Fishman on SO#1 (You can ALWAYS? write to Ron)
a.r.s., 10 Dec 1995
email@example.com (A. McPherson) wrote: > in message <firstname.lastname@example.org> asks: >> Way back when I was (very briefly) "into" Scn, there was a policy >>that in every org there would be a box into which letters to Ron could be >>placed with an expectation of receiving a prompt, to the point, response >>from him. I always tho't this a bit hinky, as if he were to attempt to deal >>with the mail from only, say, those orgs in the L.A. area, his arm would >>fall off! >> >> At any rate, since LRHs death, I'm wondering what policy is regard- >>ing this. Are there just no boxes at all? Or do they now say "You can always >>write to David?" Or what?
When I was in the Guardian's Office, I worked on the SO#1 (Standing Order # 1 Project). I was told by my senior, SO#1 Supervisor Caligari, that it was "physically impossible for LRH to answer all mail personally addressed to him", and my hat (job) was to answer stacks of mail addressed to Ron.
I was further instructed that when I answer Ron's mail, I should "assume the beingness of LRH", and that the purpose of the SO#1 Project was to keep Scientologists winning and moving up the Bridge. Therefore, no matter what problem the Scientologist had, whether it was with Tech, or Policy, or Admin, or 2D, or money flows, the answer was more auditing, more training, qual reviews leading to more auditing and training, ethics cycles leading to more auditing and training, etc. etc. etc. So that is what I did. I answered mail addressed to Ron as if I were Ron himself. Then the stacks of mail were handed over by the SO# Project Supervisor to the SO#1 LRHPPRO, and the SO#1LRH Personal Public Relations Officer was a person whose hat it was to forge L. Ron Hubbard's name at the end of the letter I typed. These people, (ironically mostly women) were skilled in signing L. Ron Hubbard's signature perfectly, having drilled for days and weeks on the nuances of forging LRH's signature. I could still tell most of the time that the signatures were not actually that of LRH, but an unskilled eye could not tell, and of course the recipient of the mail was not even looking to disagree with the signature.
Incidently, it is for this reason among others that I have challenged the copyrights of Religious Technology Center in Miami Federal Court, since I have seen the assignment of the rights to the "Advanced Technology" copyrights in 1982 from L. Ron Hubbard to Religious Technology Center, because the document was filed in the Fishman / Geertz case. In the Lerma case, Religious Technology Center took my deposition, and asked me to produce certain "Advanced Technology" documents. Even if I had control over the documents, I was unwilling to produce them, because I viewed Religious Technology Center's request as a form of entrapment, since they are currently temporarily sealed in the California court in the Fishman / Geertz case (I am fighting that temporary sealing order also). If I produced sealed documents to Religious Technology Center I would have been subject to a contempt order.
The document assigning the rights of the copyrights and trademarks to Religious Technology Center was not signed by Hubbard. It was a forgery, and no doubt it was signed by one of the SO#1 LRH PPRO's. But even arguably if it were Hubbard's real signature, which I believe is not the case, the document is still illegal because it was notarized by David Miscavige! The notary cannot be the beneficiary of the assignment --- that is clearly a conflict of interest under law. So all of these lawsuits --- against Dennis Erlich, Lawrence Wollersheim, Arnie Lerma, and now against the Dutch Internet provider xs4all, are all based upon Religious Technology Center's claims which in turn are based upon a phony forged improperly notarized document!
And, if Religious Technology Center has no valid claim to the copyrights, neither does the Church of Scientology International, since Religious Technology Center assigned their worthless copyrights to them; and in turn the local Orgs and Missions have no valid claim because the Church of Scientology International assigned their invalid claims to them.
What is also interesting is that the Church of Scientology and Religious Technology Center both has the same lawyers representing them, which is another conflict of interest.
So who really owns the copyrights to Scientology?
Probably Lawrence Wollersheim, since he has a judgment against the Church of Scientology of California, who were licensed to use the copyrights before Religious Technology Center was ever a figment of Miscavige's imagination.
One parting thought about Standing Order # 1.
Here I was, answering letters addressed to Ron all that time, thinking and believing I was like Ron's right arm, helping people winning and to "flourish and prosper" by going up the bridge, feeling great about what I was doing. And then, there I was, on the other hand, writing to Ron myself, totally convinced that Ron was really answering my letters. That is the essence of how mind control works. Who would have thought at that time that there was some other SO#1 person higher uplines answering my own letters to Ron, and some other SO#1 forger signing Ron's name. No, I knew all of "my" mail to Ron was answered and signed by Ron. And so the band played on........
Now the question is, who is answering Guillaime Lesevre's mail?
Will the real Guillaime Lesevre please stand up................
With Best Wishes to All
from the xs4all office in Amsterdam, Holland