scientology myths 2.0



What is new?




Scientology Myths - what is fact? what is fiction?
chapter: Squirrels

Q:What is behind those "squirrels" - Rumors and Using Policy to Stop

1. Squirrels

Seeking trying to rip off Scientology while complaining about people making donations to the Church is something squirrels have done in the past. LRH’s response to one such situation in 1956 was as follows:

Far-flung members of our organization often ask themselves (if they think about it at all) what they are buying with their book purchases or their courses or their processing. For one thing, they are buying the least costly and most important job of research which has ever been done on this planet. The real reason that Central Organizations process people for a fee and train people for a fee is to disseminate the capabilities and abilities of Scientology. But the secondary reason, which becomes primary in the
Central Organizations, is to buy organization itself and to advance the science.

The reason that we object to "squirrels," people like the Communist Association of Dianetic Auditors in California, is because they do not pay their way. We find their papers full of the materials which were hard won by myself and the Central Organizations and yet we have nothing but debits on our records to show that they passed our way. These people have as their major fault no cognizance of effort. These people also have given us ample experience of financial irresponsibility. People such as our best-known squirrels are perfectly willing to snatch our hard-won materials and misuse them, but they are not willing to support the effort which brought these materials into being. In other words, their existence is parasitic. Completely aside from the perversion of materials, this is what we have against them. Fortunately they number one in thousands.

Their lies, stupidities, vilifications are all a statement that they are unwilling to pay for what they use. They are cheap. The rest of us paid our way and we have won. – LRH, PAB 90, of 26 June 1956 THE

2. Rumors

Seeking to undermine the expansion of Scientology by spreading false rumors about Church staff and executives in good standing is another action typical of squirrels. LRH faced similar unfounded attacks when he was first forming Dianetics, and wrote the following in 1953:

On the subject of rumors, America sure likes to close terminals with a lot of chatter. In three years, I have never heard a true story in circulation about anyone. What a wild record! Recently so many reports reached me in various ways about Walsh in LA that I wrote some real mean letters in that direction. Further data revealed that not one of these reports I had received was true. How do you break up an organization? You just tell one section of it how bad another section is until it falls apart. Simple?

How do you kill Scientology or Dianetics? Why, just convince everyone that "while the work is all right, Hubbard is -- well -- ". How do you lose business? They tell your potential students and preclears that "while the subject may have merit, the people who run that associate school --". Just like many a preclear starts trouble amongst auditors. Auditor A helps him but he tells Auditor B that Auditor A is a dog. Auditor B gets self- righteous and tackles Auditor A. They discover that this pc gave a wrong end-up account of the whole thing.

Should you believe a psychotic 1.1 pc? Or does he cause more trouble if you listen? Should you believe the Great American Grapevine? Believe the Martians have landed, believe that the sun has just exploded, believe that water runs uphill, but believe John Public's favorite comm line? Never! . . .

Stay true to our goals and to truth and we will attain those goals. I think they are worth attaining.” – LRH, ASSOCIATE NEWSLETER #1, 23 Apr 1953, “SEVERAL ITEMS OF INTEREST…”

LRH had this to say about rumors as an indicator:

WILD RUMORS -- This symptom is caused by potential trouble sources. Find whose case roller-coasters (gets better, gets worse). Investigate. You'll find a suppressive or two outside the org. Put a head on a pike with an HCO Ethics Order and publish it widely. -- LRH, HCO PL 16 May 65, Issue II, INDICATORS OF ORGS

3. Using Policy to Stop

Most squirrels quote policies, yet disagrees with policy and will not actually follow it. LRH says the following about such:

Some orgs will find that certain personnel will use policy to stop action. When these just don’t want to do their job, although it’s easily understood in policy letters, they tell you certain polices are wrong or can’t be followed. – LRH, HCO PL 19 July 65 POLICY, HOW TO HANDLE PEOPLE WHO QUOTE POLICY TO SHOW YOU THEY CAN’T FOLLOW IT

All policy does not have equal value. Policy can’t exist down to the details of getting it into effect. That requires orders and advice. The policy of ‘Get the job done!’ is very senior to a policy relating to the
expenditure of ballpoints. A martinet is only one who insists on following policy down to idiot level, using policy for how to shine shoes or bite fingernails. A good leader only gets major policy in hard and uses the rest as specific orders or advices. Not following important policies is a shooting offense. Using small policy as a means of avoiding the major policy is also a shooting offense.
—LRH, HCO PL 13 Mar 65,

Next topics:

4. International Association of Scientologists
5. Ideal Organizations
6. Donations for new buildings

7. PCs or Pre-OTs doing an Return/Advance Program
8. Length of time on Lower Grades
9. Nattering