CHAPTER 9 SOME HARMFUL PRACTICES OF SCIENTOLOGY 9.1. Scientology is intolerant of criticism and opposition whether it emanates from within its own ranks or from outside. Its terminology designates an outside trouble source and a source of trouble from within as a SUPPRESSIVE PERSON OR GROUP and as a POTENTIAL TROUBLE SOURCE respectively. 9.2 Suppressive Person or Group is "One who actively seeks to suppress or damage Scientology or a Scientologist by suppressive acts."^1@ Suppressive Acts are "Action or omissions undertaken knowingly to suppress, reduce or impede Scientology or Scientologists."^1@ Potential Trouble Source (PTS) is "Any person who, while active in Scientology or a preclear, remains connected to a suppressive person or group."^1 9.3. Mr. Hubbard gives a lengthy list of examples of Suppressive Acts. "A. ATTACKS ON SCIENTOLOGY AND SCIENTOLOGISTS 1. Proposing, advising or voting for legislation or ordinances, rules or laws directed towards the Suppression of Scientology. 2. Testifying hostilely before state or public inquiries into Scientology to suppress it. 3. Public statements against Scientology or Scientologists but not to Committees of Evidence duly convened. 4. Reporting or threatening to report Scientology or Scientologists to civil authorities in an effort to suppress Scientology or Scientologists from practicing or receiving standard Scientology. 5. Bringing civil suite against any Scientology Organization or Scientologist including the non-payment of bills or failure to refund without first calling the matter to the attention of the Chairman at World Wide and receiving a reply. 6. Writing anti-Scientology letters to the press or giving anti- Scientology or anti-Scientologist evidence to the press. 7. Testifying as a hostile witness against Scientology in public. 8. Being at the hire of anti-Scientology groups or persons. _________ ^1Hubbard L. Ron: Scientology Abridged Dictionary. Papercraft Litho Limited, Hayes, Middlesex, England, (1967). ^@C/f., HCO Policy Letter dated 20th March, 1969. Ethics. Suppressive Acts. Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists. 114 ------------ 9. Infiltrating a Scientology group or organization or staff to stir up discontent or protest at the instigation of hostile forces. 10. Mutiny. 11. Receiving money, favours or encouragement to suppress Scientology or Scientologists. 12. Publicly resigning staff or executive position in protest or with intent to suppress. 13. Theft or espionage for another group or government. 14. Pronouncing Scientologists guilty of the practice of standard Scientology. 15. Engaging in malicious rumour-mongering to destroy the authority or repute of higher officers or the leading names of Scientology or to 'safeguard' a position. 16. Delivering up the person of a Scientologist without defence or protest to the demands of civil or criminal law. 17. Falsifying records that then imperil the liberty or safety of a Scientologist. 18. Knowingly giving false testimony to imperil a Scientologist. 19. Blackmail of Scientologists or Scientology organizations threatened or accomplished - in which case the crime being used for blackmail purposes becomes fully outside the reach of Ethics and is absolved by the fact of blackmail unless repeated. 20. Spreading false tales to invalidate Clears (_Clear_: A person who through the technology of Scientology has achieved the extremely high state of being able to be at cause knowingly and at will over mental matter, energy, space and time as regards the first Dynamic: survival as self). 21. Spreading libellous [sic] and slanderous statements about the alleged behaviour of Clears. 22. First degree murder, arson, disintegration of persons or belongings. B. DISAVOWAL, SPLINTERING, DIVERGENCE 1. Public disavowal of Scientology or Scientologists in good standing with Scientology Organizations. 2. Announcing departure from Scientology (but not by reason of leaving an organization, a location or situation or death). 3. Seeking to resign or leave courses or sessions and refusing to return despite normal efforts. 115 ------------ 4. Resignation of all certificates, classifications and awards (but not posts of positions or locations). 5. Demanding the return of any or all fees paid for standard training or processing actually received or received in part and still available but undelivered only because of departure of the person demanding (the fees must be refunded but this high crime applies). 6. Continued adherence to a person or groups pronounced a Suppressive Person or Group by the Hubbard Communication Office. 7. Failure to handle or disavow or disconnect from a person demonstrably guilty of Suppressive Acts. 8. Dependency on other mental or philosophic procedures than Scientology (except medical or surgical) after certification, classification, or award. 9. Accepting treatment from a splinter group. 10. Continued membership in a divergent group. 11. Organizing a splinter group to use Scientology data or any part of it to distract people from standard Scientology. 12. Organizing splinter groups to diverge from Scientology practices, still calling it Scientology or something else. 13. Calling meetings of staffs or field auditors or the public to deliver Scientology into the hands of unauthorized persons or persons who will suppress it or alter it or who have no reputation for following standard lines and procedures. 14. Seeking to splinter off an area of Scientology and deny it properly constituted authority for personal profit, personal power or to 'save the organization from the higher officers of Scientology'."^1 9.4. Suppressive Acts are regarded as high crimes against Scientology. Mr. Hubbard has repeatedly declared that a Suppressive Person becomes "... fair game."^1, 2^@ Provision is made ________ ^1Hubbard L. Ron: Introduction to Scientology Ethics. First Edition. Colonna Press Ltd., Hemel Hempstead, Herts., England, pp. 48 and 49-50. ^2Hubbard L. Ron: HCO Policy Letter of March 1, 1965. Justice. Suppressive Acts. Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists. Hubbard Communication Office, East Grinstead, Sussex, England, p. 2. ^@C/f HCO Policy Letter of 23 December 1965. Ethics. Suppressive Acts. Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists. The Fair Game Law. 116 ------------ for the penalty of a person who becomes fair game pursuant to the issue of a Suppressive Person Order. Such a person is assigned the condition of "Enemy ... 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."^1 The policy underlying the Fair Game Law and the issue of Suppressive Person Orders is largely one which borders on coercion and action taken on grounds such as those set out in items B.2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the preceding paragraph constitutes, in the view of the Commission, an unwarranted invasion of personal freedom. 9.5. The fierceness with which the fair game law has been applied and the willingness to trick and destroy is also demonstrated by the case of Dr. E.L. Fisher, M.P., which the Commission investigated with care. Dr. Fisher is and was at all relevant times the duly elected Member of Parliament for the constituency of Rosettenville, Johannesburg, Transvaal. In that capacity and his further capacity of a medical practitioner he received representation from members of the public in regard to the practice of Scientology within the borders of the Republic of South Africa. Dr. Fisher, pursuant to these representations raised the issue in Parliament on several occasions requesting the appointment of a Commission to enquire into Scientology. This conduct on the part of Dr. Fisher was no doubt seen as an attack on Scientology and constituted him the perpetrator of a suppressive act. Mr. Hubbard writes "Politician A stands up on his hind legs in a Parliament and brays for a condemnation of Scientology. When we look him over we find crimes - embezzled funds, moral lapses, a thirst for young boys - sordid stuff."^2 As such the provisions of an Executive Directive requiring an investigation of Dr. Fisher became operative. The terms of the Directive are startling and read as follows: "_BRANCH 5 PROJECT_ _PROJECT SQUIRREL_^@ 1. The Guardian's Intelligence Officer for the Western U.S. should make further appointments to execute 'Project Squirrel'. 2. The project consists of the following: (a) Listing all SPs engaged in Squirrel actions or anti- Scientology actions. (b) Get each one investigated (proper evidences and witnesses, not rumour). _______ ^1Hubbard L. Ron: HCO Policy Letter of 18th October, 1967. Issue IV. Penalties for lower conditions. Hubbard Communications Office, East Grinstead, Sussex, England. ^2Understanding. Issue 89. Official Periodical of Scientology in South Africa. Published by the Hubbard Scientology Organization in Johannesburg. Critics of Scientology by L. Ron Hubbard (1967), p. 1. ^@Squirreling is defined in the Scientology Abridged Dictionary as "The action of altering Scientology; off-beat practices." 117 ------------ (c) File a complete file on the person with evidences, affidavits, etc. (d) Take appropriate actions to bring any crimes to police attention. (e) Bring any sit necessary to cause their activities to cease. 2. It will be found uniformly (despite first view there is no evidence of it) that anti-Scientologists have in their background this life crimes for which they could be arrested. 3. When one finds such a crime one must get documents or witnesses and evidences sufficient for prosecution. 4. The evidences should be turned over to the police. 5. When the person is arrested, one then sues the person for anti- Scientology libels and slanders. 6. If we do the above as our pattern, we will successfully bring the following _facts_ into public consciousness: (a) People who attack Scientology are criminals. (b) That if one attacks Scientology he gets investigated for crimes. (c) If one does not attack Scientology, despite not being with it, on is safe."^1 9.6. The investigation requirement is explained by the following confidential instruction issue by Mr. Hubbard for HCO personnel only: "When things go wrong and we don't know why already by intelligence, we resort to _investigation_. When we need somebody haunted we investigate. Investigation is the careful discovery and sorting of facts. Without good investigation we don't have justice, we have random vengeance. When we investigate we do so noisily always. And usually mere investigation damps out the trouble even when we discover no really pertinent facts. ... Remember, intelligence we get with a whisper. Investigation we do with a yell. Always. ... Overt investigation of someone or something attacking us by an outside detective agency should be done more often and hang the expense. It's very _______ ^1Hubbard L. Ron: Executive Directive dated 2 December 1966. _Confidential_. Applies to HCO Exec. Secs. Intelligence Appointees. Guardian. Asst. Guardians. _Branch 5 Project_. _Project Squirrel_. 118 ------------ effective. Often investigation by a private detective has alone closed up an entheta source or a squirrel organization. In fact at this writing I can't remember a time when it hasn't. The reason for this is simple. Of twenty-one persons found attacking Dianetics and Scientology with rumours and entheta, eighteen of them under investigation were found to be members of the Communist Party or criminals, usually both. The smell of police or private detectives caused them to fly, to close down, to confess. Hire them and damn the cost when you need to."^1 9.7. In regard to the investigation of attackers of Scientology Mr. Hubbard wrote - "The mechanism employed is very straightforward. We never use the data to threaten to expose. We simply collect it and expose."^2 9.8. In the case of Dr. Fisher, Mr. and Mrs. Ollemans - then respectively Legal Officer and Public Relations Officer of the Organization - called on him at his rooms early in January 1968, and interviewed him at some length in regard to his parliamentary activities against Scientology. Mrs. Ollemans prepared a report dated 8th January, 1968, on Dr. Fisher for intelligence purposes pursuant to this interview. Thereafter during 198 Issue No. 1 of the South African Broadsheet - the copyright in which Mr. Hubbard expressly reserved - was published. It contained a short article teeming with baseless defamatory innuendos of and concerning Dr. Fisher. This article was based in part on information contained in the report of 8th January, 1968. The Commission was left in the dark as to the identity of the author of the article and accepts the denial given on oath by Mrs. Ollemans that she is its author. Be that as it may the Organization must bear the responsibility for the publication of written matter highly defamatory of a leading figure in South African public life. 9.9. The article - which subsequently formed the subject of a defamation action at the instance of Dr. Fisher which terminated on the payment to him of substantial damages, costs of litigation and the making of a public apology by the Hubbard Scientology Organisation in South Africa (Pty.) Ltd. - reads as follows: "Dr. E.L. Fisher, Chairman of the Medical Council of the United Party, who also has an interest in South Rand Hospital, is asking for an enquiry into Scientology - 'owing to public demand'. Dr. Fisher, who earlier said _________ ^1Hubbard L. Ron: HCO Manual of Justice. Grant Production Company Limited, Great Britain. (Copyright 1959), pp. 3 and 5. ^2Hubbard L. Ron: HCO Policy Letter of 17 February 1966. Public Investigation Section. Hubbard Communications Office, East Grinstead, Sussex, England, p. 1. 119 ------------ we were dangerous to mental health, has now turned his attack to 'broken marriages' When pressed to say what was 'public demand', he admitted he had only twelve letters he could put before parliament. Asked if he would stand up and produce letters telling of marriages salvaged through Scientology, he said bluntly he would not. In 1958 the Government took over the South Rand Hospital. The whole Board was retained with the exception of Dr. Fisher who previously administered its finances. What are Dr. Fisher's political affiliations other than the United Party? ... What are his regular contacts overseas? ... Does Dr. Fisher know that a certain gentleman from Europe, has frequently been seen entering his rooms? Does Dr. Fisher know that someone who was seen entering his rooms was caught red-handed the other day in possession of stolen documents? Does Dr. Fisher know that one of his associates has been in gaol under the Suppression of the Communism Act? An interesting quote from 'The Star' of March 18th, 1964 reads as follows: 'If I am a coward, you are a Communist'. Mr. Cas Greyling (Nat. - Ventersdorp) to Dr. E.L. Fisher (U.P. - Rosettenville)."^1 9.10. The reckless nature of the attack on Dr. Fisher is revealed by the terms of the unconditional apology and retraction made to him only after he instituted action for damages: ________ ^1Periodical. South African Broadsheet. Issue No. 1, 1968. (Copyright (c) 1968 by Ron Hubbard. All rights reserved), p. 4. 120 ------------ [PAGE MISSING] 121 ------------ [PAGE MISSING] 122 ------------ [PAGE MISSING] 123 ------------ [PAGE MISSING] 124 ------------ [PAGE MISSING] 125 ------------ [PAGE MISSING] 126 ------------ [PAGE MISSING] 127 ------------ [PAGE MISSING] 128 ------------ 9.18. The extent to which Mr. Hubbard is prepared to go in issuing suppressive person declarations is illustrated by the following: (a) Pursuant to the publication during 1968 of the Report of the Board of Inquiry into Scientology in the State of Victoria and its dependencies in the Commonwealth of Australia consisting of Mr. Kevin Victor Anderson, Q.C., it was declared that: "Principals of the Victorian government such as the 'Prime Minister', Anderson the 'Q.C.' and hostile members of the 'Victoria Parliament' are continued as suppressive persons and they and their families and connections may not be processed or trained and are fair game."^1 (b) The above mentioned declaration was supplemented by the following: "As a result of two cables I sent to the 'Prime Minister' of Victoria, Australia, the government is postponing all action on the bill for six months. They say they wish to 'rephrase it'. They mean they wish to forget it. My two cables follow: 'PREMIER BOLTE PARLIAMENT HOUSE MELBOURNE 19 October 1965 VICTORIA AUSTRALIA REGARDING THE SCIENTOLOGY MATTER OUR SOLICITORS HAVE NOT TOLD YOU OR CABINET THAT ACTIONS ARE AT THIS MOMENT IN PROGRESS AGAINST ANDERSON FOR FAULTY JURISPRUDENCE COLLUSION CONDONING PERJURY AND OTHER MATERS. YOU ARE NOT COVERED BY ANY PRIVILEGE OR ANY KIND OUTSIDE VICTORIA. IF THE STATE OF VICTORIA DOES NOT REPRIMAND ANDERSON IT BECOMES PARTY TO SCANDALOUS PROCEEDINGS AND WILL BE SUED #10,000,000 STERLING WHICH IT IS CERTAIN WE WILL COLLECT. ONLY A FAIR TRIAL IS COVERED IN THE DEFAMATORY ACT. IF YOU REPRIMAND AND DISOWN ANDERSON YOU WILL SAVE VICTORIA #10,000,000. HE WILL BE DISCREDITED FULLY IN PROCEEDINGS NOW BEGINNING AND LEGISLATION BASED ON THE QUICKSAND OF A SCANDALOUS PROCEEDING IS SUBJECT TO DAMAGES THE MOMENT IT CAUSES DAMAGE OUTSIDE ITS AREA WHICH IT HAS ALREADY DONE. SINCERELY L. RON HUBBARD' ______ _______ ^1Ziff Judy, Editor: The Auditor World Wide No. 31. The Journal of Scientology, Southern Publishing Co. Ltd., Brighton, England, p. 1. 129 ------------ 'PREMIER BOLTE PARLIAMENT HOUSE MELBOURNE 20 October 1965. VICTORIA AUSTRALIA WE HAVE DISMISSED YOUR FRIENDS AND STAUNCH PROTECTORS NORRIS AND NORRIS AND HAVE ACQUIRED PROPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION IN AUSTRALIA AND OVERSEAS. PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE DOES NOT COVER CRIMINAL ACTS IN PROCEEDINGS. THIS IS NOW OUTSIDE YOUR AREA OF CONTROL. THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN MINIMIZE FOLLOWING PROFUMO IN POLITICAL DECLINE IS BY PUBLICLY REPUDIATING ANDERSON AND GALBALLY FOR MISCONDUCT. IF YOU AND YOUR CABINET PROCEED WITH THE FOLLY OF PASSING A BILL BASED ON COLLUSION INTIMIDATION AND PERJURY WE WILL BE ABLE TO COLLECT EVEN GREATER DAMAGES FROM THE STATE OF VICTORIA AROUND THE WORLD. THIS CABLE IS SENT SO THAT THERE WILL BE NO DOUBT IN ANY COURTS MIND THAT YOU PERSONALLY WERE AWARE OF THE CRIMINAL IRREGULARITIES AND YET PROCEEDED TO ACT ON SUCH FINDINGS. L. RON HUBBARD' ------- The following mailing is being sent each member of their 'parliament'. 'IN THE SCIENTOLOGY MATTER YOU HAVE NOT BEEN INFORMED BY YOUR GOVERNMENT THAT THE STATE OF VICTORIA IS BEING SUED OVERSEAS #10,000,000 STERLING FOR LIBEL AND SLANDER RELEASED BY IT IN OTHER COUNTRIES. THEY WELL KNOW THAT PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE DOES NOT COVER THE CRIMINAL ACTIONS CONDONED BY THE GOVERNMENT IN THE CONDUCT OF THE INQUIRY SUCH AS COLLUSION INTIMIDATION AND PERJURY A DIRECT PARALLEL TO THE PROFUMO CASE. WHILE LEAVING YOU IN THE DARK AS TO YOUR PERSONAL POLITICAL LIABILITY WHEN ALL THIS COMES OUT THEY YET ARE ASKING YOU FOR YOUR PERSONAL COOPERATION IN GETTING A BILL PASSED. EVEN IF YOUR GOVERNMENT WILL NOT TELL YOU THIS YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW THAT THE PASSAGE OF A BILL WILL INCREASE DAMAGES AND MAKE YOU PARTY TO THESE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS. THE WHOLE MATER IS NOW OUT OF THEIR HANDS AND OUT OF CONTROL AND ALL PAPERS AND PROOFS SUPPORTING THE SCIENTOLOGISTS ARE NO LONGER IN YOUR JURISDICTION BUT ARE BEING PRESENTED AGAINST YOUR GOVERNMENT IN THE COURTS OF SEVERAL COUNTRIES INCLUDING ENGLAND WITH EVERY INDICATION OF SUCCESSFUL LITIGATION. YOU TOO HAVE BEEN BETRAYED IN THIS MATTER. THE HUBBARD ASSOCIATION OF SCIENTOLOGISTS INTERNATIONAL' ------ 130 ------------ The reply follows: 'VICTORIA GOVERNMENT IN SESSION WEDNESDAY WANTED 6 MONTHS ADJOURNMENT TO REPHRASE SCIENTOLOGY BILL. CATHERINE DENNY'."^1 (c) In a possible attempt to impress this Commission of the determination of the Hubbard Association of Scientologists International to put into execution the threat contained in the Executive Letter referred to in the preceding sub-paragraph, Mr. Gaiman, in the course of his evidence, handed in as an exhibit the strange and otherwise totally irrelevant Writ for the payment of damages allegedly issued against Mr. Anderson and Counsel who assisted the Board of Inquiry on the ground _inter alia_ of committing "a misfeasance in a public office."^2 9.19. The principle underlying the policy applicable to a Potential Trouble Source is that a person or preclear who is connected with a Suppressive Person will be unable to derive permanent gains from Scientology unless he handles the source of suppression or disconnects from it. Handling is not defined. Persumably [sic] it ranges from persuasion to co-ercion. A witness, Mr. A Tannenbaum, who claims tremendous gains from Scientology stressed that these are the only alternatives.* Mr. Hubbard requires of Scientologists that in dealing with a Potential Trouble Source they - "act with determination one way or the other - reform the suppressive person or disconnect ..."^3 9.20. He expressly states: "Therefore this Policy Letter _extends_ to suppressive _non-Scientology_ _wives and husbands_ and _parents_, or _other_ family members or hostile groups or even close friends."^3 9.21. He outlines the procedure to be followed in achieving disconnection as follows: "Disconnection from a family member or cessation of adherence to a Suppressive Person or Group is done by the potential trouble source publicly publishing the fact, as in the legal notices of 'The Auditor' and public announcements and taking any required civil action such as _disavowal_, ________ ^1Hubbard L. Ron: HCO Executive Letter dated 22 October 1965. Melbourne Bill News. Hubbard Communications Office, East Grinstead, Sussex, England. ^2Hubbard Association of Scientologists International v. Kevin Victor Anderson and Gordon Just. Statement of Claim. (April, 28, 1970), p. 2. ^3Hubbard L. Ron: HCO Policy Letter of March, 1, 1965. Justice. Suppressive Acts. Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists: _Op_._cit_., p. 6. *Record of Evidence, Vol. 7, p. 111 - Mr. A. Tannenbaum. 131 ------------ _separation or divorce_ and thereafter _cutting_ all further communication and disassociating from the person or group. Unwarranted or threatened disconnection has the recourse of the person or group being disconnected from requesting a Committee of Evidence from the nearest Convening Authority (or HCO) and producing to the Committee any evidence of actual material assistance to Scientology without reservation or bad intent. The Committee must be convened if requested. Before publicly disconnecting, the Scientologist would be well advised to fully inform the person he or she accuses of Suppressive Acts of the substance of this policy letter and seek a reform of the person, disconnecting only when honest efforts to reform the person have not been co-operated with or have failed. And only then disconnecting publicly. Such efforts should not be unduly long as any processing of the Potential Trouble Source is denied or illegal while the connection exists and a person not actively seeking to settle the matter may be subjected to a Committee of Evidence if processed meanwhile. The real motives of suppressive persons have been traced to quite sordid hidden desires - in one case _the wife wanted her husband's death_ so she could get his money, and fought Scientology because it was making the husband well. Without handling the wife or the connection with the woman the Scientologist, as family, drifted on with the situation and the wife was able to cause a near destruction of Scientology in that area by false testimony to the police and government and press. Therefore this is a serious thing - to tolerate or remain connected to a source of active suppression of a Scientologist or Scientology without legally disconnecting the relationship or acting to expose the true motives behind the hostility and reform the person. No money particularly may be accepted as fee or loan from a person who is 'family' to a suppressive person and therefore a potential trouble source. There is no source of trouble in Scientology's history greater than this one for frequency and lack of attention."^1 9.22. Examples of public announcement of disconnection by publication are: "LEGAL NOTICES I, JONATHON BATSON, do swear that I do disavow and thoroughly disassociate myself from any overtly or covertly planned contact or association with any Suppressive persons or organizations or anyone demonstrably guilty of Suppressive acts (as described in HCO Policy Letters March, 1965). Sgd. Jonathan Watson. _______ ^1Hubbard L. Ron: HCO Policy Letter of March 1, 1965. Justice. Suppressive Acts. Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists. _Op_._cit_., pp. 7-8. 132 ------------ I, HEATH DOUGLAS GREER, do swear that I do disavow and thoroughly disassociate myself from any overtly and covertly planned contact or association with J. ROSCOE GREER and ISABELL HODGE GREER, or anyone demonstrably guilty of Suppressive acts (as described in HCO Policy Letters March, 1965). I understand that any breach of the above pledge will result in my being declared immediately a Suppressive Person. Sgd. H.D. Greer. I, A.T. CHADWIN, of 2900 S. Glebe Road, Arlington, Virginia, do solemnly swear that I do disavow and thoroughly disassociate myself from any overtly or covertly planned contact or association with A.B. Lawson Jr., of 4000 Tunlaw Road, Washington D.C., and will continue to do so until such time as the above person from whom I am separating myself does become a Scientologist and abides by the codes of Scientology. Sgd. A.T. Chadwin."^1 9.23. In regard to persons taking civil action for divorce, the Commission draws attention to the following: (a) Dr. Michaelides, a medical practitioner, attended a Scientology meeting at Port Elizabeth during 1966. By way of a question he inquired whether in the case of a Suppressive Person Scientology advocated the breaking up of a marriage despite there being children. The answer given was: "... yes, ..., unless the other partner became a Scientologist."^2 (b) Mr. H. Bayer, who made a careful investigation of Scientology for a television program in Rhodesia stressed that if need be civil action for divorce was advocated as a genuine and serious portion of the disconnection technique. He said: "... no secret is made by the Scientology Organization that where a partner in marriage, be it husband and/or wife, is a Scientologist, and the other partner in marriage is not a Scientologist, but is in fact opposed to a Scientologist, that the two must disconnect. The word 'disconnect' obviously stands for _______ ^1Hubbard L. Ron: Editor: The Auditor World Wide No. 9. The Saint Hill Journal of Scientology. Published by Hasi World Wide, East Grinstead, Sussex, England, p. 8. ^2Record of evidence, Vol. 11, p. 1 - Dr. B.A. Michaelides. 133 ------------ divorce. In my own case my wife, who was at one stage ostensibly interested in Scientology when she was in fact investigating and trying to find out what it was all about - and when it was known to the Scientology Institute that I was strongly opposed to it, and my opinion could not be altered - was advised that the only thing which held her back from becoming a person of outstanding ability and an I.Q., was myself, and that once I was no longer her husband there would be no limit to her advancement. I am aware of at least two divorces which are the direct result of one partner being a Scientologist and the other partner not. I am aware of a number of instances where one partner in marriage has tried and has started to get his children or child into Scientology against the opposition of the father or the mother who was opposed, and where the one partner interested in Scientology has in fact threatened divorce, to take the children away from the other partner. One particular example is right here in Johannesburg, and again the name concerned and the people concerned can be given in camera to a committee'. (Question): 'Now, did you and your wife - I don't want to pry into your private affairs, Mr. Bayer, unnecessarily, but did you and your wife eventually come to agreement on Scientology? Did she ultimately come to the conclusion that you were right, and that she should discontinue it? --- You will find somewhere later in the statement, I think - I am speaking from memory now - that I was subjected to a certain midnight call, and my wife very fortunately at that particular moment stood next to me and heard every word that was said over the telephone. The voice on the other side was literally screaming. She only then became convinced completely that any and every step would be taken by the person concerned, and please let me make this clear, Sir. I am not talking about Scientology as such. I am talking about the person who was in charge of the Scientology Institute in Bulawayo at that particular time. She became convinced then that some of the things which I had been worried about, the lack of secrecy, etcetera, etcetera, the possibility of blackmail arising out of evidence and so on, [?] highly dangerous, and from that moment on she became utterly and completely convinced that it would be best to leave it entirely alone. You and the lady are still married? --- Oh yes. 134 ------------ And Scientology, in other words has not caused a disconnection between you two? --- None whatsoever, Sir. At one stage - if I may ask this - was there any danger of it happening? --- Yes, Sir."^1a Mr. Bayer impressed the Commission as an unbiassed witness who in his own words "... started to investigate Scientology, with no axe to grind. I was neither for nor against it."^1b His evidence was not seriously contested or contra- dicted and is accepted by the Commission as being objective and truthful. 9.21. Several other instance of the practical application of the policy of disconnection were drawn to the attention of the Commission: (a)(i) The mother of a devoted daughter who married a Scientologist received a disconnecting letter in the following terms from her daughter written on 29th May, 1968, whilst she received Scientology training in Spain: "Liewe Mammie, Die tyd het aangebreek dat ek ons verhouding moet hanteor. Die gebeure daardie aand op die plaas het 'n kwaai letsel op my gelaat, 'n Goestelike wese is net liefde en wat ek moes verduur het was baie swaar. Ek skryf hierdie kort briefi net om te verduidelik dat 'ethics' in Scientologie baie sterk is en word ek verplig om hierdie stap te neem. Ek sal moet skei van almal wat teen Scientologie is, totdat die verhouding weer reg is. Moet dus nie weer vir my skryf tot verdere kennisgewing nie. Ek ken nie oom Hennie so adres nie, so sal Mammie dit asb. na sy adres stuur. Moenie daaroor bekommerd wees nie want dit is maklik om te herstel sodra die gesindheid reg is teenoor Scientologie. Die keuse sal wees tussen my as 'n Scientologoog en oom Hennie. Ek bet julle lief maar die vryheid laat niks toe, wat oom Hennie probeer nie. Groete, Ina. N/S. Gesels met Mamma, sy sal verduidelik." ________ ^1Record of Evidence: a) Vol. 23, pp. 74-76 - Mr. H. Bayer. b) Vol. 23, p. 71 - Mr. H. Bayer. 135 ------------ (Dear Mummy, The time has arrived for me to handle our relationship. The happenings that evening at the farm hurt me very much, a Spiritual being is only love, and what I had to endure was very hard. I write this short letter just to explain that ethics in Scientology is very strong and I am compelled to take this step. I'll have to disconnect from all who are against Scientology, until the relationship has been restored. Therefore do not write to me again until further notice. I do not know uncle Hennie's address and will Mummy therefore send it to his address. Do not be worried about that because it is easy to restore once the attitude towards Scientology is correct. The choice will be between me as a Scientologist and uncle Hennie. I love you all but the freedom does not permit of what uncle Hennie tries. Greetings, Ina. P.S. Talk to Mamma, she will explain). (Translation by the Commission). (ii) The reference to "oom Hennie" is a reference to the brother of the daughter's mother who initiated a family discussion on the advisability of embracing Scientology. During the processing both the mother and her said brother were apparently declared Suppressive Persons by reason of the views expressed by them during the discussion. The terms of the disconnecting letter to the mother have already been quoted. A disconnecting letter written to the brother and posted on 29th May, 1968, reads: "Oom Hennie, Scientology open vir elke persoon die pad na volle vryheid as geestelike wese. Op die oomblik is daar 'n stop in my pad en ek skei van jou tot verdere kennisgewing. 'Ethics' in Scientology is baie vernaam en hou die pad veilig en skoon. Ek sal gee kontak meer met jou he. Ina Kleyn. NS. Die brief staan in verband met die vooryal op die plaas vroeg gedurende hierdie jaar toe jy op 'n skynbaar vriendelike maar vernederende manier probeer uitvind wat 'Scientology' is. Vind nou self uit wat dit is." 136 ------------ (Dear Uncle Hennie, Scientology opens the road to total freedom for every person as a spiritual being. At present time there is a block in my road and I disconnect from you until further notice. Ethics in Scientology is very important and keeps the road safe and clean. I'll no longer have any contact with you. Ina Kleyn. P.S. this letter refers to the incident at the farm early during this year when you, apparently in a friendly but degrading way tried to find out what Scientology is. Now find out for yourself what it is). (Translation by the Commission). (iii) As at the date when the mother gave evidence before the Commission viz. 10th June, 1969, the relationship between her and her daughter, who meanwhile returned to the Republic of South Africa remained strained. (b) Mrs. S.D. Starkey, one time keenly interested in Scientology herself, introduced two of her sons, Norman and Owen, to the movement. They became devoted adherents but, in the view of their mother, became irresponsible towards the duty to earn a living as their interest in Scientology grew. Owen received generous financial loan assistance from his mother in regard to the purchase of a dwelling house for his young family. Eventually he disposed of the house without repaying a substantial part of the loan to his mother and proceeded to St. Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex, England, to further his Scientology training. Before doing so he wrote to his mother in heartless fashion on 6th June, 1966, stating _inter alia_: "You taught me from as far back as I can remember to be weak ... I hereby disconnect from you totally until I am clear, at which time I will be in a position to handle this situation." As recently as 30th October, 1971, Owen distributed a circular letter which indicated that he was at that time the "Captain" of the Advanced Organisation, St. Hill, Denmark (AOSHDK). The Commission is quite satisfied that in the case of the Starkey family a rift developed between the sons Owen and Norman on the one hand and their parents on the other hand as a result of the sons' devoted adherence to Scientology. The following eulogy by the younger son Norman who, according to his mother, has joined Mr. Hubbard's Sea Organization for life underlines the tragic unconcern at the dissipation of family ties engendered by the feeling of euphoria Scientology gave him: 137 ------------ "Scientology has given me a completely new outlook on life. Two years ago I had no interest in my work, my future, or my life. I now enjoy enthusiasm and energy. I am able to communicate to anyone about anything, which I had never been able to do before. In fact Scientology has given me the ability to make myself more able and use these grained abilities to the fullest extent. Since starting training I have never been ill, confused or overwhelmed by life, my friends or my job."^1 (c) Mrs. M.R. McAll married her husband in 1958. Mr. McAll was a Scientologist. Mrs. McAll was not. During about 1964 she was called on to undergo an Ethics check. She refused, was promptly declared a Suppressive Person with the result that all Scientologists including her husband, who held a position with the Public Works Department of the Government of the Republic of South Africa, Cape Town, were precluded from communicating with her. As a result her husband severed all connection with her. Her husband eventually resigned his position and went to St. Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex, England, for Scientology training. In 1965 Mrs. McAll obtained a decree of divorce against her husband - an event which according to her testimony was precipitated by the order declaring her a Suppressive Person. Mr. F.M. McAll, denies* that Scientology caused the break-up of his marriage. It is significant, however, that he does not discuss the issue of a Suppressive Person declaration against his wife. In the circumstances the Commission concludes that to those who saw fit to issue the declaration the preservation of the marriage tie was less important than Mr. McAll's progress and advancement in Scientology. (d) Mrs. A.K. Morris notwithstanding every effort to accept the tenets of Scientology at the instance of her daughter-in-law found it impossible to do so. As a result her daughter-in-law and son disconnected from her. Eventually her daughter-in-law's dogged adherence to Scientology was at least a contributory cause of the ensuing divorce. (e) The following is a further case: "KEN BUSWELL want to progress along the road to total Freedom. In order to make this possible he must separate from his wife PEGGY BUSWELL completely during the period of his processing so that technology may be applied without constant enturbulation. When the ________ ^1The Editorial Staff of The Auditor, The World Wide Journal of Scientology: Successes of Scientology (Copyright 1968), Laburnum Printing Co. Ltd., Surbiton, Surrey, England, Twentieth page. *Affidavit sworn to by Rank Melville McAll, Edinburgh, Scotland, before a Commissioner of Oaths at East Grinstead on the 5th day of June, 1969. 138 ------------ Ethics Officer has received written confirmation from Ken that this step has been taken processing may commence."^1 9.25. The above instances extracted from the evidence heard by and the exhibits received by the Commission provide proof that for a period of time at least the fair game law permitting trickery, lying and the destruction of opponents and the policy of disconnection were relent- lessly applied in the Republic of South Africa to the extent even of subjecting an elected member of Parliament to a most humiliating investigation. The policy of disconnection for a period at least was applied in a manner designed to promote family discord and even divorce. 9.26. Security checking is a Scientology practice which is potentially dangerous. It consists of questioning - often prolonged - of a preclear by an auditor who makes use of any E-Meter. In regard to meaningful questions the instruction is to look for falls. "A fall means 'Oh, oh! He's got me' You don't leave a question that is getting a _fall_ response until you are sure you have been told all and the needle no longer falls when you ask that question."^2 the questions are asked from a prepared list, are designed to delve deeply into the mind of the subject and often traverse matters of intimate personal detail. The full text of each of two separate texts are quoted by way of example: (a) The Only Valid Security Check reads: "_THE ONLY VALID SECURITY CHECK_ (Amends all existing data on Security Checks) HCO Sec Form 3. _________________________________ ____________________________________ Name of Person Date _________________________________ ____________________________________ Name of Security Checker Location Since a Security Check failure can compromise or injure a person's position or economics, and because _we are not moralists_, it is better to be more positive on the subject of a Security Check failure, leaving no part of it up to judgment. The question of what constitutes a Security Check failure has now troubled enough people to make it necessary to lay down the following policies. A Security Check to be used for any organisational reason must be made on an HCO WW form. _________ ^1John Morshead, Atg. Ethics Officer, Hubbard Communications Office, Port Elizabeth. Ethics Order No. 55, dated 3rd May, 1966. Separation Order. ^2Hubbard L. Ron: E-Meter Essentials 1961. Colonna Press Ltd., Hemel Hempstead, Herts., England, p. 21. 139 ------------ There are only three ways a Security Checker may flunk any person. 1. The Security Check may be considered flunked if there is _no_ needle response of any kind to any question with meter sensitivity even at extreme high. Rise as a reaction is ignored throughout a Security Check. A rise is a not useful reaction. 2. The Security Check may be considered flunked if any compromising or important question still persists in getting a consistent reaction (not a rise) even after the Security Checker has done his best to get the person being checked to clear it by answering truthfully. 3. Refusal to be checked. Lie reaction failure may no longer be considered a flunk. Important questions always have enough charge on them to cause a reaction even on bad criminals and the reaction will continue consistently or sporadically if the person is still withholding information. The question of something reacting because of past life crimes is ruled out when a question fails to clear, the Security Checker adds 'In this lifetime?' to or in the question and works on that question, continues to use that added phrase. Reaction by reason of past lives tend to drop out and clear if this is done. The task of the Security checker is to carefully question and _clear if_ _possible_ change of meter needle behaviour caused by the question. Plainly note any level that failed to clear. This fails the person. The lie Reaction questions were originally used in Scientology only to study the needle pattern of the person being checked so that changes in it could then be judged in their true light. Some pcs, for instance, get a slight reaction every time _any_ question is asked. Some get a reaction only when there is heavy charge. Both can be Security Checked by studying the common pattern of the needle demonstrated in asking the Lie Reaction questions. The purpose of the Lie Reaction questions is returned to the original intention. A totally stuck needle can be freed by processing, or by getting off withholds. If a person is flunked by reason of 1. above, they require auditing before another check is taken, the check to be taken at the responsibility of the person being checked. All Security Check sheets of persons Security Checked should be _forwarded_ _to Saint Hill_, complete with all markings and the reason why the question would not at first clear, if important, or the drop marked which would not clear and whether or not the person was passed or failed. 140 ------------ Nothing in this policy Letter changes the responsibility of the Director of Training in preventing Scientology from being taught to persons who would use it in violation of the Code of a Scientologist. In reprinting this check sheet leave all directions as part of every sheet. Directions: Attempt to clear any reaction observed. A Rise is _not_ classed as abreaction. Mark any reaction observed or any meter reaction change elicited by the question. Then write what it cleared on. Mark largely if the reaction could not be cleared since this constitutes a failure to pass. Only fail somebody if there is no needle motion of any kind even with sensitivity at 16 on any question. (Rise is not a reaction). If they are failing because it is hard to clear a question work very thoroughly on it in an effort to clear it. In all cases complete the test. Run check with a high sensitivity setting (more than 1/3 [?] of a dial drop). If an important question fails to clear even after security checker has worked very hard to get it off, the test is flunked. The following statement should be read or quoted to the person being Security Checked: 'We are about to begin a Security Check. We are not moralists. We are able to change people. We are not here to condemn them. While we cannot guarantee you that matters revealed in this check will be held forever secret, we can promise you faithfully that no part of it nor any answer you make here will be given to the police or the state. No Scientologist will ever bear witness against you in Court by reason of answers to this security Check. This Security Check is exclusively for Scientology purposes. The only ways you can fail this Security Check is t refuse to take the test, to fail to answer its questions truthfully or if you are here knowingly to injure Scientology. The only penalty attached to failure of this check is processing or our refusal to employ you or issue you a certificate, and this will only happen if we find that you are trying knowingly to injure Scientology. You can pass this test by (1) agreeing to take it, (2) answering each question truthfully and (3) by not being a member of a subversive group seeking to injure Scientology. The first questions are nul [sic] questions to determine your reaction pattern. We will now begin - 141 ------------ Establish needle pattern: ____________________TA_____________________Sensitivity for 1/3 dial drop. ____________________ Sensitivity setting for check. Are you sitting in a chair? Are you on the moon? Are all cats black? Am I an Ostrich? Is this Earth? Have you ever drunk water? Are you holding up a tree? Am I an elephant? Are you a table? Is this a Security Check? Needle pattern. Have you ever lived or worked under an assumed name? Have you given me your right name? Are you here for a different purpose than you say? Have you ever stolen anything? Have you ever done any shoplifting? Have you ever forged a signature, cheque or document? Have you ever blackmailed anybody? Have you ever been blackmailed? Have you ever cheated? Have you ever smuggled anything? Have you ever entered a country illegally? Have you ever been in prison? Have you ever tried to act normal? Have you ever indulged in drunkenness? Have you ever done any reckless driving? Have you ever hit and run with a car? Have you ever burglared [sic] any place? Are you guilty of anything? Have you ever embezzled money? Do you have a secret you are afraid I'll find out? Have you ever assaulted anyone? Have you ever practised Cannibalism? Have you ever been in gaol? 142 ------------ Have you ever told lies in Court? Have you ever been Court Martialed? Have you ever deserted from a military service? Have you ever illegally prevented conscription? Have you ever been a mutineer? Have you ever had anything to do with Pornography? Have you ever committed Arson? Have you ever been a drug addict? Have you ever peddled Dope? Have you ever made anyone into a drug addict? Have you ever PDH'd anyone? Have you had any dealings with stolen goods? Have you ever divulged government secrets for pay or political reasons? Do you have a Police Record? Have you ever raped anyone or been raped? Have you ever been involved in an abortion? Have you ever assisted in any abortion? Have you ever committed adultery? Have you ever committed bigamy? Have you ever practised Homo-Sexuality? Have you ever practised or assisted intercourse between women? Have you ever had intercourse with a member of your family? Have you ever been sexually unfaithful? Have you ever practised sex with animals? have you ever publicy [sic] exhibited yourself sexually? Have you ever hidden to watch sexual practices? Have you ever practised Sodomy? Have you ever consistently made a practice of sex with a member of your own sex? Have you ever slept with a member of a race of another colour? Have you ever committed culpable homicide? have you ever committed a justifiable crime? Have you ever bombed anything? Have you ever murdered anyone? Have you ever hidden a body? Have you ever attempted suicide? Have you ever caused a suicide? 143 ------------ Have you ever kidnapped anyone? Have you ever done any illicit Diamond buying? Have you ever acted as an informer? Have you ever betrayed anyone for money? Have you ever betrayed a trust? Have you ever betrayed an employer's trust? Have you ever speculated with somebody else's funds? Have you ever knowingly implicated an innocent person? Have you ever withold [sic] a communication concerning a crime or misdemeanor committed by another? Have you ever threatened anyone with a fire-arm? Have you ever been in illegal possession of fire-arms? Are my questions embarrassing? Have you ever been paid for giving evidence? Have you ever acted as an informer? Have you ever injured somebody's reputation by knowingly spreading lies? Have you ever injured somebody by spreading tales you know were true? Have you ever destroyed something belonging to someone else? Have you ever plotted to destroy a member of your family? Have you ever had a member of your family in an insane asylum? Have you ever been pronounced insane? Have you ever been a spy for an organization? Have you ever looted any place? Have you ever stolen from the armed forces? Have you ever conspired with anyone? Have you ever had anything to do with Communism or been a Communist? Have you practised fraud? Have you ever been a newspaper reporter? Are you hiding anything? Have you ever had intercourse after placing another under alcohol or drugs? Have you ever used hypnotism to procure sex or money? Do you collect sexual objects? Have you ever ill-treated children? Have you ever practised sex with children? Have you ever practised masturbation? Have you ever taken money for giving anyone sexual intercourse? Have you ever sexually coerced a servant? 144 ------------ Do you have any bastards? Are you witholding [sic] anything? Have you ever had any connection with a brothel? Have you ever coerced anyone into giving you sex? Have you had anything to do with a baby farm? Have you ever killed or crippled animals for pleasure? Have you ever crippled a person? Have you ever been a spy for the police? Have you ever pretended a disability? Are you afraid of the Police? Have you ever committed a misdemeanor? Have you ever committed a felony? Have you ever committed a capital offense? Have you ever done anything you are afraid the police may find out? Have you ever falsified the books in any firm you worked for? Have you ever criminally avoided taxes? Have you ever counterfeited money? Have you ever fraudulently altered or issued certificates or documents? Have you ever obtained money under false pretences? have you ever done anything your mother would be ashamed to find out? How could you help yourself generally? What represents yourself? How could you help your family? What represents your family? How do you feel about sex? What represents (the Org. (others (a group to you? How could you help the (Org? (Others? (a group? How could you help mankind? Have you ever controlled people? How do you feel about being controlled? What is communism? Do you feel Communism has some good points? Have you ever been a member of the communist party or any associated groups? 145 ------------ Have you ever been a member of any group with similar ideas as the Communist Party? Do you know any Communists personally? Have you ever injured Dianetics or Scientology? Have you committed any overts on a Scientology Organization? Have you wronged anyone in a Scientology Organization? Have you ever stolen anything from a Scientology Organization? Do you have anything in your possession that you shouldn't have? Do you have any overts on L. Ron Hubbard? Have you ever had any unkind thought about L. Ron Hubbard? Do you have any overts on Mary Sue Hubbard? Have you done bad things to leaders in Scientology or Scientology Orgs? Have you witheld [sic] anything from executives in Scientology? Have you sought to get any staff member dismissed? Have you knowingly planned not to do our job? Have you ever had any unkind thoughts about Mary Sue Hubbard? Have you ever injured any Scientologists? Have you ever had any unkind thought about Scientologists? Have you ever betrayed Scientology? Do you know of any secret plans against Scientology? Do you plan to steal a Scientology Organization? Have you ever taken money to injure Scientology? Do you deserve to be helped by Scientology? Have you ever used Dianetics or Scientology to force sex upon someone? Have you ever falsified a claim for money to be repaid to you or to be paid to you? Do you know of any plans to injure a Scientology Organization? Do you know of any plans to injure a Scientologist? Are you upset about this Security Check? What question in this check shouldn't I ask you again? Have you witheld from answering anything because it might injure someone? What unkind thoughts have you thought while I have been doing this check? 146 ------------ Have any of your answers here been designed to injure another? Are you upset about the Security Check? __________________________________ __________________________________ Passed Failed ____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________ Signed by Examiner. L. RON HUBBARD. LRH:jl Copyright (c) 1961. by L. Ron Hubbard, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED." (b) The Johannesburg Security Check (also known as "the Jo'burg Security Check" or "the Joburg") reads: "HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 23 Hancock St., Joubert Park, Johannesburg (Issued Saint Hill) HCO Secs. Any Directors of Security. HCO POLICY LETTER OF APRIL 7, 1961 Re-mimeo only for use. _JOHANNESBURG SECURITY CHECK_ This is the Johannesburg Security Check sheet further amplified by myself. This is the roughest security check in Scientology. We will call it the 'Jo'burg Security Check'. It does not necessarily replace other check sheets but it is probably the most thorough one we have now. In reprinting this form use legal (foolscap) length and double space every thing except directions. _Jo'burg Security Check Sheet_ _HCO Security Form 2_. ___________________________________ _________________________________ Name of Person Date ___________________________________ Name of Security Checker. Directions: Attempt to clear any fall observed. Mark any fall observed or any meter reaction change elicited by the question. Then write what it cleared on. Mark largely if the fall could not be cleared since this constitutes a failure to pass. Only fail somebody if there is no needle motion of any kind even with sensitivity at 16 on any question. If they are failing because it is hard to clear a question, work very thoroughly on it in an effort to clear it. In all cases complete the test. 147 ------------ If an important question fails to clear even after security check has worked very hard to get it off, the test is flunked. The following statement should be read or quoted to the person being Security Checked: 'We are about to begin a Security Check. We are not moralists. We are able to change people. We are not here to condemn them. While we cannot guarantee you that matters revealed in this check will be held forever secret, we can promise you faithfully that no part of it nor any answer you make here will be given to the Police or the State. No Scientologist will ever bear witness against you in Court by reasons of answers to this Security Check. This Security Check is exclusively for Scientology purposes. The only ways you can fail this Security Check is to refuse to take the test, to fail to answer its questions truthfully or if you are here knowingly to injure Scientology. The only penalty attached to failure of this check is processing or our refusal to employ you or issue you a certificate, and this will only happen if we find that you are trying now to injure Scientology. You can pass this test by (1) agreeing to take, (2) answering each question truthfully and (3) by not being a member of a subversive groups seeking to injure Scientology. The first questions are nul [sic] questions to determine your reaction pattern. We will now begin:- Lie Reaction: Are you sitting in a chair? Are you on the moon? Are all cats black? Am I an Ostrich? Is this Earth? Have you ever drunk water? Are you holding up a tree? Am I an elephant? Are you a table? Is this a Security Check? Have you ever lived or worked under an assumed name? Have you given me your right name? Are you here for a different purpose than you say? Have you ever stolen anything? Have you ever forged someone else's signature? have you ever blackmailed anybody? 148 ------------ Have you ever been blackmailed? Have you ever smuggled anything? Have you ever been in prison? have you ever indulged in drunkenness? Have you ever done any reckless driving? Have you ever burgled any place? Have you ever embezzled money? Have you ever assaulted anyone? Have you ever been in gaol? Have you ever told lies in Court? Have you had anything to do with Pornography? Have you ever committed Arson? Have you ever been a Drug Addict? have you ever peddled Dope? Have you had any dealings with stolen goods? Do you have a Police Record? have you ever raped anyone? have you ever been involved in an abortion? have you assisted in any abortion? Have you ever committed adultery? Have you ever practised Homo-Sexuality? Have you ever had intercourse with a member of your family? Have you ever been sexually unfaithful? Have you ever practised Sodomy? Have you ever consistently made a practice of sexual perversion? Have you ever slept with a member of a race of another colour? Have you ever committed culpable homicide? Have you ever bombed anything? Have you ever murdered anyone? Have you ever kidnapped anyone? have you ever done any illicit Diamond buying? Have you ever betrayed anyone for money? Have you ever threatened anyone with a fire-arm? Have you been in illegal possession of fire-arms? Have you ever been paid for giving evidence? Have you ever destroyed something belonging to someone else? Have you ever been a spy for an Organization? 149 ------------ Have you ever had anything to do with Communism or been a Communist? Have you ever been a newspaper reporter? Have you ever had intercourse while under the influence of drugs? Have you ever used drugs or blackmail to procure sex? Have you ever ill-treated children? Have you ever taken money for giving anyone sexual intercourse? Have you ever had any connection with a brothel? Have you ever had anything to do with a baby farm? Have you ever been a spy for the police? Are you afraid of the Police? Have you ever done anything you are afraid the Police may find? Have you ever falsified the books in any firm you worked for? Have you ever done anything your Mother would be ashamed to find out? How could you help yourself generally? What represents yourself? How could you help your family? what represents your family? How do you feel about sex? What represents (the Org (others? (a group to you? How could you help (The Org? (Others? (a group to you? How could you help mankind? Have you ever controlled people? How do you feel about being controlled? What represents mankind to you? How could you help animals and plants? What represents animals and plants to you? How could you help material things? What represents Matter, Energy Space and Time to you? How could you help Spirits? What represents Spirits to you? How could you help God or Infinity? What represents God or Infinity to you? What is Communism? do you feel Communism has some good points? 150 ------------ Have you ever been a member of the Communist Party? Have you ever been a member of any group with similar ideals as the Communist Party? Do you know any Communists personally? Have you ever injured Dianetics or Scientology? Have you ever committed any overts on a Scientology Organization? Have you ever stolen anything from a Scientology Org? Do you have any overts on LRH? Have you ever had unkind thoughts about LRH? Do you have overts on Mary Sue? Have you ever had any unkind thoughts about Mary Sue? Have you ever injured any Scientologists? Have you ever had any unkind thoughts about Scientologists? Have you ever betrayed Scientology? Do you know any secret plans against Scientology? Have you ever taken money to injure Scientology? have you ever used Dianetics or Scientology to force sex upon someone? Do you know of any plans to injure a Scientology Organization? Are you upset about this Security Check? ____________________________________ ______________________________ Passed Failed ________________________________________________________________________ Why? ______________________________ Signed by Examiner. L. RON HUBBARD. LRH:jl Copyright (c) 1961. by L. Ron Hubbard, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED." 9.27. Elsewhere in this Report^@ the potential harm which can result from security checking of children has been stressed. The same applies to unbalanced, emotionally immature, tense or sensitive adults and - possibly to a lesser extent - to adults in general. A witness testified* that he and his wife embarked on a Scientology processing course during 1966. The _______ *Record of Evidence, Vol. 14(c), pp. 1-37. ^@Infra, Chapter 12. 151 ------------ processing commenced on a Tuesday at a fee of R150,00 each for the initial auditing which was in the main conducted by an auditor, Mr. Van der Poel, who used an E-Meter. The audition proceeded over a period of five days. Eventually the subject of sex was reached. According to the witness it went "on and on and on" the emphasis being on his past sexual life. The process continued for five or six hours. The witness stated: ".... there was still a read on the meter and this went on and on and drove me really frantic. ... I threatened to throw the cans connected to the E-meter at my auditor. ... I was sent or taken to an Ethics Officer."^1a Auditing was resumed after the visit to the Ethics Officer. On the Friday, during auditing, the witness experienced physical sexual reactions. During the night he woke up. The witness continued: "... I felt it was unnatural, ... it was frightening, inasmuch that I had to control over it, ... it was something which I was afraid of, my body seemed to be out of control. ... When I first woke up there was just this mad sexual urge. ... My wife was asleep and as I say, I call it a mad sexual urge because it was something uncontrollable. And first of all I looked at her with a view to relieving this urge, and in the next frantic moment, as I say this vision of my daughter came into it."^1b The witness continued to say that if his daughter had been in the room he felt certain that he would have done something to her. He attributed his experience to "... this hammering of Scientology."^1b The Commission does not doubt the truthfulness of this witness who made a highly favourable impression. It is unlikely in the extreme that so distressing a story would be invented and the Commission rejects this as a possibility. This case illustrates the dangers which may flow from inept probing. If such probing by an unskilled or insufficiently skilled auditor proceeds too deeply or terminates too abruptly it may, as seems to be the case in the instance described, result in a sever abreaction - a panic state induced by bringing to conscious recall certain past episodes. In the case referred to the auditor was unable through lack of experience, knowledge and training to control the situation. The induction of deliberate abreaction is not uncommon psychiatric practice. The purpose thereof is to reveal a past episode buried in the subconscious mind which is responsible for psycho-neurosis or some _______ ^1Record of Evidence: Vol. 14(c), a) p. 7; b) p. 13. 152 ------------ other forms of abnormal behaviour. Such revelation could lead to beneficial consequences if the patient is confront by a psychiatrist. In the hands of the unskilled this is a dangerous technique. 9.28. Mr. Gaiman and Mrs. Lacey, testifying on behalf of the Church of Scientology, stressed that a Code of Reform dated 29th November, 1968, announced the undermentioned major reforms: "1. Cancellation of disconnection as a relief to those suffering from familial suppression. 2. Cancellation of security checking as a form of confession. 3. Prohibition of any confessional materials being written down. 4. Cancellation of declaring people Fair Game."^1 9.29. The announcement of the Code of Reform should, in the view of the Commission, be seen against the background of two important events. The first of these events is the publication during 1965 of the Report of the Board of Inquiry into Scientology referred to in paragraph 9.18(a) - a report which found no worth-while redeeming feature in Scientology and which found that Scientology constitutes a serious medical, moral and social threat to individuals and to the community generally. The second of these events is a statement made by the Minister of Health in the British House of Commons on July 25th, 1968, in the course of which certain steps were announced to curb the growth of Scientology and in the course of which the Minister of Health also said: "The Government are satisfied, having reviewed all the available evidence, that Scientology is socially harmful. It alienates members of families from each other attributes squalid and disgraceful motives to all who oppose it; its authoritarian principles and practice are a potential menace to the personality and well-being of those so deluded as to become its followers; above all, its methods can be a serious danger to the health of those who submit to them. There is evidence that children are now being indoctrinated."^2 9.30. In August 1968 - the month after the Minister of Health made the statement referred to in the preceding paragraph - Mr. Hubbard, according to a press release dated 9th December, 1968, caused a questionnaire "to be distributed throughout the world by the Continental Organization situation in all major cities of Wester Society"^3 calling for suggested reforms. The Code of Reform is claimed to be the outcome of the replies received. _________ ^1Lacey Jan: Public Relations Chief Africa. Circular Letter, 11th December, 1968. _The Church of_ _Scientology_. _Code of Reform._ 29th November 1968. The Hubbard Scientology Organizations in South Africa (Pty.) Limited, Johannesburg, Republic of South Africa. ^2Robinson, K.: Minister of Health. Hansard (No. 1459/1967/68) Columns 189-191. 25th July 1968. ^3Staff, Public Relations Bureau, The Hubbard Scientology Organizations in South Africa (Pty.) Limited, Johannesburg, Republic of South Africa. Press Release. Immediate. Scientology Reforms. 9th December 1968. 153 ------------ 9.31. The substance of the Code of Reform was published in _Freedom_. Several thousand copies of this edition were distributed in the Republic of South Africa according to information furnished to the Commission by the Church of Scientology in a letter dated 7th September, 1971. In addition a copy of a Policy Letter dated 26th August, 1968, issued by Mr. Hubbard entitled _Security Checks Abolished_ and forming part of the Reform Code was widely published _inter alia_ in _The Auditor No. 42 World Wide_, _Understanding Magazine_ and in issue No. 1 of the _South African_ _Broadsheet_. The terms of the Policy Letter of the 26th August, 1968, are as follows: "The practice of security checking from security check lists like the 'Joburg' has been abolished. There are several reasons for this: (1) We have no interest in the secrets and crimes of people and no use for them. (2) Security checking is often done without regard to the point where the person feels better and so became overrun. (3) Security checking is often done in disregard of the state of a persons [sic] case. (4) Low level cases do not react on actual crimes and so the 'security' furnished is often a false security. (5) There is public criticism of security checking as a practice. (6) The existence of lists of crimes in folders often makes it necessary to destroy the folders which may contain other technical data which is constructive and valuable. (7) If a person _is_ a criminal or has overt acts which affect his case, and speaks of them to an auditor of his own volition, the auditor is bound by the Auditor's Code not to publish use or reveal them. Nothing in this policy letter alters standard grade processing or rudements [sic]."^1 9.32. The Commission has drawn attention to the fact that the Code of Reform followed in the wake of the two set-backs suffered by Scientology and referred to in paragraph 9.29 above. The Commission does not and cannot suggest that this policy change is not genuine and sincere but feels itself constrained to point out that the issue of the Broadsheet which carried portion of the Code of Reform also somewhat incongruously contained the defamatory article of and concerning Dr. Fisher. The promulgation of the Code of Reform notwithstanding, the Commission finds the policies of disconnection, public investigation, security checking and the implementation of the ________ ^1Hubbard L. Ron: Security Checks Abolished. HCO Policy Letter of 26 August 1968. Hubbard Communications Office, East Grinstead, Sussex, England. 154 ------------ third party law so disturbing and dangerous that the mere possibility of an existing or future organization reintroducing the same or similar practices should be closely guarded against. The Commission accordingly recommends that practices of this nature, where they (or some of them) form part of the system of discipline of any organization or are applied by any organization, be declared illegal by appropriate legislation. 155 ------------