Virginia McClaughry

Refund request

Content:

May 9, 2000

Treasury Secretary
Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization
210 S. Ft Harrison
Clearwater, Fla
34616

Refund Request

Dear Sir/Madam,

As you know, I have withdrawn my membership to what is called "The Church of Scientology", due to fraudulent misrepresentation of LRH written works, that are not factually written by LRH.

I have spent 25 years training, and processing with Scientology technology. 
I still remain a scientologist, loyal to the original teachings, and writings of L. Ron Hubbard.

Most Recently I was auditing on OT VII, one of the highest levels obtainable in the Church, up until approximately 1 1/2 years ago.

I discovered that Lrh's HCOB C/S Series 73 RA, which was 12 pages long, had been edited and rewritten by RTRC I/C, to where the "new" issue (C/S Series 73RB), had SEVEN PAGES deleted of Lrh's writings. In direct violation of BOTH of these versions, (one LRH, one not), as an OT VII, I was ordered to pay for a "security check" to "renew my eligibility", every six months. I also received other auditing actions I was not supposed to be doing per the above references, which I also had to pay for.

I was on OT VII for almost 9 years, essentially my entire history of auditing at the Church of Scientology FSO. I was sold services that were represented to be "written by Lrh", which were not, as is easily provable.

This is Fraud.

As a scientologist, I would never have paid for these services, if the services were correctly represented as written by someone else. I thought that I was getting "pure, unadulterated Lrh”, as RTC represents it, and so I purchased these services in good faith.

Upon bringing this gross alteration and misrepresentation of Lrh's work to the attention of Church management, as well as other scientologists, the following actions were taken by Scientology- related entities, or Scientology-related individuals:

  1. I was reverse audited by auditor of the year Therese Blum (reverse auditing is also known as "black Dianetics", it is auditing being used to attempt to cause harm to another)
  2. Defamation of my character was undertaken with blatant lies being spread to as many scientologists as possible about me, as well as my husband Mike. 
  3. I was held in a room by the MAA sandcastle April Buchanan, with 2 male ethics officers guarding the door, who would not let me leave in time to catch my scheduled plane flight.
  4. I was also declared a "suppressive person" for exposing the fraudulent activities of RTC and CSI, as well as C of S FSO. This declare was in direct violation of HCOPL Keeping Scientology Working. Additionally, the declaring of me as a suppressive person, and circulating a document stating such amongst thousands of scientologists, is further defamation of character, as well as libel.
  5. My husband was asked to leave his place of employment, David Morse and Associates, because he was "not in good standing with the Church of Scientology". This is of course religious discrimination, as well as documentation of the defamation of character covered in 2. above.

All of these actions, as well as the fraud itself, are in direct violation of the 1993 IRS/Church tax exemption agreement D. Certifications section C. "that no Scientology-related entity or Scientolology-related individual (in his or her capacity as such) has after 1986 knowingly committed any act of fraud or criminal conduct that might constitute a violation of public policy endangering the tax-exempt status of any Scientology-related entity."

Since there has been knowing acts of fraud and criminal conduct in regards to myself, as well as my husband, I am hereby reporting all of the above to the appropriate IRS officials, in charge of enforcing these rules.

To avoid a possible highly public lawsuit, I request the following:

  1. RTC/CST/OSA, etc need to draft a formal, binding agreement to not practice any "fair game" tactics on me, or my family or business.(fair game activities to be defined in said agreement) This would include any persons in the hire of any lawyer retained by the Church, as well as any surrogates or current members.
  2. Now that I know I was defrauded of approximately $220,067.50 during the course of my 9 years on OT VII, I want this money refunded to me within 15 days of receipt of my requests.
  3. Since I am no longer supporting the current Church, therefore I also demand a refund of my IAS membership fee, amount is $2000.00., refunded within 15 days of receipt of request.
  4. Request for refund from the IAS in the amount of $2000.00, requested by my husband in writing March 28, 2000, to be paid immediately.

Cashier's check or money order to be sent to:

Virginia McClaughry (Mike McClaughry for #4 above)
... (deleted)

Sincerely,

Virginia McClaughry

cc: Lisa Mcpherson Trust
cc: Dan Liepold, attorney at law
cc: IRS Assistant Commissioner Employee Plans and Exempt Organizations
cc: Exempt Organizations Area Manager, Pacific Coast
cc: Captain Fso
cc: President Fso
cc: LRH comm
cc: Osa Int Mike Rinder
cc: Ben Shaw
cc: RTC David Miscaviage
cc: Sandcastle Reg Hy Levy
cc: Ed Int
cc: President IAS
cc: Treasury IAS

---next answers

Ok, here is the COFSFSO's response-pretty entertaining :)

Flag letterhead

May 25,2000

My response

IAS letterhead

26 May 2000

June 9, 2000

next is raw data sp declare post

Sea Organization, 8 Jan, 2000
FLB ETHICS ORDER 866
ALL ORGS
ALL MISSIONS

--------next comes Greg and Debra's.

Issue reads:
Sea Organization, 3 February 2000 (yes that is their typo)
FLB ETHICS ORDER 867
ALL ORGS
ALL MISSIONS

Mine now.

Issue reads:

Sea Organization, 5 March, 2000
FLB ETHICS ORDER 878
ALL ORGS
ALL MISSIONS

Ok thats the raw data in fair use quote form.

Virginia McClaughry

-------sp comparison post

From my writeup of our story

At this point, the terminals stopped trying to prove to Virginia, with non-LRH references and incorrectly interpreted HCOP/Ls, that the six months check line was a standard line. "

Now let's see what an authorized RTC representative had to say when confronted with this data:

(from my story)

------What was that again Marina?? Let's look again, especially at this part..

Now, where was I, oh yes, truth versus fiction.

Note to OSA, you should tell RTC that was a bad idea, it actually made people realise that Flag was covering up the truth, bad move, really bad move. But good for me, as I have a lot of new friends now!

And, in case you missed it I WANT MY MONEY BACK.

So you know guys, OSA requires a lot of TR-3 you know, and this is the fastest way to reach them. I thought I would start using this public line as well as the private lines I am currently using.

I just noticed something that occurred in December 1998, with Marina, April Buchanan, and two unnamed ethics type personnel, that was not in the original writeup I did, but has been covered briefly in my refund letter to the Church.

I had a plane reservation made prior to arriving at Flag. The day came when it was time to leave, and after the truly unbelievable "handlings" I had at flag, with no application of the LRh bulletin in sight, I was set to leave. 

I came in the morning to meet with April to "work up an ethics program for me to do while I was at home". I was seated in a small office in ethics, with April on the side where the door is.

We spent the morning there, and as it was approaching the time that I needed to leave to make it to the airport, April said that I could not go, and said hold on a minute. As she opened the door, I noticed there were 2 male sea org uniformed personnel on either side of it, guarding it apparently. I did not know until then that I was being detained. April came back and said you can't leave, and I said I have no reason to be here, you are not following this bulletin and I am leaving. She then said can you wait a few minutes RTC is on her way. Marina bursts through the door and points her finger at me, and in her best "Admin TR's" voice says "You are not leaving". Now again, me, not being the quiet type, I started to stand and said "Oh, yes I am." 
Marina, her tr's slightly shaken (at such nerve I believe), says quite haughtily "Excuse me?", And I said with definite antagonism at this point, "You heard me.", and I started to leave. Marina blocked the door, and said again "You can't leave, this is not a good Flag product". I said "now that's for damn sure". Marina said, give me a chance to see if I can get Flag to correct this,so I was mildly curious at what that could possibly be, so I said I would wait for her to see what she could do.

I still was not allowed to leave this room, and was, guarded, until approximately an hour later.

I think this might be what as known, as illegal detention, held against your will, that sort of thing.

Especially where I was trying to leave to catch my plane and was stopped from doing so.

April also followed me EVERYWHERE the rest of that day, and into the next (except for at night), which I found amusing, in a macabre sort of way.

I think those of you lurking out there who are OT's, should know what is behind the 1.1 mask of "the friendliest place in the world", and this is one good example.

Ok, that's all for tonight, more to come.

Nite all,

Virginia

sp declare comparison continued post

Hi everyone, thought you might like this post I did to ARS

Virginia

Hi all you lurking scn'ists,

While the Magoo and Morrigan types provided some quasi-entertainment, I will be getting back to more interesting subjects.

But first some observations regarding Morrigan might be of note to some lurking here. (you know who you are). 1. She did not answer one question re: what she is doing to correct the alteration of LRH's technology, and 2. She goes into quite the BPC over my asking her these questions, with such off-topic responses as "you left your friends" "you didn't stand and fight", quite dramatic surely, but in the face of the subject I am currently discussing re: our SP Declares, exactly who left who?

Here is Morrigan throwing rocks on her computer at all who dare to stand and fight the criminality and violations of the creeds and codes of Scientology.

Hypocrisy is quite the in vogue modus operandi in the Church today, and if you or anyone on ARS think she is here without OSA knowing it, you don't know the current Church management at all.

OSA "doesn't" read this newsgroup, and pigs now fly.

Well, that about covers the subject of Morrigan, now onto more enlightening matters.

Let's carry on with the comparison of Mike's and my Declares.

"Mike began contacting Scientologists in the field, spreading Black PR about Flag and Lrh's technology of confessionals." By his actions Mike committed the following suppressive act:

"attempting to undermine or advising or condoning the abandonment or reduction of the use of the full technology of locating and handling overts, evil purposes, destructive intentions and nonsurvival considerations."

Let's go over Black PR

Definition 3. Admin Dictionary

"the activity called black propaganda consists of spreading lies by bidden sources. It inevitably results in injustices being done by those who operate without verifying the truth" 

Excerpted from confidential OSA Intelligence HAT

: "It is my intention that by the use of professional PR tactics any opposition be not only dulled but permanently eradicated... If there will be a long-term threat, you are to immediately evaluate and originate a black PR campaign to destroy the person's repute and to discredit them so thoroughly that they will be ostracized."

Hmmmm, Mike says that one of the things that Ben Shaw told Greg Barnes, is that we were considered a "long term threat", we all at the time were wondering what the heck does that mean?? Makes sense now doesn't it, someone decided that we were one. We would definitely be considered that by the actual SP's running the Church. Could it be that this Sp Declare, as well as the Black PR campaign, were done to destroy our reputes and discredit us so thoroughly that we would be ostracized?

Now who (or what) would want to do such a thing as mount a full scale Black PR campaign against us for trying to apply standard tech, and get others to do so as well?

I'll let you all answer that by your big selves.

Now remember, Black PR by definition is LIES. Read that again LIES.

So, now, one and all, is this HCOB a lie?

HCOB
C/s Series 73 RB

"b) Pre-OTs in the area between the beginning of New OT VI (Solo NOTS Auditing Course) and the completion of New OT VII (Solo NOTS) may not receive any other auditing, with the exception of those services allowed in the No-Interference Area (between the start of New OT I and the completion of OT III) for pre-OTs who are stalled or moving slowly."

"EXCEPTION

Pre-OTs progressing well in the No-Interference Area should not be interfered with by Sec Checking or anything else. However, when a pre-OT is stalled or moving slowly, any of the actions listed below, as appropriate, can be ordered by a qualified C/S...

  1. Non-audited PTS handlings
  2. Confessionals and O/Ws
  3. The handling of postulates, considerations, attitudes, evil purposes or evil intentions (False Purpose Rundown)
  4. Service Fac handling (bracket method only, no R3RA) 
  5. Disagreement Checks"

Or even the one that is actually by LRH, (not assisted by RTRC), is this a lie too?

"SECTION III: THOSE PERSONS COMPLETED ON OT III AND/OR COMPLETED ON ANY LEVEL ABOVE OT III:

A. CAN BE GIVEN, BETWEEN ANY OT LEVELS ABOVE OT III:

1. Auditing:

Any required PTS Handling that does not use Dianetics.
Prepared Lists, as applicable, with special instructions followed for handlings on Clears&OTs.
Purification Rundown.
Happiness Rundown
L10, L11, L12.
Confessionals.
The handling of postulates, considerations, attitudes, evil purposes or evil intentions.
False Purpose Rundown.
O/Ws.
Disagreement Checks.
Black PR handling.
Rudiments.
Method One Word Clearing."

(Note that it says above BETWEEN OT levels.

Or how about this one, is it a lie too?

HCOB 8 March 1982 Confessionals And The Non Interference Zone.

"CAUTION

A pre-OT who is running well and making case gain should not be interrupted"

Guess that about answers that question, these are not lies.

Ok, so what did Michael contact other scientologists about, and why?

He sent them the full report of which my "I am a SNCC Graduate this is my story" post was a part of.

Which of course is about the above references, none of which would be applied by Flag.

So, RTC was consulted, and refreshing our memory here, this is what RTC said about applying these references, from interview with Marina Pezzotti

"Marina says, well I'm not going to change the whole line. It's not going to hurt you to get a sec check. If there is nothing on the question it will F/N."
"Marina says it's not a technical point, it's a security point."

"Virginia then said, does he say anywhere in here that you can sec check for security purposes? Marina says no."

"Marina said ok, ok, but I'm still not changing the line."

"Marina says I'm not changing the whole line, but I might change it for you."

Ok ladies and gentleman, here's a question for you, if RTC, who is very specifically charged with Keeping Scientology Working, can say things like above, WHILE HAVING FULL KNOWLEDGE OF VIOLATING LRH's HCOB's in doing so, whose hat is it to ensure KSW is applied?

RTC is the top of the org board, now what?

KSW Series 1

" SCIENTOLOGY WILL KEEP WORKING ONLY AS LONG AS YOU (italics) DO YOUR PART TO KEEP IT WORKING BY APPLYING THIS POLICY LETTER."

"NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE IN SCIENTOLOGY, ON STAFF OR NOT, THIS POLICY LETTER HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH YOU."

So, now, whose hat is it to correct this ultimately?

That's right, you and me and everyone else in Scientology.

If you remember, the beginning of the Black PR campaign was by Barbara Nelson, Solo Nots D of P.

From my story

October 4, 1998

D of P Barbara Nelson writes a KR after the meeting on October 3, 1998.

She says that Virginia McClaughry and Greg and Debra Barnes disagree with sec checking mid-Solo NOTS. She says they were not at all interested at looking at other references on the value of sec checking.

Virginia and Greg and Debra find out about this KR later. They correct the false data and ask for a withdrawal and Barbara withdraws it. The correct data is that no one disagreed with sec checking, the statement was that HCOB C/S Series 73 was not being applied.

Also, no one ever said they were not interested in seeing other references on sec checking, on the contrary, Barbara was told that they did want to see the other references she was talking about."

The meeting with Marina mentioned above was in December.

After this meeting, a full scale Black PR campaign saying essentially what Barbara Nelson had said was begun. (I will post some of these docs soon)

Now as an aside, one could wonder if RTC and OSA decided we might be long-term threats AFTER Marina saw I wasn't going to budge on it.

Seems highly likely actually.

Ok so now we are faced with RTC who isn't what they said they are, and a Black PR campaign, what to do?

PR Series 18 How to handle Black Propaganda

"It is a long-to-find and hard-learned fact that people who engage in black propaganda have big bursting crimes to hide.

They do not have little (italics) crimes. They have BIG ones.

One's own ability to confront evil may be too low to really grasp the black propagandist's crimes or believe they exist.

Such people are often SANCTIMONIOUS hypocrites. They are usually arrogant and will not parley (have conferences with a foe). They appear so terribly sure they are RIGHT that it fairly shakes one's confidence that they could ever do anything wrong.

Thus the black propagandist is not detectable as such in many cases. The lordly institution, the lofty society, the glittering country are far, far above such a nasty psychotic trick as a studied, financed, expertly run campaign of vicious lies.

Thus they are believed, Or their servants believed. And their campaigns can be very (italics) effective.

..........And it makes it hard to get anything bad about them (italics) believed.

"But under all this are real (italics) crimes....."

"Believe that. For in the course of your counterattack you may despair of ever finding anything.

But you will find it."

"But there is no truth in the bad guys always cause their own downfall...."

"Therefore it is vital (italics) to handle the matter. One can't just hope it will all go away. It won't........."

"ONLY COUNTERATTACK HANDLES."

"One has to fill the vacuum of the counterpropagandist's evil deeds. As these are never exposed to view, there is a vacuum there."

And there you have it, Mike applied PR Series 18 in the face of a BLACK PR campaign, as well as KSW.

He mailed 10 ex go friends of his, and exposed the crimes he had found (letter to be posted shortly regarding initial crimes found), as well as the Scientology HIGH CRIMES found, and asked them to apply KSW as well. 

Not lies, as proven above, and not Black PR therefore.

Whew! I didn't know there would be this much just on one sentence of this SP Declare. Guess when a generality is there it hides a LOT of data, hmmm?

It's late, will do more tomorrow or so.

Nite,

Virginia

P.S. Notice in PR series 18 it does not exclude ANYONE, and that includes the Church, or other "scientologists". If someone runs a Black PR campaign on you, then they have crimes.

Which kinda puts the critics in a different light, doesn't it? (well, some of them anyway). Some of them are actually exposing some quite truthful crimes of the current Church Management.

So get your own ability to confront evil up guys, you don't want to be outdone by supposed "critics" do you?

No.

P.P.S You know, I had never even been anywhere on the internet that was critical of the Church until AFTER my comm ev, and the black pr campaign which it resulted from. I didn't even know there was such stuff!

And (critics you are going to love this), I went because that's what it says to do in PR Series 18 and I quote

"However, a black propagandist often has many (italics) other enemies. These have sometimes gathered data."

Since the Black Propagandist was My very own Church, where to apply this? Welcome to the world of critics and "SP's, and all their sites, data, as well as government and public records.

So there was scientology tech in use guys.

:)

So Alice in wonderland................ isn't it?

----------and lastly something that might interest you i posted.

Confront,

Want to know how LRH says to keep espionage from occurring? (the big reason RTC "does" sec checks). Clue: NO WHERE IN THIS REFERENCE DOES IT SAY SEC CHECKING IS THE TOOL TO USE.

from HCOPL 1 September 1969R Revised 24 September 1983
COUNTERESPIONAGE

section "ORG'S PROTECTION"

"Our Dianetics and Scientology orgs are fortunate in that where tech is "in" very little infiltration can occur since persons cannot benefit from things they try to harm.

Our primary protection is "in" tech and well processed staffs. It follows that when tech is out, ethics will be found out also."

So there you go, in tech and well processed staffs is the answer, something which RTC cannot seem to grasp.

As another investigatory point, now that I read this again after everything I now know, look what LRH says are signs of intelligence actions being done on the organization, and see if any of these look familiar to you.

"Intelligence actions internally in a company or organization take five main courses:

  1. Theft of documents or materials.
  2. Executive actions contrary to the company's best interests, if not out-right destructive.
  3. Administrative enturbulation, including messing up files, addresses, facilities or communications.
  4. False reports or false advices to customers or staff to bring about apathy or defeatism.
  5. Perversion or corruption of the product (in our case, technology)."

Hmmm, looks like we have at a minimum nbr 2, 3, 4, and 5, present in the current Church of Scientology. Especially 2 and 5. One is probably present as well, if we investigate for it.

What does LRH say the motive is for all this?

"Financial gain is the primary motive in almost all cases of infiltration."

Now who would be gaining financially off of this infiltration, it's certainly not the staff. Let's see, what about the special directors of CST, or David Miscaviage, Norman Starkey, Marty Rathbun, or Mike Rinder?

Somebody is getting the money, as that IS the primary motivation for the current infiltration of the Church, per LRH.

Let's investigate that some more, shall we?

How about a "noisy" investigation into where the money is going?

Virginia

ok, there you have it!

You can arrange it or edit if needed, for your page, as long as the content is not majorly altered. :)

Love,
Virginia

From: Virginia McClaughry <vmcc@icehouse.net
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Date: Friday, July 28, 2000 11:06 PM
Subject: NEWS.....NEWS....NEWS...

In Federal Court, Spokane, Washington, a suit was filed on July 25, 2000.

Mike McClaughry VS David Morse and Associates: religious discrimination

Mike was "asked to leave" his 3 year job, due to "being declared".

This is America, and firing someone because of their standing with a Church, is not quite in fitting with the Constitution.

Virginia

Documents to be posted as they are filed.

Anyone who has newspaper/media connections feel free to inform them of the above. :) 

NavUp