Briefing Number 1
The last time that I have seen LRH personally, which was in the year 1980, in the fall, he had just completed the final technical development and research on the presentation of standard tech by film, by pictures, so it can never be altered by anyone in the future.
It is very interesting to note that those films are no longer available in the church. We are trying to get copies, but the excuses they give are that the films show people who are declared, and that they are scratched, and some are damaged, and that "we don't use them anymore".
Now, any one of you, that knows the HCOPL 17 Jun 70 "Technical Degrades", will realize that this is the technical proof that LRH could not be behind RTC. Because he would never have allowed anything that he developed — -to give exactly how the TRs and metering should be used-- not to be used anymore. We are just talking about the technical side this time. In the years that I worked with Ron, he explained to me a few times what his main job was in the research. It was basically, he said, like going into a dark room, opening a door into a dark room, and trying to find a door at the other end. Without a light or a guidebook. He said the only thing he would go in with would be an E-Meter. As he would bump into things, or run into difficulties in the "room" (or level) that he was researching, he would then have to find out how he could get back to the door and start again with the E-Meter. And finally, after exploring the various ways to get through this area, he would finally find the door at the other side, and could go into the next level.
"Now, he said, the bulletins you see written are the exact path through the room. There are many other things that could be written, but they are not the direct path through the room."
In the C/Sing of a level, we find certain remedies and corrections which help people get back to that path through the room-- if they go off into the wrong direction. These are the correction programs and so on. You see that in various things like the green form, the resistive case bulletins, the things handling various types of things on the GF40, other list actions, and so on. These exact things and some of the remedies, some of the OT Correction handlings when a case caves in, these are the various ways to get back on to that path.
Now, we have found out that, after 1980, when Ron did go off the lines (because he disappeared from the place where he was working at that time in California), that certain technical bulletins have appeared. But I happen to know, and so do many other technical terminals, that, in the materials, parts are written by LRH. Parts of them. Other parts are not written by him. These are parts of his research that came from his research notes of the past which he did not want to put into the levels because they are not the direct path to the door. Alright, this is the reason that in the Free Zone technical centers there are many Solo Nots Completions. I think there are 20 to 30 right now, and so far, in the church, there is only one or maybe a few more. But, they are only promoting that there is one.
We cannot analyze the church's technology anymore by the policy of Scientology. We can only analyze it by the emotion of greed in asking people to "pay, pay, pay" for more-- to not go through the room, but wander around in it for awhile until all the money is gone.
I hope you understand this. That describes to you what Ron went through to do the research to give you the bridge.
His workday on the Flagship, when I was there for 6 to 7 years, that I observed him working was: every day in his whole schedule there was approximately eight hours a day devoted to tech and eight hours devoted to handling management, admin and ships affairs. I never saw him work less than 16 hours a day in that six years, never saw him get a pay-check for the week of more than 80 dollars. I do know that when we were ready to come to America and go off the ship that if Ron had wanted to take all of the Sea Org reserve monies, which was at that time about a hundred million dollars (for the Sea Org, for the churches for making buildings and continuing expansion, that is what it is for), that if he wanted to go and disappear with all the money, that we would have said, "OK, fantastic, he has done a fantastic job". But he didn't do that. He went to America and carried on finishing the NOTs research and OT level research, and doing the films, the technical standard films, knowing already that there were many, shall we say people, who in the United States were waiting to attack him and his family. This does not sound like the actions of a man who is operating on a basis of just money.
The lies spread about LRH are proportional to the overts that those people who spread the lies have done against him and his family.
The people who transmit or relay the lies, especially amongst Scientologists, are merely people who probably have not made the place on the grade chart where they are supposed to be. Because anyone who has gains from Scientology, and real wins or abilities, knows Ron's purpose on this planet.
His first duty was to help thetans to rehabilitate and go back to their native state, and that it was, in fact, a way to become self-determined and pan-determined and at cause again.
Even the last possibility of a person remaining at effect was covered by LRH in the tech; where he said on the Class 8 course, "the last thing you will have to run out, the last thing, is your track of auditing, because, you realize, that from the definition of a thetan at cause, that whenever he is sitting in an auditing chair, no matter how good the auditing is by the auditor's code, which puts the PC at cause over his case, and helps him, he was still scheduled by the auditor, he was told to pick up the cans, told to start, and to end, and he was under control, though it is a control that is leading him in the direction of getting him free". And Ron said even that little bit of the person at effect has to be audited.
So, auditing is not a trap, Scientology is not a trap, but it can be used as a trap, if the purpose of LRH is not followed.
Now, at this point I'll ask you if there are any questions about LRH or anything I have said, because next I'm going to tell you about what we do in Frankfurt.
Question from a person at the event:
"There are many bulletins after 1980, like data about checking grades processes for reads and that sort of thing. Now how do we know where the data ends?"
I covered this point with several tech people in England and America between 1980 and 1982, and it was decided at that point (it is arbitrary of course, but it is a decision and it works) that we take the end of 1980 because that is the last time, we can be sure, that LRH was there and receiving any technical bulletins back and forth for OK, and his approval, and all these auditors that have audited some 20 years, and when done correctly, have great results with all the tech from before that. So there seems to be no reason to actually change it.
Ron did that continuously as he would get feed-back. You see, the Flagship was an experimental place also. Many of us that were on board were asked if we would volunteer to take part in research sessions.
I might add to that point about the research. I told you before that Ron didn't write the bulletins immediately after getting through the dark room himself, but would make sure that cases of all types, difficult cases or easy cases, or people that have gone up the bridge this way and that way, whatever, that oldtimers, new people, could all receive the same results by getting PCs and auditors to do it on the Flagship. So there was continuously, as they came out, there was always the way that every single person could go up the most, perhaps shall we say, not particularly the easiest, but the most efficient way. It does not mean fast. It means the person would be able to confront and handle that which came next and go up the bridge.
Now, on the Class 8 Course he made his point that it was all conforming to the basics of Scientology. So, the only changes you would see in the bulletin after that was if there was some pretty large percentage of when they put the tech in the field, that some problems arose, and it wasn't found on the Flagship, then there would be a slight revision or something.
Now you have to realize that, since 1980, there has been another motive in this. And that is to keep the person paying for his auditing.
As Ron said on the Class 8 Course, there are a million ways to do it wrong and there is only one way to do it right, and you can make a million dollars doing a million wrong things and finally come back to the right one, or you could put them through the correct way the first time, and then you can make a lot of OTs.
Ron's purpose in the Tech was to get the thetans up to OT, and we can not see this purpose in the bulletins that have come up since 1980.
The actual additions of various rundowns, and things people must do, some of these are merely, shall we say, special handlings. They are not major actions. That means that not everyone on the planet would need a R/D concerning how to better fix an automobile, or how to handle their 2nd dynamic or something like that, or how to handle their problems with Ethics. Some people would need that, but the others would handle that on their regular bridge.
So, we have a path that is very well researched, and very well experimented, and very well taped out which does result in increased abilities and causativeness. And I have compared the case levels of people who have done the bridge before 1980, and the ones who have done it since with the church, and there is a great difference. It is a difference which can be measured in terms of dynamic responsibility, the responsibility in life over the various dynamics, and in the reality and communications levels of the people involved. I think you may yourself know of some of these examples.
I have found people in the church doing NOTs auditing, which is now the top level of the released bridge, who were afraid to communicate, afraid to find out everything. They kept very low profiles, they were very effect. It did not seem to me that they were able to cause much effect.
Another thing that people may be interested in, and this is to finish the answer on the question, is what Ron predicted for Scientology on the PDC tapes in 1952.
The PDC Course was an actual OT Course. It dealt with the thetan's ability to mock up things and to make things of his universe and to reduce his being effect of the MEST-Universe (matter, energy, space, time).
He said in those lectures that Scientology had a short space on Earth to flourish and prosper; between the time that man had gained control over his environment and his machines where they released him for a little more free time to do spiritual things, and before those men with evil purposes would use those machines to enslave you.
This apparently has been a repeated history on the track. We see it happening in the world. He also said that we must get the tech fully developed and in use before the "shades of night" fall, and he referred to that as the "Shades of Night" coming down, or keeping all ideas and new developments a secret, so they could be used to control people rather than let them gain more freedom.
You see that today with all these mysterious secrets that are going on behind the scenes, and you never get to hear about what is really developed. All the ideas for a New Civilization, for instance, are kept from you, or not allowed to be developed.
I think that fully answers why we put that arbitrary date in there.
I also might mention one other thing about the Grade chart, since you are all on it, we are all on it.
The grade chart represents the majority of cases at the time it was developed, how they can progress. However, as a C/S, you do not always go by only that, because, as you know, not everyone is average. You must do the basics of Scientology with each case on an individual basis. This is the only way you can handle resistive cases, or someone that comes in and has just recently arrived, and is already a Natural Clear, and has no drugs or medicine in this lifetime.
So each is different. There are the extremes, and there is the middle, but no case is exactly like any others, as no thetan is exactly like any others. In fact, you will find that if every case was the same, all their cognitions and all their answers to the questions on the processes would be the same. But they are not.
The questions are the right ones, the answers are the individual ones from that thetan to get him through that particular ability level. And if there is something necessary to be done to get him to that "going up the bridge in the middle", then we must choose the exact thing that will get him there without any problems so he has no difficulty in continuing. Which brings me to the reason why I am giving you this tech briefing.
We will be starting now full-time, 1st or 2nd week in December, the moving of all cases in the Frankfurt area that can exchange right up the bridge.
Now, you ask, "why here in Frankfurt? Because you are supposed to be in Spain?" and all that stuff. We are doing the same thing in Spain, but I do not speak Spanish and the cases in Spain are all at a level where they can be handled very easily by a lower class auditor. Many have not had much auditing at all. I have programmed or C/Sed for each of the people there. I have trained up a Spanish speaking auditor on the DCSI so we can keep whichever ones that are clear going on up.
But also, there is a matter of exchange, and there is not much exchange in Spain. The people there do not have any extra money to do anything under the socialist government, and to tell you the truth, I couldn't survive on just doing tech in Spain. In fact, I was not even going to do any tech anywhere. I was depending on David Mayo's and the other AACs to expand quickly. But, something a bit upsetting to me has occurred in the last 4-5 months that is despite all our advice to them on policy.
If you understand the mechanics of PTSness, when that occurs, it must be handled. It's Ethics, it's an Ethics handling. If you don't have that, it's a roller coaster.
Policy and Tech complement each other. But that is not the most upsetting thing. That was the first one.
The second upsetting thing was that it is allowed and even promoted by Div 6s and Div 2s. I do not accuse any tech people for this because I am sure they do the right things with their tech. But, the administrative people and publics of those AACs are permitting extreme criticism of LRH and repeating of the enemy's stories that are appearing in the newspapers, and were started by known SPs, such as Nibs Hubbard-deWolfe (who was Ron's antagonistic son from a former marriage).
They have thought it OK to keep promoting the words of Flynn, who is dedicated to destroy the church, and Ron de Wolfe, who is dedicated to destroying LRH and Scientology. I have that in writing from Ron de Wolfe himself. In a letter, he stated he has been trying to take apart Scientology, brick by brick, for 30 years. Yet, it is OK, it's allowed to say, "I think this is right. LRH was in black magic, and he was taking drugs, and he was doing all this, and he ripped off all this money," and they are allowed to say that. They even write that down in their magazines and stuff like this.
Now I ask you: If this is permitted and they send a person up the bridge, in the future when he goes out and says "I am a Scientologist", (by the way, they also send out letters stating "We do not say we are Scientologists anymore". I have a letter saying that from Harvey Haber from the AAC, who is the DIV6 of David Mayo's.), when they say that and go out and say, "Well, I've had my auditing" to someone they are in communication with for business or a job or just contacts, these people could just turn around and say, "Well, that's very funny, because 5 years ago you told me this guy who founded all this stuff was crazy, into black magic, and he was this and that". To put it mildly, and in the most lightly way, they are destroying their own future. It is like a man climbing a rope ladder up the side of a cliff and saying, "Man, the guy who built this ladder, he didn't know what the hell he was doing. The things that hold the ropes are all weak, and it's going to fall in any minute." Well, why the hell is he climbing the ladder? Why doesn't he just stay down there? It is not understandable.
This is why I realized that they needed a C/S in Frankfurt. I realized, also, that many people have been, shall we say, a little bit messed-about by the old church. I realize that people are willing to exchange to have all this handled and go up the bridge standardly. I can also read and speak some German, although I must translate some of it. Also, Frankfurt and Germany are a very key part in the 4th dynamic, which I also take responsibility in my universe for handling so that we do not become slaves. So, for all of these reasons I decided to actually start some very standard going up the bridge for people from any level, because at first it was going to be OT levels. But, there are not enough people just there yet. But we will get them all the way up and then carry them up to the very standard OT abilities.
As I say, I can recommend any technical person that anyone wants to ask on the planet that is doing the tech standardly. David Mayo does very standard tech, and so do all the people he trained.
All I am stating here is that the environment which they are in tends to make them PTS. Eventually, it will stop or hinder or cause them to drop the cause levels or the ability levels they have obtained.
So it is not the fault of the auditor. The fault is that they do not have a 3rd dynamic tech in the org, and the Ethics around it to protect it.
Now perhaps you have seen the order that Dorothee wrote with my approval about the drug-scene over at the "Avalon". This is an example of a gradient of ethics being applied and the correct policy being used to handle PTSs and giving them a chance to get back on the standard line. Do you know that there is no AAC in the world that I have seen an issue from? That there is no tech delivery center in the world that I have seen an issue from to handle an ethics situation? They can't confront it. I could handle it as a C/S with them. Because they have been hit by incorrect ethics by RTC, they backed off from using it totally.
To stop using it totally is like a man who has a wreck with his car, and he never wants to drive again. Or, like a person who has had a bad auditing session and it is very hard to get him back into session. There are handlings for this.
LRH said the tech could be used to suppress people. Policy can be used, Ethics can be used with Policy, but when used correctly, no problems, you go right up the bridge. Actually, I wrote the chapter about Ethics in "What is Scientology?". I wrote that chapter and sent it to LRH, and he personally OK'd it. What was written was put in the book. And in that, it states that Ethics is a technology, and it covers conditions, it covers getting off overts, and sec checks, and covers the PTS/SP phenomena, and boards of investigation and other justice actions.
These are all technical tools. They should be used correctly and for the right thing. The way RTC is using them, saying, "I don't like these findings for the Comm Ev. You find it this way. Now go back and do it the way I say," is totally against policy written on it.
You think, why can't people see this. The Convening Authority, or authority who calls the committee, cannot influence the committee. He can only accept the findings or reject them. He can not tell them what they should be. It is an evaluation and, in fact, you don't even need a committee if you don't follow that policy.
And now, you find in the writing of RTC itself stating, "we now declare people at the finger". They even say this themselves, no comm ev. They will even tell (we have witnessed statements), they will even tell the person "you can have a committee, but you will lose." The other thing is, they are mixing the technologies again. They are alter-ising the technology of ethics. They are confusing conditions with justice actions.
A justice action is a 3rd dynamic action when the person cannot get his 1st dynamic ethics in himself, so he needs the help of the group.
Condition formulas are actually the way to expand and flourish and prosper in the universe. They are meant to be applied causatively by the person on an individual basis. If the wrong one is applied, and this is stated in Policies on Ethics on a tape, if the wrong one is applied, the person will fall down the conditions to the one lower. Very exact. This happens all the time.
You notice how many SP-declares have come out in the last few years-- 2000 and more-- and from the viewpoint of the church, all those 2000 fell to the next one lower. If you look at an SP being an enemy — they went to treason and they resigned from the church. It was the wrong condition. Obviously, they didn't come up.
Ethics is to get the guy up. Some of them went to doubt and did a whole doubt thing, and when they did that correctly, back to treason they went again and were gone. Some of them went down to confusion and remained there, and they didn't want anything to do with anyone. That is an example of misapplication of ethics. But what we have been doing in OTC WW is trying to make sure that not only the tech survives, but the policy and ethics as well, all those technologies.
So, in Frankfurt we will find that we will do it that way. When, for instance, you hear someone carrying on and nattering about this and that and the other, it should be reported to ethics. The person is called in, and HCO justice policies are applied. It's called Manual of Justice, where, by finding out who told you that, you trace it back to the source. And when you get to this source, he either agrees to have his overts and withholds pulled on the terminal he is criticizing, or if he doesn't agree, then a justice action is called by the 3rd dynamic to decide where this person is sitting in relation to the group, like a Comm Ev or whatever.
There is no condition formula which says criticisms are handled in this condition. That's not the purpose of the condition formulas. You can't put a person in a condition because he is critical.
The church does this all the time. (Ha, you are critical of us, you must be with the enemy, you are suppressive.) There is no such thing. The technology for handling criticism is given in the red bulletins. Also, it comes from O/Ws and M/Wh Technology.
It is very easy and everything has a basic and a way to handle it. When you mix these up you get salt in the coffee and sugar on the meat.
First of all, we will start this program off by making sure we collect whatever data we have on a case, or whatever auditing you have had. We can do that with a white form plus a D of P interview, or you can write it up yourself and we check it with a D of P interview, or summaries, what you had on the bridge or off the bridge. It is up to the D of P to get the complete data now.
I'm a permanent Class 8, awarded by LRH, and I know what to do with a case problem. You have to have the data on the case. We get these data together, and before anything else is done, I look it over as a C/S, and then I make sure that the next correct action is done-- after which the person should be on the bridge. Now, that means he may be on the bridge already, but, so far, I haven't found anyone that is standardly on the bridge.
Some people have had invalidative sec checks, some people have started to go into endless corrections, and some people have been programmed to, shall we say, to do actions on the side, which are not necessary to go up the bridge and probably not needed.
For instance, a girl asked me in Vienna, "I have this problem of playing before an audience. I'm anxious, I'm nervous." So, she said, "can you handle that?" I said "yes. Well, I'm also a C/S. Where are you on the bridge?" "Well, I think I've done ARC-Straightwire/Life-Repair."
She really wanted this handled. Now, if I was interested in just money I would say "sure, it will take 50 hours, I'll handle it." No. I only want the fair exchange. But, I want the best thing for the PC, so I told her, "First, go up the bridge. Get your grades. You can do it here, or in Langenthal or whatever, and when you are up the grades it should have been handled. If it is not, then let me know and we will handle it."
She was surprised. I said, "Well, what do you think the grades are for?" The things like that, that the thetan can obtain, each grade handles the different parts of these things. If you know the grade chart, you can see all the abilities that people achieve on those grades. If they really achieve those, I don't think she would be nervous after Grade IV.
Well, if you look at it, it could be a problem in communications, it could be a problem with a problem about it. She could have O/Ws and be a little nervous about being found out. It's right there somewhere, or an ARC break or dramatization of a service fac, it could be anything. So honestly, as a C/S, I have to tell her, "you go up the bridge". The church would probably say, "ha, you need a Sunshine Rundown, so you are happy all the time." 50 hours of that. That's a very high price. So, you see, this is what we want to get back: the intention of LRH in developing the Tech. And, in addition to the intentions of LRH, we want to get back in (I say "get back in" because it is not there now) the recognition of source. Because there are people now in England going around and saying that, "Ron didn't develop the tech", and they are saying, "John McMasters developed it", and other people like David Mayo, and some of the Class 10s, "Otto Roos developed the Tech".
How soon they forgot that I was on the Flagship for 7 years when he, LRH, developed everything.
From the Class 8 Course all the way through NED for OTs, starting with the NED course, all the tech in-between and including the Ext/Int-Rd and the Drug-Rundown, OT Drug Rundowns and everything that was developed right in that period.
As the captain of the ship, I made a tour of the ship many times a day, and I saw him at the office, working on the Tech 8 hours a day. I didn't see any of those other guys doing it.
So it's very strange to me, that these stories can be circulating amongst Scientologists. That's as silly as me saying that since I was used on a pilot process or an experimental process of some of the Ls, (you know, the Ls, L10, L11, L12). I was given some of those on the Flag Ship, as an experiment. But, it's like me going around saying "I helped develop the Ls." I didn't do any of the research on the Ls. I was a PC or a PreOT.
You see the difference. And even then, I mean, that people would believe this. It shows me that we are on the correct path only here in Frankfurt, and in Spain, or wherever we are putting the OTC WW. Because, as I said, the other areas are becoming more and more increasingly (as they are not getting their overts pulled), they are getting more and more critical, and spreading these rumors and so on like that. They are false.
OK. That's my viewpoint and I hope you like it. But I think what you are being given, if I may look at it now from another viewpoint, what we are doing here is actually also a pilot process in Frankfurt, right. And as a result of this, you may be the first people to be able to promote the results of the most standard bridge since LRH was actually running FCCIs at Flag. That's Flag Case Completion Intensives on the Flag Ship, and he was C/Sing all of their cases.
So, next year we can start over here the Universal Church of Scientology somewhere in Europe, where all the training and auditing that has been lost, all of his training, all the Policy, all the Ethics, all the Tech come back in.
Because that has not been duplicated yet, I consider I'll take the responsibility to start that and help start that, because no one else, again, is doing it.
I would also like to state that when you get to your OT levels and so on, that my main experience in missionairing in Tech was to be the Commanding Officer in most of the AOs on the planet.
I've been the Commanding Officer for the AO at Alicante, which was the first one on land, and the one in Edinburgh, which was the first AO in England, and the first one in California, which was the AO L.A., and on other missions. I have also run the AO in Copenhagen. And believe me, I know everything that can happen with an OT case.
Before those jobs, I was in the Advanced Org on the Flagship on the following posts: Tech Sec, Qual Sec, Dir of Review, and the Review Auditor for all OT cases.
And before that, when the Sea Org just started in 1967, I was the I/C of Review, and that included sec checking, included all of the review actions on all the persons in the original Sea Project. Before that, I was Senior Lead Review Auditor at SH England, and Director of Review Qual Division, and before that, HGC auditor and also Class 7 Intern, which is Power Processing Auditor.
So I have a lot of technical qualifications on my track for handling these types of cases, and I can say in truth that the AOs were never run better by anyone else except, of course, LRH.
I'm not bragging about that! I'm just telling you that because I've duplicated what LRH wants. And, most people that have been to those AOs and have been through them, when other people were running them later, will tell you the same thing.
The reason they tell you that is because whenever I went to correct an AO later, the first people who would come to me would be the oldtimers who had been there earlier, you know, and gone up the bridge. And they would say, "I'm glad you are back. Now I want to tell you something." "OK," I said, "go ahead and tell me, because I'm here on mission to handle whatever it is." And they say, "We can't promote for people to come here anymore. They just don't do it right anymore."
These were the most influential and wealthy and the most known public. And I would pull the string and get the data, and I would find that whoever was running it, had gone into the idea, "We are just going to make the money, we are just going to sell Power processing and something or other, and we are not going to get them up the bridge."
One place, at one time in Copenhagen, I even found they had a C/S that was blackmailing PCs. I declared him, and I'll even let you know the name, because I don't want him ever again in Scientology. That was Belkacem Feradj, French Algerian. Maybe he's not known in Germany, but he was at the AO in the 70s. He is now in the US. Anyway, that is probably the most betrayal I think you can do to LRH that someone could blackmail a PC, find out about his W/Hs from the government or his W/Hs on his wife, or whatever, and then say, "If you don't give me this money, I will tell."
Now, that is about the most betrayal that I have run across on the tech lines.
But these guys that are going around criticizing LRH, if they keep going like that, they may reach the No.1 position in betrayal.
We have tried as OTC, and my friends tried, Maria has gone over to the US, Hermanns in Switzerland have gone there, John Caban has gone over there, and every time we brought them the same message.
"Hey, knock off this criticism and this Bla Bla Bla about LRH, and pull their overts and withholds, and trace it down to the source and expose who is doing it." They won't do it.
Anyway, it's time now to create the alternative for the alternative, OK ?
I am asking you if you want to help in this. I'm going to do C/Sing and so on, and in special cases I might even do some Review Handlings. Because there are some people I understand have been screwed up, messed up on the OT levels, that requires this type of AO review auditing handling, which I can do and get everyone back on the bridge and on up through OT. We do need more OTs as LRH always says. Real ones.
Because, shall we say, he is feeling a little lonely. He has left the bridge here for us. He is waiting there to say "Hello! Glad you could make it!"
So, anyway, that's what the plan is, and I would like now to know of any questions you have about this before the tape runs out.
Oh yes, one other thing. My rate as a permanent Class 8 as C/S is DM 300/hour.
Maria is going to do the D of P stuff, D of P interviews and also operate as what you call a tech page, getting the folders together and doing all those things. She knows the whole line. She has worked at Flag and in AOs and so on.
Now, I want you to realize something, right? Marianne is going to continue auditing and so will Franz and anyone else.
Like that, I hope we will get the whole thing together and just start a flow that will be filled by all around Europe. We will have to train people and get them out and just bring the whole level of technology up.
Also, I want to point out about that DM 300/an hour C/Sing. Once the person is on the bridge right, really on the line, and when I know what is happening in every session, then it is not necessary to have the Senior C/S, (I'm calling it Senior C/Sing). Anyone that is trained to run those levels can probably just C/S the next steps on the thing. Like you have run 0A on the communication thing, the next thing you run is 0B. So, when you went standardly on 0A you go on to 0B.
So, I'm sure Marianne can handle that, or Franz, or any person. What I'm trying to do is getting the person sure that he his totally right on the bridge without any BPC, picking them up again at the point where they go into the Solo-Assists, and then giving them the C/Sing from there all the way to OTIII. And I'll even state here, that anyone that wants to go on the old OTIV,V, and VI, we have those materials as well. But, that is only once they have finished OTIII, then they can sort of communicate back and forth in writing to the C/S and we will see if that is the best line. But, by that time, I think I'll probably have done my NOTs training as an auditor and C/S, so I can carry on with that. If not, there is always Per Schiottz in Copenhagen, so we will work the whole bridge.
Please address any communication, if you have anybody interested for this, to Maria. She will be keeping the logbooks of who has paid for what. So we can give the service on the basis of policy, you know, the service to the people that have given exchange and buy the preference rates, and so on.
Also, the C/Sing does not take as long afterwards as it does in the beginning, because in the beginning you have to work with little data from the D of P and the White Form. You have to guess at what is in the folders that the church is holding, and you have to pick out what BPC they have missed and handle those, and make it so that the person is ready to go.
When you have them going already, it is very easy and may take 5-10 minutes to do the C/S. If there is a little bit of trouble, it doesn't take very long, because you have already done the basics.
So out of DM 300,- we say that DM 150 is a half hour, and DM 75 is 15 minutes, and if it is a fast thing, 5 to 10 minutes, it's DM 50. So that way, everybody can have their folder C/Sed by me if they want. If they don't wish to, they can just have the beginning done and will then be handed over to their regular tech lines. And after they get to the Solo Assists, then I'll take it on from there.
Now, for the auditors here, the people that are tech people, I will tell you one other thing. Here, we are applying the policy of Qual. OKs to audit and OKs to the C/S etc., etc. are obtained in Qual. And this is how all tech got started on the Flagship. That's why I'm using this, because we do not have a training course where we can train a whole bunch of C/Ses. We will have in the future, but until then, if there is something you want to C/S and you have the qualifications as an auditor there, well, then you bring the bulletins, you study the pack and so on, and as Qual Terminal I ll give you checkouts and meter checkouts, everything on that pack, and give you the OK to do it.
That is how it was done originally in the Sea Org. You check out, you show me the checksheet, you've twinned, or whatever you have done the whole check outs and so on. Like a tech training thing on it, on the exact thing you want to do, like you want to be able to C/S or audit on the DCSI. Well, then you do the Pack, Bla,Bla,Bla, bring it here, I give you an exam, give you a check-out, and so on.
Well, I think that is about the end, unless there is any other question.
To end off, that is the purpose of this. It is to put in the bridge like LRH originally intended. The alternative to the alternative that will bring Europe again into a position where LRH stated in 1966, "Europe must be ready, in case the United States goes down the drain, to take over the entire responsibility for Scientology in the world."
I think it is time again to do this.