Copyright © Safe -- www.fza.org <Safe@scientology.at>
From: theta88008@my-deja.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 11:05:40 -0800
Subject: Squirreling of '98 "Ethics" book

Hi Fellow Scientologists,

Whenever you find changed information from the "by L. Ron Hubbard" copyrighted works to the dba "L. Ron Hubbard Library" (Church of Spiritual Technology, Inc.) version, then I'd appreciate it if you would report it for all us Scientologists to be aware of until an errata sheet comes out that fixes it.

My latest concern has been the new 98 Ethics book. I have more OMISSIONS to report.

In the Petition Section of the 98 "ethics" book "Introduction to Scientology Ethics, there is a squirreled policy of 6 May 1965 (no date or title reference is given). I found these 4 words omitted...

1) "the office of LRH."

The whole sentence says ... (page 369)

"No person under sentence or awaiting a Committee of Evidence may validly petition."

But that's not what the 1985 Ethics book "by L. Ron Hubbard" says or what the green on white policy says in the Basic Staff Volume. What is says is ..

"No person under sentence or awaiting a Committee of Evidence may validly petition THE OFFICE OF LRH." (emphasis added to the missing words in the 98 ethics book.)

The 98 version indicates that NO PLACE ELSE can you petition. Whereas the POLICY doesn't say you can't petition elsewhere. It only specified "the office of LRH" you can't petition. Because petitions can be sent to any senior regarding anything. Big differences in meaning.

But "meaning" is not even my point right now. This 98 version SQUIRRELED what was said. PERIOD. No ands, ifs or buts.

2) No bibliography referencing source of data.

The last 1985 "by L. Ron Hubbard" version DOCUMENTED the source of the "Introduction to Scientology Ethics" data in the back which they called "bibliography." The back has a page that references all the articles. It says at the top of the page ...

"BIBLIOGRAPHY

The following materials by L. Ron Hubbard were used in the compilation of this work. They are listed in the order of their occurrence:" It goes on to list the Policy references.

Where is this documentation in the 1998 version? It's not there. Neither are the exact policies referenced in the 1993 LRH Library version ... even though there is something CALLED a bibliography but it is only a reference to all the Scientology books available, but not any referencing to where the data in the book SPECIFICALLY came from.

What's gradually happening here? Are we losing our sensitivity to make sure things are properly sourced? Does somebody want that to happen? Do you fully understand the risk of not sourcing the original data?

You see it's too hard to check for accuracy of LRH data if sources are OMITTED. Nice trick, huh? Do you really believe it's all just an accident? (Why are there hardly any spelling mistakes in our materials? THAT gets checked fantastic. But does source?)

When Ron was around, nobody would even dream of putting anything together without referencing the source of the policy. Why is such a lax attitude taken now? Because he's gone? WHO is suppose to be in charge of this to insure it doesn't happen? WHO is responsible for this?

3) OMITTED "Table of Conditions"

This important table is in the 1985 "by L. Ron Hubbard" version of the Intro to Scn Ethics book, but missing from both the 1993, and 1998 version by the "L. Ron Hubbard Library."

Why? The source of this policy is HCO Policy Letter of 14 March 1968. Is the table of conditions canceled? No longer valid? I think it's very important. It paints a better clear picture of the ORDER of the conditions as they progress up. Why would anybody want to haze this up omission?

I just keep on digging up more and more, and I think there will be no end for a long time. Please, check your data against the "by L. Ron Hubbard" versions. That's what I'm doing and keep on getting shocks of my life. Don't think I don't disbelieve this could be squirrel stuff at first? Sure I do. It's too much of a shock. Then I go up to anger. Then I realize what may be happening.

But I'm starting to wake up to the fact that HIDING and OMISSIONS are usual. Though that is something I DO NOT plan to get "use to" or "tolerate." Neither should anybody else!

Yours for getting out the truth,
Safe

--
"Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us."

-- Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas (Justice for 36 years)

"Freedom encompasses the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and provocative". "Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having."

-- Lord Justice Sedley

David Miscavige, Ban Church of Scientology Censorship Software now!

For the truth about who controls CofS, go to:

http://clever.net/webwerks/veritas/