______________________

Send all material in the next ten days to:

Grady Ward
3449 Martha Ct.
Arcata, CA  95521-4884 

+1 707 826 7712

or e-mail images of the documents to:  [email-masked]
or arrange to fax via the same e-mail

note: photocopied, faxed or e-mailed images of documents are just as
acceptable as the original for this purpose.

Thank you. This may be the year in which the criminal cult of scientology
get both an injunction issued against their criminal acts and my R.I.C.O.
(racketeering) allegations are pursued in Federal district court.

From elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!news1.istar.ca!winternet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.logical.net!node2.frontiernet.net!news.his.com!news.walltech.com!hsnx.wco.com!news.wco.com!news Wed Jan 15 23:21:55 1997
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:69769 comp.org.eff.talk:606 misc.legal:21790
Path: elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!news1.istar.ca!winternet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.logical.net!node2.frontiernet.net!news.his.com!news.walltech.com!hsnx.wco.com!news.wco.com!news
From: [email-masked] (Grady Ward)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: German rebuffs US stars' Scientology charges
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 15:58:32 GMT
Organization: +1 707 826 7712
Lines: 33
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts07.tidepool.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99g/32.339

On Fri, 10 Jan 1997 22:50:08 -0800, [email-masked] (Huge Cajones
Remailer) wrote:

>BYLINE: By Erik Kirschbaum
>
>DATELINE: BONN
>   German political leaders Friday angrily rejected 
>accusations by celebrities including Dustin Hoffman, Goldie 
>Hawn and Larry King that Germany was oppressing Scientologists 
>in the same way Hitler persecuted Jews.
>

And by January 24, 1997 the criminal cult of scientology has been ORDERED
(Order, C 96-20207 entered January 6, 1997) by the Honorable Ronald M.
Whyte of the Northern District of California to SHOW CAUSE why they should
not be RESTRAINED from the RMGROUP of alt.religion,scientology, the forged
cancel messages to a Usenet forum, stealing photographs of my children from
my elderly mother, lying about me to my publisher in order to jepoardize a
source of income, fraudulently obtaining my phone records and my wife's
bank records and causing the theft and substitution of public records in
Sweden in order to obstruct justice.

The implication of this order is serious. It essentially requires the cult
to form an Answer to my Complaint without being able to interpose
procedural motions to dismiss beforehand.

The celebraties who signed this shameful letter ought to know that a
Federal Judge has found probable cause to issue such an Order.

If it were not for the criminal acts of scientology, not many of us would
give a shit about them.

From elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!hsnx.wco.com!news.wco.com!news Wed Jan 15 23:23:29 1997
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:69704 comp.org.eff.talk:592 misc.legal:21697
Path: elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!hsnx.wco.com!news.wco.com!news
From: [email-masked] (Grady Ward)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: District Judge Whyte Permits Grady Ward to Download and Store Criminal Cult (alleged) Secrets
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 22:04:03 GMT
Organization: +1 707 826 7712
Lines: 32
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts15.tidepool.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99g/32.339

In a January 6. 1997 ruling, the Honorable Richard M. Whyte of the Northern
District of California substantially decreased the scope of a preliminary
injunction by permitting Grady Ward to:

"...the court does modify the injunction to allow Ward, for the purpose of
gathering evidence for his defense, to download and store any NOTs and
other Advanced Technology works posted on the Internet by others without
Ward's involvement or suggestion..." (January 6, 1997 RMW Decision, at 1)

Good news! Since I can now download and store the cult crap from the
Internet and Web sites totally legally, as long as I don't have anything to
do with it being put up. But of course I never have.

Wow!  This is a REALLY BIG WIN for the criminal cult!

I haven't decided yet whether to appeal this modification of the injunction
since it didn't *totally* dissolve my injunction, but except for gaining
experience writing an appellate brief to the Ninth Circuit, the injunction
is virtually moot anyway.

April 11, 1997 is discovery cut-off (and when I will move for summary
judgment)

June 16, 1997 will be the trial.

More free legal experience from the legal whores Helena K. Kobrin, Roger M.
Milgrim, Eric M. Lieberman and more laughter at "Rear" Admiral David
Miscavige, oft-sodomized leader of the criminal cult of scientology.

From elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.mathworks.com!worldnet.att.net!news.dra.com!supernews.com!news Wed Jan 15 23:26:04 1997
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:69601 comp.org.eff.talk:564 misc.legal:21642
Path: elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!n4tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.mathworks.com!worldnet.att.net!news.dra.com!supernews.com!news
From: [email-masked] (Grady Ward)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Grady's Opposition to Hogan's Motion to Strike Swedish NOTs exhibit
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 23:10:51 GMT
Organization: +1 707 826 7712
Lines: 19
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.54.58.128
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99g/32.339

It must be noted that Johan Wevers only explicitly admitted to be the
"second Vorlon"  It is unknown whether he was the first as well.

In one statement he said that he got the NOTs from the net as did virtually
everyone else on May 6, 1996.  This may or may not be construed as being a
denial of being the "first" Vorlon.

He also said  that McShane did not ask him about the distinction

However, it is certainly material that a person admitted to being *any*
Vorlon (while I have totally denied it). Withholding that knowledge from
the judge is certainly unethical, if not a misdemeanor under California
law.

Note I ask for only $300. While I doubt that either the plaintiff's motion
or mine will be granted, I want to start a new trend of asking for
sanctions when the opposition acts  unethically.

From elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!news.uunet.ca!uunet!in1.uu.net!205.252.116.190!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.mathworks.com!news-xfer.netaxs.com!news.thecia.net!usenet65.supernews.com!news Wed Jan 15 23:28:38 1997
Xref: elastic alt.religion.scientology:69174 comp.org.eff.talk:503 misc.legal:21463
Path: elastic!lethe!news.on.rogers.wave.ca!news.uunet.ca!uunet!in1.uu.net!205.252.116.190!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.mathworks.com!news-xfer.netaxs.com!news.thecia.net!usenet65.supernews.com!news
From: [email-masked] (Grady Ward)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: "REAR" ADMIRAL DAVID MISCAVIGE LEADS THE SCIENTOLOGY CRIMINAL CULT OF WEAKLINGS
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 1997 16:59:30 GMT
Organization: +1 707 826 7712
Lines: 73
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.54.58.126
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99g/32.339

On December 23, 1996 Thomas R. Hogan, unethical San Jose, California
attorney, promised to ask the Federal District Court of Ronald M. Whyte to
enjoin me from "violating trade secret law" and "soliciting others to
engage in copyright infringement" by making the following posting.

Personally I think Hogan and the criminal cult -- especially "Rear" Admiral
David Miscavige -- lack the gonads to carry out their threats. After all,
Hogan also promised to move for my contempt of court if the NOTs were
published to the Internet, and we all know what happened here! I think
Thomas R. Hogan is a lying cocksucker, and scientology led by "Rear"
Admiral David Miscavige is a cult of COWARDS and WEAKLINGS.
What do *you* think?

SCIENTOLOGY *TOP SECRETS*  WANTED

L RUNDOWNS	

L10 Rundown
"A series of 23 different actions which address the reasons one 
withholds oneself or restrains oneself from action." 

L11 Rundown
"Addresses the main block or area of irrationality upon which a 
being introverts and which diminishes one's power

L12
"Can bring about tremendously increased personal stability, 
certainty and control of beingness."

	However, it has been said that the true goal of the above 
training exercises is to remove your *conscience* which is of 
course the reason why a normal person "restrains oneself from 
action" or "diminishes one's power" of doing unspeakably evil acts. 
The above material reputedly and in great detail makes you feel 
*comfortable and uninhibited* about past and future crimes you 
have or may commit, including a large laundry list of crimes such 
as murder, mutilation, sexual abuse, theft, and kidnapping.  
Unlike other exercises, the L's *focuses* on "evil purposes" and 
may well be the *most* criminally deranged and destructive of all 
the so-called "advanced technology."

	I am also interested in the following criminal cult fraud 
mana: The Class VII-IX Case Supervisor and Auditor courses, 
with any accompanying tapes, Clearing Course, NED for OTs 
Auditor and Case Supervisor courses, New Vitality Rundown 
Auditor and Case Supervisor courses, OTI through OTVIII, New 
OTI and New OTIV, Power and Power Plus, R6EW, and Sunshine 
Rundown.

	While not compromising your identity, please send enough
auxiliary information so a reasonable person could believe that 
these materials were not obtained in violation of copyright or 
trade secret laws.

Send all material to:

Grady Ward
3449 Martha Ct.
Arcata, CA  95521-4884
USA

[email-masked]

All materials outside the constraints of my injunction shredded by 
a Fellowes cross-cut shredder after examination. I do NOT archive 
e-mail or Usenet posts.

PGP'ed submissions welcome. To obtain the latest version of my
Public key, please check the PGP public keyserver at

http://www.pgp.com/keyserver/pks-toplev.cgi