Category Archives: policy

Clear and Beyond

The lower level scientology program up to the state of Clear is a directed form of client-centered psychotherapy.  One doctor fully trained in both client-centered therapy and scientology has astutely written that ‘directed client-centered therapy’ is an apparent oxymoron.  That may in fact be a critical entry point for the bipolar quality that seems embedded throughout scientology.  Nonetheless, the description of the end product of the scientology lower levels is nearly identical to that described as the self-actualization end product of client-centered therapy.

When a person reaches the Clear state – resembling common notions of self-actualization – he is indoctrinated into the secrets of the universe.  Fully grasping those secrets requires the adoption of a form of multiple personality disorder.  Incidentally, and not the impetus for this observation, modern mental health recognizes that certain psychotherapeutic practices can serve as a causation factor for mpd. Scientology secrets inform the individual that in fact he is not an individual at all.  Instead he is a ‘composite being’, consisting of a potential infinity of separate, distinct individuals.   Each individual member of the composite has quadrillions of years of its own experiential history that it brings to the dizzy equation.   Extraordinary, and expensive to the seeker, measures are employed to ensure the scientologist believes this universe view with utter certitude. For several tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars the advanced scientologist is invited to address and release each of his or her parasite personalities.  The process entails hundreds or thousands of individual sessions.  The process takes many years.  The individual completes this penultimate scientology advanced level when there are apparently no more personalities left but his own.

The scientologist then pays another ten to twenty thousand dollars for the privilege of determining which of the lifetimes of those now allegedly departed parasite personalities he mistook for his own.  That is what L. Ron Hubbard left behind as his legacy.

However, after completing that final scientology level himself Hubbard went back to chasing down more of what he apparently found to be an endless hoard of demonic, parasitic personalities that he continued to harbor.  Frustrated, he attempted to finally rid himself of the demons in one fell swoop and kill himself in the bargain through the application of electric shock.  He dismally failed in the assisted attempt on his own life.  Whether or not that attempt was the cause, at about the same time as his suicide mission Hubbard sustained a debilitating stroke.  He was reduced to asking others whether they could hunt down his own parasitic demons personalities for him. (see Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior)

Since Hubbard’s 1986 death scientology authorities have taken to having advanced members who have completed the full scientology program but who are still unsatisfied re-do the entire scientology program from the bottom up.  The believer is given to understand that the source of his dissatisfaction is some misapplication of scientology along the way.

For the dedicated member of this monotheistic religion that repeatedly promotes that when in doubt one should ‘do as Ron (L. Ron Hubbard) would do’, there should be little surprise that often one does not experience a happy ending.

Awakening – Part III

 

references:

Awakening from scientology

Awakening – Part II

By now, some Scientologists might have suspected that I am setting the stage to redirect them from following L. Ron Hubbard to following David R. Hawkins.  In fact, while my third recommended reading assignment is Hawkins’ Power vs. Force, I would suggest to people at the outset not to latch onto Hawkins as they once latched onto Hubbard.

While Hawkins simply and eloquently describes states of consciousness above and beyond those contemplated in scientology (i.e. non-duality) a study of his arc of evolution finds him paralleling Hubbard in certain limiting senses.  Both found workability in utilizing simple true/false detectors of energy connected with thought.  Hubbard’s of course was the e-meter.  Hawkins’ was the use of applied kinesiology.  Both chartered and described the realms of higher states of awareness and consciousness discoverable by disciplined utilization of those thought-energy tools.  On the other hand, both became so enamored with the efficacy of their tools that they lost the plot.  First, by buying into the infallibility of their chosen mechanics, they in some ways dragged spirit/life down to the mechanics they used to explore it.  Second,  by overvaluing the adoration that the workability of their paths engendered, they succumbed to the seduction of guru status and the debilitating judgmentalism such positions breed.  In a word, both ultimately eschewed the aforementioned lesson of the Tao that permitted them to discover what made them so popular in the first place.  Power vs. Force is a very good read because it betrays little of those ultimate Hawkins failings – aside from the absolutist terms with which he promotes kinesiology.

A signal, critical difference between Hubbard and Hawkins is that the former attempted to force the world to accept his ideas and created a slave cult to accomplish that.  Hubbard sought to command whereas Hawkins sought to teach.

Hawkins is recommended  as a good first exercise in comparing scientology to data of comparable magnitude.  You are likely to see independent validations of some core scientology principles and practices.  You are also liable to begin to see the limitations of one’s scientology-controlled thinking.  Power vs. Force can at once reinforce what of value one may have gotten from his scientology experience while piquing interest in other potential horizons beyond it.  The latter are written about in a modern, mysticism-free manner in Power vs Force.

Another important distinction between Hubbard and Hawkins that makes study of the latter worthwhile for the scientologist is that Hawkins recognized – as does the traditional eastern wisdom I repeatedly suggest people devote some study to – the crippling effects of clinging to personal identity; ego.  Power vs. Force also recognizes the value of graduating from constructs, as summarized here:

In overview, we can see that from time immemorial, man has tried to make sense of the enormous complexity and frequent unpredictability of human behavior.  A multitude of systems has been constructed to try to make that which is incomprehensible comprehensible.  To ‘make sense’ has ordinarily meant to be definable in terms that are linear – logical and rational.  But the process, and therefore the experience, of life itself, is organic – that is to say, nonlinear by definition.  This is the source of man’s inescapable intellectual frustration.

It is a lesson lost by many who have attempted to bottle and market the magical animation agent called ‘life.’   The most famous warning about that trap was summed up in one now-famous saying by Hubbard’s perhaps most important influence, General Semantics founder Alfred Korzybski, ‘the map is not the territory.’   Eastern wisdom has been communicating that in various ways for millennia.  More recently, advanced theoretical physics is validating it as demonstrable.  It is my observation that Scientology, applied exclusively as it requires itself to be applied, not only confuses the map for the territory, it has a tendency to convert the territory into the map in the follower’s mind.

In this book I am sharing my own journey toward recognition of the difference between map and territory and how I believe that that recognition can lead to broader spiritual horizons.  I am fully cognizant of the fact that there are many people who are more intelligent or more spiritually attuned than me.  What I see that I have to contribute to the mix is not necessarily wisdom or enlightenment, but instead the willingness to explore and communicate what a lot of Scientologists and former Scientologists have intuited but haven’t been willing or able to follow through with overtly.  Therefore, it is quite likely that at various points along the line you might find my assistance has served its purpose and lose interest in continuing to follow this particular trail of exploration.  It is after all only a map thus has served its purpose once someone is out of the ditch and heading in the direction he wants to go.

I think it is possible that by simply reading and contemplating the three recommendations that I have made in this introduction any individual is capable of graduating from Scientology in a positive sense.  That is, recognizing its map/construct nature, what one attained from it, and where one might turn to expand on whatever level of consciousness or awareness he or she got from it.  It might also occur at any given later juncture along the away.  The sooner one finds that point of departure – hopefully with a fresh, curious outlook – the better as far as I am concerned.

Awakening from scientology

I have been administering a course in graduating from scientology for the past couple months.  While doing so, I have been writing and sharing with students the chapters of an in progress book on the subject.  I recently added an introduction to the course/book as I recognized it required a further undercut.  I am publishing that introduction in three parts here as it might serve to spark productive thought and discussion.

A course in graduating from scientology

Introduction – Part I

One of the most difficult traps that scientology creates for minds is that of creating an arrogant sense of certainty in the member.  It is ultimately the ceiling that keeps people beholden to scientology, afraid to explore outside of it, and thus serves to entrap them within its own limitations.  What makes it so binding for scientologists is that they are taught that such an attitude has that effect at the outset of their studies. That is, the first barrier to learning is the student thinking he already knows it.  Scientologists apparently never think that the datum might apply once they had learned all there was to know about the subject that taught them that very datum.  That type of tricky dichotomy is peppered throughout the subject.  It is one thing that makes reasoning, discussion or debate on scientology so confounding.  A scientologist is only permitted to view the subject within the parameters of its own nomenclature, constructs and logic. He must never permit the thought to enter his own mind, ‘is there more to life than I have been instructed?’

As we shall see as we progress, scientology is finite.  It consists of the words of one man who wrote and lectured on the subject between the years 1950 and 1986.  By firm policy scientology enforces the notion that those thirty-six years of observations by one man are all that need be known on the mind and spirit and a host of other subjects.  It even instills the idea that to think or explore outside of the box of Hubbard words is dangerous.  In the book Power vs. Force David R. Hawkins succinctly described how such mental mechanics generally obtain:

The truth of each level of consciousness is self-verifying in that each level has its native range of perception, which confirms what’s already believed to be true.  Thus, everyone feels justified in the viewpoints that underlie his actions and beliefs. 

Presumably, the reader has to some degree shaken the scientology tenet that if it isn’t written or spoken by L. Ron Hubbard it is not true nor worth knowing. Otherwise, why would you even pick up a book entitled Graduating from scientology?  Nonetheless, in my experience the notion of fully self-contained infallibility is so heavily implanted with scientologists that it tends to come off in stages or layers.  It is common for scientologists, and even former scientologists, to continue to weigh any new data they encounter on the mind and spirit against a hidden standard, ‘how does it measure up against what scientology holds?’  Measuring up is not the problem.  Our course of exploration is all about comparing and contextualizing scientology indoctrinations.  It is a virtual exercise in Hubbard’s Logic 8: a datum can be evaluated only by a datum of comparable magnitude.  The problem arises when your mind is trained to work on an automatic default (read thought stopping) where any data, no matter how vital and workable, is discredited and discarded to the degree it does not agree with one’s scientology indoctrination.  Scientologists come to know about scientology and in the process are convinced that they know all there is to know.

That is a perfectly normal state of affairs for a monotheistic religious belief system.  For those seeking the comfort and security that type of system lends to adherents, you would be well advised to drop this book right about now.  This course of exploration is for those who never signed up for such when they embarked on scientology study.  This exploration is for those who got involved in scientology from the beginning as part of a search for truth, wisdom, and enlightenment.

Overcoming Scientology Instilled Ignorance

Attempting to remedy Scientology instilled ignorance is a hazardous venture.  It can result in losing your job and having your family and friends harassed into abandoning you, and worse.  The resistance to truth can be so intense that in most cases the proponent of light is reduced to adopting the Scientology constructs of opponents, enemies, battle, and war.  Before long the seeker of truth becomes a mere ‘attacker’, over time becoming more and more like that which is attacking him and which seemingly by necessity he must attack in order to survive.

Scientologists – even many independent ones – have a habit of collapsing the ideas of  a) exposing corruption and lies to the light with b) attacking.  There is a reason for this.  Scientologists have been indoctrinated with the false idea that a=b when it comes to Scientology.  That then justifies the application of Hubbard’s hundreds of pages of war-upon-‘attackers’ technology.  Debate, even discussion, becomes impossible.  Scientologists are taught that argument is best performed by destroying the messenger of the idea (or truth) they oppose.  That is the ‘dead agent caper’ technology where the Scientologist becomes a one trick pony performing only ‘gotcha’ – that is, falsus in unum falsus in omnibus becomes the end all.  When ‘successful’ it justifies and perpetuates all  manner of falsehood and rotten corruption and abuse.

Part of overcoming the implantation of these falsehoods and the vow to fight to the death to protect the most astounding abuses is some honest contemplation of why such indoctrination is so intense and effective in Scientology.  Why was such false indoctrination introduced in the first place?  Why does it intensify over time, and intensify exponentially in the face of the most truthful, cathartic whistleblowing?  I think such contemplation will lead you to some answers you may at first find uncomfortable but ultimately will find liberating.

To those shining the light upon Scientology abuses, you may find you have better perspective, more equanimity and even credibility if you understand these Scientology games and take care not to fall prey to them.

“Ignorance does not yield to attack, but it dissipates in the light, and nothing dissolves dishonesty faster than the simple act of revealing the truth.” – David R. Hawkins

“Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.”   –  Louis Brandeis

 

Scientology Black Bag Roster

Mike Rinder posted an informative piece today called The Black Bag Department.  In it he exposes the identity of some key Scientology ‘professional’ operatives used to terrorize and intimidate perceived enemies as well as some of their tactics.  Mike’s article reminded me of a couple other important names that need to be added to the roster.

For many years in the Washington D.C. area Scientology’s go-to gumshoe has been Harry Gossett.   Gossett, like Ingram, has apparently been fond of the Scientology bonuses available when he impersonates an agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, see link.

Another important operative historically has been John J. (aka J.J.) Gaw of Moreno Valley, California.  Gaw was responsible for the original electronic and physical surveillance set up on Pat Broeker in the late eighties and early nineties. Mr. Gaw also handled the sensitive assignment of investigating the personal lives of IRS agents, flanking the quest to attain tax exemption for Scientology.

An even more important, as yet unnamed, Scientology espionage operative is Doug Jacobsen.  During the eighties and nineties Jacobsen was one of only five former Guardians Office intelligence staff who survived the ‘GO disband’ and who remained trusted enough to run black bag jobs against perceived enemies. Jacobsen left staff in the late nineties, but is reportedly an active OSA agent in the field.  A couple years ago Jacobsen attempted to infiltrate the fledgling independent movement while operating a limo service specializing in catering to out of town Celebrity Center public.

 

 

 

 

Scientology’s Code of Honor

I haven’t done any editorializing or analysis of the series of recent posts on the aims of Scientology (Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, OSA Statistics).  I have simply posted the words of L. Ron Hubbard directing his Scientology troops at various times towards what he considered vital objectives.  More books could be written on the hundreds of lives that were ruined (both targets and executors of the objectives) by execution of those directives – and the many more like them that were issued over the years.   Most of the commentary on those posts has gravitated toward two poles.  At one pole is denial, strained justification.  At the other pole is condemnation, wholesale and definitive.  What few have assayed to do is explain the behavior of those who adopted and carried out these aims.  Those people who really believed the future of humanity was won or lost on whether those directives were thoroughly complied to. I have some views to share on that score which are derived from subjective experience and objective observation.

If you want to change out rotting upholstery you need to get down to the brass tacks. One piece of fundamental ‘scripture’ that most Scientologists – corporate, independent and otherwise – tend to agree upon wholeheartedly is L. Ron Hubbard’s ‘Code of Honor.’   It is so popular amongst them that it could be said to in some ways serve to define ‘Scientologist.’   There is no doubt that the Code contains some sensible and lofty principles that could serve someone well at certain life crossroads.  Just as certainly, there are aspects of the code that could serve to suggest destructive, even sociopathic, behavior.

“2. Never withdraw allegiance once granted.”

I watched a documentary on Jonestown wherein the son of Jim Jones reflected on the single most powerful factor that led 900 people to follow his father’s directions to commit suicide – including some murdering their own children and authorities investigating the group.  After decades of therapy and soul searching he concluded that the common denominator of this mass insanity was an overriding concern on the part of each individual, ‘what would the rest of the group think of me if I withdrew allegiance now?’  That rang consistent with the Scientology experience to me.  It was the very moral question I grappled with for four years before deciding to expose the Jim Jones like behavior of David Miscavige at the international headquarters of Scientology.

I have investigated and studied organized crimes in several forms.  One common means to organize crime – from street gangs to white collar – is to establish the agreement early on to ‘never withdraw allegiance once granted.’  Usually, initially the vow is taken because the group somehow serves to protect the individual taking the vow or serves to give the individual a sense of belonging and empowerment. Over time, the crimes of the group and any member of the group become the crimes of each individual member to justify, glorify, and protect from outside exposure and accountability.  Ironically, but not surprisingly, throughout the history of Scientology that very cycle has repeatedly played itself out as it continues to today.

If folks feel the ‘Code of Honor’ is something too valuable to eschew wholesale, I think it would behoove them to replace item 2 with something along these lines:

“Only maintain allegiance as long as the recipient of it demonstrably remains true to those purposes and principles to which allegiance was granted in the first place.”

“12. Never fear to hurt another in a just cause.”

By Scientology’s own ‘technology’ nobody is ever hurt by another without just cause.  A being automatically manufactures just cause when he harms, or fixes to harm, another being.  If one credits Scientology ‘technology’ as infallible, as Scientology demands it be credited, then item 12 of the code encourages Scientologists to park their consciences at the thresholds of the homes they terrorize in the name of Scientology.

On death row of any prison you will find just about every cold-hearted murderer absolutely certain that the acts for which he was convicted and sentenced fit squarely within the advice of item 12 of the Code of Honor.

To fear to hurt another is not weakness, it is not unethical, it is not immoral. When that fear is real and consulted – most particularly when one feels he is carrying out a just cause – it has another name.  It is called conscience.   And so I see item 12 of L. Ron Hubbard’s Code of Honor as tantamount to an invitation to abandon or forfeit one’s conscience.

Again, to those wishing to continue following this code, they might be well served by replacing item 12 with something like this:

“Always give due consideration for the rights and well-being of another before doing something that might hurt that person, most particularly when you or another have pre-justified the act as being in pursuit of a just cause.”

ENEMIES OF SCIENTOLOGY DEPOPULARIZED TO THE POINT OF TOTAL OBLITERATION

Attached is a 2006 publication of the church of Scientology International.  It details the statistics of the Invest (Investigations) Bureau (the espionage and intelligence branch of Scientology’s dirty tricks and propaganda arm, Office of Special Affairs).   It carefully measures Scientology Inc’s accomplishment of the aims of Scientology as explored recently in several posts. The quality of the lives of the dozens of staff of OSA Invest are determined by whether these statistics are uptrending week to week or whether they are downtrending.  If the statistics are uptrending the staff member is not punished and is sometimes rewarded. If the statistics go downward, the staff members responsible can lose pay, lose eating or sleeping privileges, and be made to perform hard manual labor (in addition to a full work schedule) in order to make good with the group.  All of these statistics are carefully designed to add up to the ‘valuable final products’ of the Investigations Bureau, one of which is: ENEMIES OF SCIENTOLOGY DEPOPULARIZED TO THE POINT OF TOTAL OBLITERATION.

Note well that one of  the first Hubbard references that these statistics are based upon per the publication itself is ADVICE 27 Mar 1972 COUNTER ATTACKS TACTICS.  We have explored the implications of that publication before, e.g. ‘Standing one’s ground’,  and no doubt will do so again in the future.  It explicitly states that when you cannot shut up a whistleblower by costing him or her their job you then effectively attack that which he or she most values (in most cases, that means spouses, children and other family members of the target).  If there was any doubt that it is currently enforced, you see it here prominently highlighted in modern OSA context.

Investigations Statistics Issue

The Aims of Scientology: Part 4

references:

Aims of Scientology: Part One

Aims of Scientology: Part Two

Aims of Scientology: Part Three

How to obtain ‘humanitarian control’ by L. Ron Hubbard:

“All of a sudden somebody is jumping all over us in “Wango-bingo” and all itwould take would be a quiet phone call. That’s one way to keep order. That is an intelligence method of handling things. It’s not blackmail, because blackmail is demanding money and that has nothing to do with it. “You jump on us, you’re dead” — that type of material.

It follows this way: We start to expand an area and we instantly and immediately want protective information in that area. We may be able to coordinate who causes the unrest of the world against the channels that they would have in that area. And that tells us the most favorable protective information.

That is the formula. And the more we study the general scene, the more we can coordinate, how do these birds do it? And then we will find what lines they use and get protective information on the lines they use.

So, Mr. Big decides to knock us flat in Bongville. All of a sudden it cools by the simple reason that we already know that the head of the public health service at Bongville has three wives. What you normally do is leak it to him. Somebody goes out and has dinner with his daughter as a perfect stranger and says “You know, I would be awfully careful of jumping on those Scientologists in Bongville if I were you. You know somebody ought to tell your Daddy that there’s some wild rumor—of course, we don’t know what the truth of it is—that actually you have three mothers. And they know that over there.”

Our general world study tells us what we look into to find protective information.

If we keep this up it will eventually lead us straight to the top which will give us humanitarian control.

     Information is the keynote.”

(emphasis added)

- L. Ron Hubbard 1 July 1968, Information and Control

Full Scientology Office of Special Affairs Issue, Information and Control

The Aims of Scientology: Part 3

References:

The Aims of Scientology Part 1

The Aims of Scientology Part 2

“SITUATION: Governments hold onto and nurse psychiatry and the mental health movement. Vital tech of Scientology not used by governments yet.
DATA: Psychs can’t deliver yet governments hold on. Psychs just PR without delivery. Government still retains them.
ADMIN WHY: We have not PRed governments properly to make them offload psychs and onload Scientology.
ETHICS WHY: Governments not evaluating and accepting false reports.
IDEAL SCENE: Scientology has replaced psychs in all government zones.”

L. Ron Hubbard – Occupy Territory Eval (now Office of Special Affairs policy)

click here for The full OCCUPY TERRITORY EVAL

Scientology Infiltrates Carnegie Mellon University

The following is a report from Invest Aide OSA INT (Office of Special Affairs International, the propaganda and dirty tricks arm of David Miscavige’s church of Scientology International) on dealing with Scientology critic David S. Touretzky – professor at Carnegie Mellon University.  Note that it is titled “DR”.  That stands for Daily Report.  There are dozens of these daily reports in OSA INT files on Touretzky.  There are hundreds of such reports on more effective critics.  There are thousands of these types of reports on those critics whom David Miscavige considers a threat to himself personally and who have withstood Scientology’s wrath over time.   Ask yourself: should United States taxpayers be subsidizing an organization that spends its considerable dollars on such hijinks?   And, what is with Scientology’s apparent predilection for inserting sex toys into their operations?

April 27, 2006

D/CO EXT OSA INT

CC: CO OSA INT

INVEST CHIEF OSA INT

DR – David Touretzky – 27 April

Dear Sir,

This is an update on Touretzky.

Feedback on Touretzky: Greenway claimed that the producer of the MSNBC show Touretzky was on a last week was impressed with Touretzky’s performance and wants to use him for any future shows on Scientology. Greenway said that she wants Touretzky to become the “voice of the critics” and not Lerma or Tory (she hates both of them). Greenway that the Church never leaves Touretzky alone.  She said that she never asked him about the dildo which some CMU students put up on a website. She thinks the Church made up the dildo invoice and sent it to Schwarz.

Greenway was told that it really looks like some disgruntled CMU student who has a bone to pick with Touretzky put up the website (a site by a “student” critical of DST).  Greenway insisted that it is done by the Church (Greenway is upset about the CMU students’ website and the dildo’s exposure). Greenway talked about how the Church has gotten numerous letters sent to CMU about Touretzky including one from Hillary Clinton asking that he be fired, but CMU still stands behind him because they don’t care what he does on his free time. (This is a falsehood as he does not perform all of his anti-Scientology activities during his free time and we have documented evidence showing that he is doing it from CMU).

Greenway said that every time Touretzky does something against the Church he sends the legal department at CMU a packet of information concerning his activities so that they are briefed when the Church contacts them about this.

Following are updates on the handling steps previously laid out:

1.           Get the NY PI to relay the article on Cohon and get the feedback from his media contacts about getting it printed.

The NY PI spoke with his contacts at UPI and AP. They have received the proposed article and said that they are going to research and then submit it to their editors. The PI reminded both of his contacts that Touretzky is [ deletion of salacious - quite apparently false - accusation], and then we are going to have another Columbine because of him. The contacts agreed and said they will get back to the PI about the story.

2.           The alumni to complete going through the records and find alumni they can trust to brief and activate on DST.

Another Scientologist alumnus was found. His name is Christopher Rath. He will be contacted and activated.

3.           Debug done on getting a resource on the chat room.

This prediction line has been debugged. We now have a person that is on IRC and he has set up a totally secure connection and the line is operational to log the chat sessions.  DST is still active on this chat daily.

4.           FOIA request project written and started with at least 2 FOIA requests filed.

Seven FOIA requests were filed with the NSF on people that are connected to Touretzky as they either worked with Touretzky in the past or are currently. The people are: Walter Schneider, Tai Sing Lee (CMU Computer Science Dept.), James McClelland (Psychology Dept & CNBC Director), Julie Fiez (Pitt Psych Dept), William Skaggs (Pitt Neuro Science Dept), Daniel Simons and G. Bard Emerntrout.

5.           Get out the new requests to NSF on the “desk audit” CMU did at NSF’s request on Touretzky’s grants and get out the new request for data on Scientology. (This is a follow up on a cycle that had been dropped earlier).

The new request was drafted and was sent to [deletion - attorney information] for ok. [deletion - attorney information] Two went out from the Church and the third one will go from a private individual.

6.        Get Freedom the rest of the briefing materials on Touretzky that is needed for them to put an article together about DST/CMU.

The materials were put provided to Tom Whittle who is researching and drafting an article on Touretzky and CMU.

7.        Get current students and parents of current CMU students located for the purpose of getting these parents briefed on Touretzky and willing to take actions.

No current CMU students or parents of CMU students have been found so far. The PI in Pittsburgh is checking with various contacts and comm lines he has to locate them. The PI has closed and started a resource who is a student at CMU who is doing a special training on computer systems at CMU. The resource is 43 years old and he will be used to befriend Touretzky, and find names of current CMU students who can then be surveyed to get their parents contacted and stirred up.

8.            Offensive postings continued.

BS continued to push her message about Jared Cohon condoning Touretzky.

9.            John Fisher (alumnus) meeting at CMU.

On Saturday alumnus John Fisher’s, was further briefed and prepped for his meeting this week with two CMU faculty members (Fisher was called to CMU to assist in so matters related to the university). Fisher was given a briefing pack about Touretzky and he would take up Touretzky’s actions with these faculty members and get them to agree to take action. John Fisher will be back in LA on Thursday morning and we will then get his debrief and work out the next action.

This is ok.

Ml,

Frits