I have been at work for seven years to produce a series of techniques which any well trained auditor can use to clear people. We now have them.

I am truly sorry that this took seven years. Actually, it took more than twenty-five.

Under other “systems of research” it could not have been done. It was financed at first by my writings and expeditions. Some 15,000,000 words of fact and fiction articles ranging from political articles to western were consumed in a large part by this research but it was free to act if not free from sweat.

No bullying dictator wanted it for his mass slaveries as happened to poor misguided Pavlov. No big corporation wanted it for a better Madison Avenue approach to advertising another kind of slavery. No big RESEARCH FOUNDATION like Ford was there to interject their “America First” philosophy. These had not paid for it, therefore they didn’t own it. The work stayed free. Thus it prospered. It did not wither in support of some aberrated ” cause”. It bloomed.

But the violence of protecting this work while continuing it took a toll nevertheless. Special interests believed it must be evil if they did not own it. Between 1950 and 1956, 2,000,000 traceable dollars were spent to halt this work. Newspaper articles, radio ads (as in Seattle from the University of Washington) bribed “patrons”, financed “patients” all cost money. You hear the repercussions of this campaign even today.

Money could not stop this work by then. It was too late. If anything had been wrong with our organizations, my character, our intentions or abilities the whole advance would have crumbled. But we had no Achilles heels. We carried on. All that has survived of this attack by the two APAs, the AMA and several universities is a clutter of rumors concerning your sanity and mine and rumors no longer financed will some day die.

And so the work has emerged free of taint and misguided slants. It is itself. It does what it says it does. It contains no adroit curves to make one open to better believing some “ism”. That makes it singular today in a world gone mad with nationalism. Buddhism, when it came to the millions, was no longer free of slant and prejudice. Taoism itself became a national jingoism far from any work of Lao-Tze. Even Christianity had its “pitch”. And if these great works became curved, with all the personal force of their creators, how is it that our little triumph here can still be found in a clear state?

Well, no diamonds and palaces have been accepted from rajahs, no gratuitous printing of results has been the gift of warlords, no testament had to be written 300 years after the fact.

For this we can thank the gentleman from Guttenberg and the invention of magnetic tape.

Therefore, although we have no such stature as the Great Philosophies, I charge you with this look to source writings, not to interpretations. Look to the original work, not offshoots.

If I have fought for a quarter of a century, most of it alone, to keep this work from serving to uphold the enslavers of Man, to keep it free from some destructive “pitch” or slant, then you certainly can carry that motif a little further.

I’ll not always be here on guard. The stars twinkle in the Milky Way and the wind sighs for songs across the empty fields of a planet a Galaxy away.

You won’t always be here.

But before you go, whisper this to your sons and their sons “The work was free. Keep it so.”



Issue One 1957

Accusing those who have since left the Church of Scientology and now call themselves “Independent Scientologists” or “no longer affiliated with the Church” “squirrels” has been going on for some time now.

Again we are dealing with what could be considered a redefinition of terms or words for Propaganda purposes.

Actually squirreling is simply defined in HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 FEBRUARY 1965  SAFEGUARDING TECHNOLOGY in the first paragraph:

For some years we have had a word “squirrelling”. It means altering Scientology, off-beat practices. It is a bad thing. I have found a way to explain why.

A squirrel is defined in the Dianetic and Scientology Technical Dictionary as:

 1. a squirrel is doing something entirely different. He doesn’t understand any of the principles so he makes up a bunch of them to fulfill his ignorance and voices them off on a pc and gets no place. (SH Spec 77, 6111C08) 2 . those who engage in actions altering Scn, and ofbeat practices. (ISE, p. 40)— v. to change and invent processes. (HCOB 23 May 69)

As anyone can see nowhere in any above definitions just as in the definition of “Scientologist” is membership or lack of one with the Church of Scientology a determining factor.

In fact according the Article  of the Church of Spiritual Technology bylaws:

“Religion of Scientology” and “Church of Scientology” shall not necessarily be co-terminal.

Co-terminal defined as:

1.having a common boundary; bordering; contiguous.

2.meeting at the ends; without an intervening gap:

In our calendar system, the close of one year is conterminous withthe beginning of the next.
Of course there are those who believe that the Church of Spiritual Technology itself is and was a false flag operation because Meade Emory a former commissioner to the IRS was involved in its incorporation.
Whether this is the case or not. The fact is that the Church of Spiritual Technology is a legally incorporated entity in the State of California and the by-laws of this corporation say what they say.
But they also go on to say:


That is to say, the terms “religion of Scientology” and “Church of Scientology” shall be co-terminal only so long as churches of Scientology continue, in the opinion of L. Ron Hubbard during his lifetime, and in the opinion of all of the Directors and Trustees following the death of L. Ron Hubbard, to espouse, propagate and practice the religion of Scientology.

That being said there lies the rub. Since there are many Scientologists who feel the the Church of Scientology no longer continues “espouse, propagate and practice the religion of Scientology.”. Despite what the current “opinion” “of all of the Directors and Trustees” is, based on irrefutable evidence that the Church of Scientology has squirreled or altered the religion of Scientology.

One prima faca example is what is called the “Golden Age of Tech” which seems to be a competing technology to what is called “Standard Tech”.

Yet in HCO POLICY LETTER OF 31 MAY 1968 (Reissued from Flag Order 800) SCIENTOLOGY TECHNOLOGY . Specifically says:

There is one Tech and that is Standard Tech.

Unfortunately there is other Tech around. This other Tech is a Liability. Other Tech is defined as any tech which is not standard Tech.

Let’s start punching this hard.

In a policy which later became part of what is called the “Keeping Scientology Series”.

Much has been said about the “Golden Age of Tech” by others. So I won’t reiterate what has already been said but only state what seems to be obvious and that the Church of Scientology by promoting what they call the “Golden Age of Tech” and its latest revision known as “Golden Age of Tech Phase II” as an alternative to Standard Tech no longer seems to “espouse, propagate and practice the religion of Scientology” but is doing something else.

What could be called by definition squirreling and that accusing many Scientologists currently in the field of doing so. Is a simple case of the pot accusing the kettle of being black.

In my next post I will go into greater detail on how based on my own research the Church of Scientology itself became a Government Approved and Tax Exempt “Squirrel Group”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s