Copyright 1997

All commercial rights are reserved to the author, who currently
wishes to remain anonymous and therefore is writing under the
pen name of "The Pilot".  Individuals may freely copy these files
on the internet for their own use and they may be made available
on any web server who does not charge for them and who does not
alter their contents.


Feb 12, 1997

Whether or not anybody within organized Scientology is willing
to listen, it is still only fair for me to propose a plan for
straightening out the subject.

Here I will limit myself to short term practical improvments
which could be implemented now.  This does not right every wrong
or fix every problem, but it is, I believe, a good starting point
which gives hope for the future.

First a few points of theory, following which I will list the
points to be improved.


One of the irksome things about the current Scientology orgs
is that Ron did not carry very much of the auditing tech or the 
basics discovered in Scientology into the 3rd dynamic (1st dynamic
is self, 2nd is family, 3rd is groups, etc).

Modern org policy mainly consists of practical business techniques,
things that Ron learned in the Navy, and stuff dredged up out of whole 
track organizations plus a smattering of scales and some attempts to 
improve communication.  That's all well and good, but where is the 
real tech and the high powered insights?

Let's see if we can really apply a few of the things we learned
about the 1st dynamic to the 3rd.

In the area of problems, we know that the PC (preclear) is usually 
burried under the weight of old solutions that he's still holding in
place and which generate tons of new problems for him (which
then must be solved in turn, etc.).  We handle this by undoing
solutions and taking apart the opposing forces that are locked
together in the problems rather than by layering more solutions
on top of the mess.

Ron once described policy as a series of workable solutions to
organizational problems.  So we should be working to take apart these
problems and undoing the solutions rather than building upon them.

This means "the less operating policy, the better".  I put it in
terms of operating policy because we also have useful knowledge
and ideas presented in the form of policy, and of that we want
more rather than less.  The target would be to have less rules
and more understanding.

Now situations do exist that have to be handled, and we do need
to use policies and orders to cool down the confusions and hold
the problems in check.  That is our first action.  But we can't
just drop it at that point because that will encourage a new
generation of problems.  Instead, we add a second step, which
is to go back and see if we can't find some way to undo the
source of the trouble and discard the policy.  Or at least
shift over to a more basic solution instead of handling a
surface manifestation.

And then we go a step further and review the policies we did
keep and reduce them to the absolute minimum.  And at the same
time, we find out as much as we can and publish key data so
that we can operate from greater understanding.

In the area of communication, we know that communication is the
universal solvent and that when the PC starts withholding and
blocking communication, its going to accumulate mass and back
up on him and kick him in the teeth.  It doesn't mean that the
PC has to blab all of his withholds to every passerby, but he
can't be actively hiding everything or he's going to sink 
under the weight of it all.  This indicates that things like 
confidentiality and hiding stuff for PR reasons are dangerous
to the health of an organization.

If you think about the average PR personality, it should be
obvious that their communication, although high in quantity,
is generally poor in content and somewhat undesirable.  This
is actually a very poor level of communication and these
salesman types are generally looked down upon with a bit of
distaste.  The truth of the matter is that the communication 
isn't real and the affinity is kind of false and people notice 
that.  It's out ARC (Affinity, Reality, and Communication).

A person can communicate a lot and they can promote things with
true ARC instead of this false PR crap.  The same is true of
organizations.  You do need to promote and advertise and 
put out lots of communications.  But if you get totaly PR
oriented, people smell a rat.  They are much happier learning
that you are working actively to fix things that are wrong
rather than hiding them.

But in terms of grades 0 (communications) and 1 (problems),
the orgs are only slightly screwed up and perhaps better off
that the average in the society.

Its grades 2 (overts), 3 (ARCXs), and 4 (service facsimilies - 
makeing yourself right) which are grossly out in the orgs.

At first glance, grade 2 looks hopeless.  The org almost never
admits to mistakes, makes amends, or even imagins that it has
done something bad.  It is all extremely well justified.

But you could help a PC with a case like this.  Let's say that
you've got someone who's made lots of mistakes, gotten things
screwed up, and turned into a bit of a con artist.  And
furthermore, there are angry people hunting him down looking
for blood.  How would you get grade 2 in on him?  It seems
like there is just too much and its too dangerous and 
overwelming.  But it could be done on a gradient.  You'd
find out what small thing he could confront taking responsibility
for and start with that and gradually build up until his lines
were clean again.

You can't just cave in to somebody who's looking for vengance,
because they're out for blood and can no longer deal with
you on a rational basis.  But most people are not fixated on
vengance and will cut you some slack if you make an honest
effort to reform.  So you attempt to deal on a reasonable basis,
admit the mistakes and find out what you can do to remedy the
situation.  You watch out for the occasional guy who'se too
viscious to come to a resonable settlement, but you don't
assume that everybody is like that.

So what kind of actions might start an org on the road to 
recovery?  What gradient of responsibility could be confronted
to start with?

A complaint department might help.  Big stores have these and
it doesn't cave them in to let people bitch about things and
exchange a few defective toasters or whatever.  It acts as
a bit of a safety valve and maintains good customer relations.

The org already has a post which almost does this.  It is the
chaplin, and sometimes a good chaplin will actively work to
right wrongs, but they do not have a lot of authority and are
quite constrained by the existing tech and policy.  This 
could be beefed up.  They could be given full authority to
override policy in individual cases.  They could actively
strive to clean things up.  They could even be advertised as
a complaint department.  

You would have to make it safe for people to complain to them.
They probably need a special dispensation to keep things told
to them in confidence from the rest of the org as priviledged 
communications, much like a priest or lawyer would protect
his client's withholds.  These chaplins would have to be 
highly trained as auditors and highly trained on policy as
well (the same is needed for ethics officers).

Many things could be done to compensate for mishandling.  
Best might be to give someone an academy training level because
that will raise the recipients understanding and responsibility
whereas a free intensive of auditing can sometimes encourage
the person to take less responsibility and make the org 
responsible for his case and abberations.

Appologies and admission of error can also help a lot.  The
chaplin could even write letters of appology on the org's
behalf to non-Scientologists in cases where they have been
harmed by things such as wrongful disconnection etc.

But this also needs to be carried up to a higher level.  There
should be a senior chaplin at the international level who has
the power to get policy changed when necessary and who keeps
an eye on the whole subject.  His job would be to really
make Scientology into a safe environment.

At one time Scientology was banned in Victoria, Australia.
Eventually the org bit the bullet and cancelled the fair
game law, sec checks, and disconnection.  As a result the
ban was lifted.  Even though these things have gradually
crept back in, the cancellations let in a breath of fresh
air and were of great benefit.  From that perspective the
ban served a useful purpose, but it would have been better
if the org had confronted what it was doing and cancelled
these without the need for heavy outside pressure.

Once the org began to take some responsibility it would become
easier for it to take some more and begin to tackel some of 
the bigger out points.  If they could bend just a little
and admit some mistakes and make good on them without the
roof falling in, then it will be easier for them to confront
the bigger sore spots and handle them.

Next in the lineup is grade 3 which deals with ARCXs.  Here
we have some extreme ones between the org and the freezone,
the org and the middle class, the org and the psychs, and
the org and "wog" society.  The very usage of the term "wog"
in Scientology is symptomatic of the deep ARCX and its use is
also a mechanism that further encourages the ARCX.

There are a number of factors underlying this.  One problem is,
of course, the various witholds.  Members who believe in the
subject don't want to admit to the more brutal or unreasonable
actions that sometimes take place.  At the same time, they
feel that they will be attacked or ridiculed for their beliefs.

Furthermore, Ron encouraged fighting psychs and squirrels etc.

And then there are the basic disagreements as to social values.
Those lead to breaks in reality.  The Scientologist is generally
trying to look at things from a multi-lifetime view and it
comes in conflict with middle class values.  This doesn't
mean that the middle class is suppressive.  They are a productive
and stable backbone to the country.

Instead of attacking, you find what goals you have in common and
promote those.  And you work to increase communication and
understanding between the two sides.

It is actually a bit of a mistake to primarily push Dianetics
instead of presenting Scientology to the society.  The culture
has grown a lot since the 1950s and there is a great deal of
acceptance of metaphysical concepts.  And the average Scientologist
has much more of a metaphysical rather than a psychological slant
on things.  A bit more promotion on past lives and operating
with the viewpoint of an immortal spirit instead of as a body
would make the Scientologists much more comprehensibile to the
public at large.

And again, I would beef up the chaplin to handle these things.
What is really needed is a chaplin's office of comparable size
and power to the ethics office.  This would act as a balancing
influence.  A large org would need both a public chaplin and
a staff chaplin, because there are screw ups and wrongs that
need to be righted in both areas.

As to service facsimilies, it should be obvious that the tech
itself is currently used by the org to make itself right.
This is why the tech has to be considered perfect and defended
against all doubts or criticism.  Delivering the tech and
freeing mankind justifies all possible overts.

Let's stop worshipping the tech and start learning to think with
it.  Let's realized that its flawed and admit the imperfections
and then promote it anyway because its the best we've got.

A service fac wouldn't blow that easily, but we can make a start.

At the highest level, we would also need a powerful chaplin's
division in OSA whose duty is to make peace rather than war.
If you have an army, you must also have a diplomatic corps.



The org board is rumored to have come from Ron's recollection
of an anchient galactic civilization.  If so, then I would point
out that that civilization is now dust.

Any organization pattern worked out in detail and carried through
into practice would be useful to an organization, and the 
Scientology org board has its good points and is certainly no
worse than most of the management structures used in this 
society.  But its far from perfect.

The older 7 division pattern was expanded out into 9 divisions
based on Ron's coming up with the Mind/Body/Product theory 
that divides the organization structure in progressions of
three (3 executive divisions each divided into 3 regular
divisions which are each divided up into 3 departments etc.).

The theory itself is actually quite reasonable, but the 
application of that theory to devising the pattern of the
org was flawed.

When you see a successful team of 3 partners launching a business,
one of them will ineveitably be an expert in producing the
product of the business.  The other two may consist of an
expert at organization and an expert at sales and marketing.
And if its only a team of 2, then one is an expert at producing
and the other is the salesman and promoter and they will somehow
or other manage the organizational hat between them.  It never
really works if you're missing the technical person who can 
really produce the product.

If its a software company, one of the top 3 has to be a software
guru or you're dead.  And if its cars you're building, then
one of the 3 had better be an automotive engineer.  If you've
got a hospital and one of the 3 top execs isn't a doctor, then
you'd just better forget it.

Established companies often violate this rule, and they lose
their ability to deliver the product and they sink.

If you only have the organizational executive, then there is
nothing to sell and nobody to sell it and therefore it is
the least important of the three.

If you only have the salesman, then its all promotion and no
delivery and you end up with what's known as a get rich scheme
or a con game.

If you only have the technical hotshot who can produce, you
end up with these obscure but well respected little firms that 
gradually develope a small following but achieve little market
penetartion.  Even so, this is the only one of the three that
has any chance at all of surviving alone and therefore is
the most critical to the entire venture.

For a Scientology org, one of the 3 senior executives must be
a super expert on the tech and his executive division must
be devoted to the technical aspects of the subject.

When Ron did his division by 3s, he created a set of 3 public
divisions in one executive division and also had a dissemination
division (more sales) in another.  So the structure was heavy
with PR.  And to make room for this, he bundled up a treasury
division along with the technical and qual (QA) divisions to
form an executive division whose manager would be just as concerned
with money as with real delivery.  So his pattern is weak on
actual production and he regulates the technical hotshots to
a lower rung in the management hierarchy.

Its not surprising that we see so much promotion and so few
results with such an org board.

A better pattern would be as follows:

1st Executive Division:  Organizational
  (this is what the org calls the HCO exec div.)

1.1 External affairs
  (the president's office, planning, legal, etc.)

1.2 Internal Management
  (this is the org's HCO division)
  (personel, communications, ethics)

1.3 Treasury
  (income, disbursements, supplies)
  (in Ron's pattern, he has this in the 2nd exec below and places
   the dissemination division here instead)

2nd Executive division: Production / Technical

2.1 Auditor Training
  (this is only a department in Ron's pattern)
  (for software, this would be the analysts and designers,
   for building houses this would be the architects, etc.)

2.2 Processing (Auditing)
  (this and 2.1 above are both just departments in Ron's
   single technical division)
  (in other businesses, this is the appropriate main line

2.3 Qual (QA)

3rd Executive Division: Sales and Marketting

3.1 Sales (Dissemination)

3.2 Marketing (the public divisions)
    (this spreads across 3 divisions in Ron's plan)

3.3 Publications
  (Ron has this as a department in the dissem division.  But
   this is a critical area.  It is a key element in the spread
   of a subject).

As a further justification for giving publications its own separate
division, one of the key reasons behind IBMs success was its
exceptionally large publications division.  They are one of the
largest publishers in the world.  They combined this with a
fantastically strong sales force and swept the market in the
early days of computers.

At a minimum, this pattern at least assures that one of the key
people at the top really knows the score on the business that
the organization is in.



This is what I would do immediately if I had absolute power and 
authority to fix the CofS.

I believe that these 40 points in the areas of tech, policy, and
external affairs would be enough to completely turn things around
and revitalize the subject.


First of all I would keep the existing lineup pretty much
intact.  Experimental ideas like the supergrades that were
presented in the Super Scio writeup are best left to the freezone.

But some things do need to be corrected.

1.1 Cancel all eligibility checks except for routing on staff.
The FPRD would remain as a case action for use when needed, but
grade 2 and later OT grade 2 processes would be the preferred way 
of handling overts.

1.2 Restore the sanctity of the confessional.  All examination of
PC folders for any purpose outside of auditing is to be forbidden.
No ethics penalties, amends projects, or lower conditions are to
be assigned based on anything revealed in an auditing session even
if the session is an eligibility check or DofP interview that is
prefaced by the phrase "I'm not auditing you".  However, currently
dangerous or harmful situations are to be handled in ethics by
getting the person to do the right thing and eligability to join
staff may be refused even though no ammends can be required.

1.3 Some improved basics such as validating the PC's rightness,
shifting from setups to major actions as soon as the PC is flying,
etc.  See my comments on what is wrong with standard tech in
Super Scio #4.

1.4 Some general improvements in course supervision, especially
insisting that the supervisor be an expert on the materials that
he is supervising and an emphasis on raising understanding rather
than raising stats.

1.5 For TRs, you coach the thetan rather than the body.  Flunk
what the thetan is doing (such as flinching) rather than what
the body is doing (such as jerking sideways).

1.6 Running to two major release points in level 1 (help and
problems), level 3 (change and ARCXs) and level 4 (responsibility
and fixed conditions) as is currently done in level 0 (straightwire
and communications).  The courses remain the same.  Each of the
two grades is run and attested to individually.

1.7 Redefinition of the state of clear as being "no longer affected
by the force in mental pictures and free from stimulous response
reactive thought".  You will find that a clear has a moment of
free choice before he dramatizes something (he decides to let 
himself have an ARCX etc.).  But he can still have out grades
and other abberations.  Cancellation of the policy that makes
it a suppressive act to invalidate the state of clear.  The state
should stand on its own merits rather than needing to be defended.

1.8 We should reinstate level 0 to 4 training as a prerequisite
to the SHSBC even for Clears and OTs.  This encourages people
to do their levels right away and provides a fast and easy
gradient into training as an auditor.  And it will speed up
the SHSBC considerably.

1.9 Clears and OTs with somatics are to be handled first of all
with assists and if this is inadequate, dianetic rundowns can
be used by substituting recall processes for R3R.  NOTS can keep
a somatic restimulated (and should be included as part of the
assist handling on an upper level case), but if the somatic is 
run out, there is nothing to restimulate.

1.10 Cancellation of confidentiality.  However, all rules concerning
not going out-gradient on new people and avoiding stirring up things
above the persons case level will remain in force.  All discussion
of entities and BTs below the OT 3 case level is to be restrained
and handled by using the referance in "History of Man" (you get
worse if you give them power and you do fine if you ignore them)
and by further pointing out that our senior datum is that the PC
(not entities or whatever) is responsible for the condition he is
in.  As a last resort, a troublesome entity can be handled in 
review by using Nots techniques, but this is only if the PC insists
that its there, you never search for or stir up these things up 
below OT 3.

1.11 Improved NOTS correction lists.  See Super Scio #6.  Add
questions like "blaming something on BTs", "putting them there
to run", "bypassed the cause over life EP" etc.  The "point to
the being you divided from" process can be used experimentally
in review if the PC insists that he has a split off piece of
himself that needs to be handled.  Audited Nots rundowns are 
not to be done after a PC has achieved the Solo Nots EP (and 
it might possibly be achieved on audited Nots or even on OT 3).  
BTs can be handled if they show up, but you don't run processes 
to search for them once the person has reached the solo nots EP.

1.12 Audited Nots should be a brief setup and repair and the
main thrust should be solo.  Solo Nots should be exported to
the AOs as quickly as possible (discussed further below).

1.13 Clears and OTs with grades style difficulties should have
the appropriate grade run or rehabbed.  There is the potential
for OT grades processes which go beyond lower level grades,
but this would be something to research.

1.14 Immediate release of OT levels above 8.  We need to resume
upward motion on the bridge.  At a minimum, old 4 through 7 
can be expanded with additional processes from the 1950s.  But
the rumor is that Ron left more OT levels which could be released.
So we have lots that can be issued.  Beyond this there are things
like handling actual GPMs (see Super Scio #3), so there is no
need to worry about running out of levels before we make a real

1.15 We need a steady export of higher technology to lower 
organizations.  The ship and flag would remain as centers of
technical excellence and have each new OT level as an exclusive
for a period of time, but would not permanently hang onto 
services.  The ship can do new OT levels.  OT8 can be exported
to Flag (and Flag can also pilot new rundowns).  Solo Nots
can move to the AOs and Nots auditor training can be done
at Saint Hills.  The Briefing Course, CCRD, and solo to OT2
can be exported to the outer orgs.  The missions should be
allowed to train people through class 3 (leave class 4 and
specialist rundown training at the outer orgs).  Note that
the missions must offer training as well as processing or
else we will be forever short of auditors.

1.16 More 1950s tapes should be added to checksheets, expecially
on the upper OT levels.

1.17 If there is something abusive in the Introspection rundown,
it should be revised or cancelled.  The same for any other 
abuse in training or processing.


2.1 The chaplin's office needs to be beefed up considerably and
given the hat of righting wrongs as discussed earlier.
An international chaplin becomes the post for reforming the
subject when there are abusive conditions in policy.  If some new
insanity like the "Finance Police" should start up, the Chaplin
International should be powerful enough to stop it dead in its tracks.

2.2 The org board should be changed to place treasury under HCO
and move dissem to the public divisions so that the org exec
division can become pure tech and get a tech hotshot on the
exec council as discussed earlier.

2.3 Management by stats would be changed to management by good
indicators with stats being a highly important management indicator.

2.4 Reinstate "Only Accounts Talks Money".

2.5 Cancel the RPF and substitute a non-abusive staff rehabilitation 
program to get failing staff members back in shape.

2.6 Real cancellation of Fair Game and Disconnection.  The 
non-enturbulation policy would remain in effect and would be
subsituted for disconnection when necessary to ensure case progress.
This is currently used when two Scientologists in good standing
are at each others throats and going PTS to each other.  We will
give non-Scientologists the same curtesy while ensuring that
the PC is left alone while he is getting audited.

2.7 Tech training of staff members is to be given preferance over
management training once a staff member has learned his post hat.
Staff co-audits on everything (using readit-drillit-doit as needed)
and local delivery of solo levels to staff (as soon as a CS is
available) will be used to ensure that staff make good case 
progress and move up the bridge.  This training and processing
is their exchange for long hours and low pay and should really
be pushed so that staff aren't taken advantage of.

2.8 Lower conditions are not to be assigned except in flagrant
circumstances.  And the chaplin has the right to overrule these
even in the face of policy.  Reinstate "Ethics exists to get 
tech in" (if its not interfearing with the PCs auditing, leave
it alone).

2.9 Review and cleanup financial and pricing policies.  We should
make our money on volume of flow rather than high prices.  Outer
orgs should not be drained to finance the top command structure
because they generate the volume flow that keeps the entire
structure doing well.  We should have regular lower prices rather
than crazy discount schemes.  Efforts should be made to streamline
progress so that people get more "bang for the bucks" rather than
trying to milk as much as possible before letting somebody move

2.10 Simplification and removal of unnecessary steps on routing
forms.  It should be fast and fun to move through lines rather
than an annoyance.

2.11 Full reinstatement of the 1967 policy "New 2D Rules".  Drop
all rules against homosexuals etc.  Keep people from messing
each other up and encourage them to put aside their 2D games
while they are trying to get through a new level, but otherwise
leave them alone.  If somebody is abberated, it will get run
out eventually.  We are not the morals police.  The Sea Org does
have an image to maintain, so their staff shouldn't be wildly
promiscious or throwing orgies, but they don't have to be more
puritanical than what is currently accepted by the society at

2.12 Re-emphasize that policy is a guiding thing rather than
an absolute (see "Theory of Organization: What is Policy").

2.13 More truth, more communication, more ARC.  Less concern
with PR.  More compassion and less harrassment.

Note that some abbusive things, such as the "overboards" were
cancelled long ago.


3.1 An immediate end to the "war with the squirrels".  Acceptance
of the freezone as a group with shared goals but differences
of opinion.

3.2 Cool down the "war with the psychs".  Abusive and barbaric
phychiatric practices such as shock treatment remain a target, 
but many don't engage in these.  The orgs general attitude should
be that they are usually lacking in spiritual enlightenment and 
are a bit out of date rather than considering them to be a source 
of evil.

3.3 Stop fighting the metaphysical community.  Mixing practices
should remain in force to the degree that you don't engage in
metaphysical actions at the same time that you are trying to
do a Scientology level, but there is no other block.  Let them
read Krishnamurti or cast a horoscope as long as they keep it
off lines and put it aside while they are doing a course or
getting audited.

3.4 Cancel "Issue Authority".  Allow free and open discussions,
especially on the internet.  If we let satisfied public chat 
as they see fit without bothering them with ethics
and letting them talk freely (even when they disagree with
tech or policy), there will be enough good communication to
balance any amount of viscious attacks.  Also cancel "Jokers
and Degraders".  Humor is not a crime.  A viscious attack 
disguised as humor should be handled based on the visciousness
rather than destroying our sense of humor.

3.5 Stop attacking the internet.  Make peace with the webmasters
etc.  Build good relations.

3.6 Drop all court cases except those necessary to defend the
organization from harm, and try to settle those in a reasonable
manner as well.

3.7 Add a powerful Chaplin's division to OSA.  It should work to
right wrongs and clean up our external relations.  I would not
disarm OSA because of the occasional vengeful attacker who will
not see reason, but this becomes a last resort.  Walk softly and
carry a big stick becomes the keynote rather than savagely attacking
everything that moves.

3.8 Separate the publication of tapes, books, and bulletins from
orthodox Scientology.  Golden Era and Bridge should act as service
organizations who sell materials (even those currently labled
confidential) to everybody, even freezone and declared enemies
of the church.  Try to get everything available and get the prices
down.  Make money on volume.

3.9 Issue an absolute general amnesty, with no amends required,
covering every possible offense.  In the future, only declare
people as enemies if they are truely attacking the organization.
Do not declare people who disagree with us or blow or join the
freezone.  And realize that even an enemy is not fair game, the
laws of the land still hold true.  The high scaled viewpoint
is to fight one's opponents with honor rather than treachery.

3.10 Allow people to move between the orgs and the freezone
and back again.  The org should maintain its position by the
excellence of its technical delivery rather than by stomping out
the competition.


There is lots more that could be done:  Group processing on TV,
a new Dianetic home co-audit book, simplification of policy,
expansion of tech, an honest biography of Ron etc.  But the above 
should be enough to clean things up and create a boom in the subject.


The above is a bit too long and complex to serve as a rallying
cry, and it requires too much understanding of tech and policy
to be easily passed around.  

So here is an abbreviated, simplified list to use in pushing
for a reformation of Scientology.


The general target is a restoration of truth, open communication,
and care for one's fellow man.

1. Recognition that the subject is still on a research line.
Redefinition of the State of Clear as being "no longer affected
by the force in mental pictures and free from stimulous response
reactive thought".  Acknowlegement that this does not errase the
grades of release or handle the basic problems, overts, and
upsets which originally caused the being to decay.  The OT levels
are a gradient to allow the being to reach these on the early

2. Cancellation of confidentially.  Re-emphasis of Scientology
as a religion and abandoment of the viewpoint that it is a
business with trade secrets.  Termination of all leagal suits
except those necessary to defend the church from direct attack.
As a matter of relegious freedom, all materials should be
easily available to anyone regardless of their status within
orthodox Scientology.

3. Promotion of free and open communication.  Cancellation of
"Issue Authority" "Jokers and Degraders".  Use of "mixing practices" 
only to forbid actual practice while trying to do a Scientology 
level at the same time.  An end to the persecution of squirrels 
and psychs except for situations of actual physical abuse.  A 
recognition that we have shared goals with many other groups.

4. Cancellation of eligability checks for students and PCs.
Restoration of the sancitity of the confessional, even for those
who subsequently are labled as enemies.  Use of the FPRD only
as a major case action for the purpose of case gain and not
to gather data.

5. Cancellation of all policies on suppressive persons and 
an end to declaring people SPs.  Use of "non-enturbulation orders"
for the duration of training or processing as a last resort
when a PTS condition cannot otherwise be handled.  An absolute and
total amnesty for all past actions (because we'll never sort
out what was or wasn't justified).  Subsequently, people
are only to be declared as enemies if they engage in flagrant
and unreasonable attacks against the church.  People who
disagree or blow are not to be labled as enemies.  Elimination
of the use of "lower conditions" except in circumstances of
outright damage and danger.

6. Establishment of an International Chaplin, a chaplin's
division within OSA, and an expanded office of the chaplin
within the organizations, all with the power to right wrongs,
override policy as needed, and keep the orgs operating in
an ethical manner towards their staff and public.

7. An end to all physical abuse, including cancellation of
the RPF and an end to all penalties for lower conditions.

8. Intensive tech training, co-auditing, and solo auditing
delivered locally to all staff as an exchange for the 
low pay and long working hours.

9. A steady release of new OT levels and a steady downward
export of levels to the next lower level of organization as
the new levels become the premier service for the top level
10. A cleanup and simplification of pricing.  Ethical behaviour
on the subject of money.  Restoration of the policy "Only
Accounts Talks Money".

11, Full reinstatement of the 1967 policy "New 2D Rules".  Drop
all rules against homosexuals etc.  The Sea Org does
have an image to maintain, so their staff shouldn't be wildly
promiscious or throwing orgies, but they don't have to be more
puritanical than what is currently accepted by the society at

12. Change from management by stats to management by good
indicators with stats being a highly important management indicator.

13. Re-emphasize that policy is a guiding thing rather than
an absolute (see "Theory of Organization: What is Policy").

14. More truth, more communication, more ARC.  Less concern
with PR.  More compassion and less harrassment.


I would intend that amnesty to apply to everybody on both sides
of the fence.  One big reason that revolutions go sour when they
win is that they take revenge on the overthrown regime.  This is
why things never change so much as they remain the same.  The
revolutionaries soon take on the color of those whom they deposed.
You break this and many other deadly cycles by means of forgiveness.
Christ was right.  Forgiveness is one of the keys to getting out
of the trap.