Free Scientologists

Dipl.-Ing. Andreas Gross, Switzerland

FS Bulletin of 4 March, 2005RA
Revised on 17 Oct., 20071 & 13 April, 2015

Remimeo
Rehab Ron's Ethics Series Nr. 3
Alter-Is of Clearing and OT-Series Nr. 9
Scientology Auditor Rehabilitation Series Nr. 19
Scientology Engram Prior Beginning Series Nr. 3

KSW – SUBTLE EXTINCTION OF SOURCE

There is a development within Scientology – within the Church as well as in the Freezone –
which Ron considered part of the bad criminals: A steady, seemingly unstoppable process of Al-
ter-Is, a subtle extinction of source.
This paper is supposed to bring this strategy to mind and contribute to counteract this.
Source refers to the original, unaltered source: publications2, lectures and books originally and
unchanged by L. Ron Hubbard.
As for the meaning of source towards materials from a different origin, I can only recommend
studying the KSW-series by LRH. Especially number one of the series.
The lectures have been recorded and we hear Ron's voice. Since the 1990s it has been possible
to create any text with anyone's voice with the help of technological means. However, most lec-
tures we have are on tapes that are older, thus more credible. In fact, in the 1980s, a Ron's Jour -
nal was published by the new management "with Ron's voice" from which voice experts claim it
cannot come from Ron. If you think this accusation of procacity is unbelievable, you should
take a look at the well-documented cases where RTC presumed to cut out entire sentences and
paragraphs from Ron's lectures: Example PDC no. 20.
The printed materials (books and publications) are mostly based on handwritten manuscripts.
However, sometimes Ron used his typewriter and signed each paper with his signature. These
manuscripts were stored in a separate room at Flag. Contemporary witnesses stated on the In-
ternet that this room burned out at the end of the 70s. This loss is concealed with a grandiose
story within the Church: The "Preservation of Tech Project", as it was presented in the KSW-
News3, edition 29. Oct 1989. Apparently, the LRH originals are stored in atomic shelters. This is
supposed to explain why, nowadays, no one has access to these originals anymore. Not even
Class XII auditors or top management people.

1
Revised to include the series-no. and an additional example of the falsification of source by the RO.
2
By publications I mean HCO Bs, HCO PLs, LRH EDs, etc.
3
The KSW-News are published by the RTC. They are large-sized pamphlets for Staffs and Publics in order to
keep them informed about RTC activities.
FSB 4.3.05RA KSW – Subtle Extinction of Source page 2 of 9

Copies of these original manuscripts were available in the Publications Orgs, e.g. the New Era,
so that they could be resorted to prior to new publications. This access "is no longer necessary
today" since the RTC is guaranteeing which materials were true to source. The facts, however,
are different.
Secretaries type-wrote these manuscripts on print stencils4 that were sent to all Orgs so that they
could make copies. These copies were distributed to all people in charge (according to the list in
the edition's header) and at least two copies were stored in the Qual library:
Qual is essentially an exporter of Knowledge and Qual has an exciting new addition to its ranks
—the Org Library in Dept 14.
Under the Staff Librarian, the Org Library ideally contains 2 copies of everything that has ever
been issued—books, tapes, policies, technology, packs, manuals on all org machines, various dic-
tionaries of all sizes, in English and other languages, plus speciality books on various subjects
which may need to be used in Word Clearing. One set is a Master Copy and has a large red stripe
and a red Master Copy, Do Not Remove stamp on it. Master copies are never removed from the
library area. The other copies are numbered and may be signed out to staff, as in any library.
[FDD 18 QUAL INT 2 October 1971 DIVISIONAL SUMMARY FOR DIVISION V, aus
Hubbard, L. Ron, 1976, "Organization Executive Course - Qualifications Division 5", 1st edi-
tion, Los Angeles, Publications Organization Worldwide USA, pg 32]
This is based on the following LRH lecture:
But, an Org Library. Now, there are certain packs – . Let us take an ASHO. An
ASHO that does not have available Power packs – I mean an SH that doesn’t have avail-
able Power packs – baahh! It’s a bad show. You’ll find most Power auditors, and C/Ses
particularly, and so on, assemble their own packs and their own library and so on. Well,
so, great, that’s fine; you are not a substitute for that. It’s an Org Library. And you just
get your hands on at least two of every pack on tech or policy or anything else that has
ever been issued. And you put a great big red stripe with a great big stamp on the master
copy, which mustn’t be removed from the area, and you carefully sign out any spares
that you have and you get them recovered. In other words, you have an actual library,
not just some books lying around.
And IF YOU ARE REALLY BUILDING THE THING UP, YOU SHOULD
HAVE A COPY OF EVERY TAPE EVER MADE. Now, that’s quite a library! But we
actually would be in a position somewhere up the line to furnish that. But you certainly
should have a basic copy of every tape being used in HCI, not just all the tapes in HCI.
And that’s a full library. Now, YOU ARE IN THE BUSINESS OF KNOWLEDGE.
WELL, THAT’S WHERE IT’S CONCENTRATED IN THE ORG.
Now, the duties of the Librarian have not been written up, but they are simple
enough. THEY DO THE STANDARD DUTIES OF A LIBRARIAN. THEY NEVER
LET THE MASTER COPY OUT. They could have some area there where somebody
can sit and read and look up something. THEY ALWAYS HAVE A MASTER COPY OF
EVERYTHING THEY OWN, AND THEY ANSWER QUESTIONS. Now, THAT
TAKES AN INTERESTING LIBRARIAN BECAUSE HE’S THE TECHNICAL IN-
FORMATION CENTER. Tech Information Center; So if there is any other technology
that you are using, such as the lawn mower and so forth, he’s got it too. So ALL BOOK-

4
Stencil printing was the common technology before the development of photo copiers in offices to create small
publications. So-called stencils, which were put into a small printer, were inscribed with a normal typewriter in
order to print small, one-color publications. If, for example, you owned four of these print machines, you could
print publications in black or red or green or blue.
FSB 4.3.05RA KSW – Subtle Extinction of Source page 3 of 9

LETS ABOUT ALL EQUIPMENT IN THE ORG ALSO BELONG IN THAT LI-
BRARY.
Now, that Librarian has got to be enough on the ball to be able to look up this
volume or be able to tell the guy, „Look in that volume, and here it is.“ Now, there’s ac-
tually – technical indexes have been made and we have been trying to get them issued,
but they’re being issued along with this HCOB series. You’ll find that the OEC volumes
are extremely good in their indexing.
INFORMATION! WHERE CAN THE GUY GO TO SEE IT? NOT TO BE
TOLD VERBALLY IT. WHERE CAN THE GUY GO TO SEE IT, AND SO ON?
WELL, THAT IS DEPARTMENT 14’S LIBRARY. THAT’S THE KNOWLEDGE
CENTER. AND SO, YOU DON’T GET VERBAL DATA LINES OR ANYTHING OF
THE SORT. [Hubbard, L. Ron: Lecture 05. Sep 1971 A Talk on a Basic Qual – I]
Two copies of each publication, even when they are outdated, revised or voided. You were able
to understand the historical development of the tech in Qual. So there was an extensive collec-
tion of loose papers of i.a. HCOBs, HCOPLs, LRH EDs publications.
In 1976, these collections of loose papers were published as cased books: The HCOBs in [Hub-
bard, L. Ron, 1976, "The Technical Bulletins of Dn & Scn - Volume I 1950-1953", 1st printing,
Los Angeles, Publications Organization Worldwide, USA]5, the HCO PLs in [Hubbard, L. Ron,
1976, "Organization Executive Course - Volume 1 HCO Division", 1st printing, Los Angeles,
Publications Organization Worldwide, USA]. The Qual principle was still adhered to in there
and the already revised references were documented.6
The methods of keeping all obsolete publications corresponds with the industry's procedure that
technical documentations were defined into DIN standards7.
Part of that is highlighting certain parts of the revision in the new text by using cursive letters so
that it's easier for the reader to spot the differences.
LRH also insisted on keeping a distinct difference between his publications and those by others.
Even after the fact when a lot of non-LRH HCOBs and HCOPLs were in circulation, he insisted
on it and set up a mission that was supposed to separate the wheat from the chaff. That's what is
says in the preface of "Index Instructions":
Virtually all policy letters ever issued (except confidential ones) have been included
here.
While this research and compilation was being done, a team of Flag missionaires
went through each and every policy letter to assign HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS
OFFICE POLICY LETTER status to only those issues actually written by L. RON

5
The latest publication in there is the HCO B 28. Oct. 76, C/S-Serie 98.
6
You can find many references listed in the table of contents of the Tech Vol VIII, for example, that have either
been cancelled or revised by the press deadline. There was a reference on which page you could find the revision
or cancellation. For example the entry about the HCOB „14 Jan. (1972) Study Correction List (canceled—see
Vol. IX, 329) page 16. On page 16 you can really find this reference and the following note in a footnote: [This
HCO B was canceled by HCO B 4 February 1972, Study Correction List Revised, which was revised four times,
the most recent revision being BTB 4 February 1972RD, Study Correction List Revised, which may be found as
number 7 in the Study Series, Volume IX, page 329.]
7
DIN = Deutsche Industrie Norm (German Industry Standard). More and more replaced by the EN= European
Standard. In the US there are similar ISO standards = International Standardization Organization. Of course the
standards committees tend to copy each other so there are DIN-EN-ISO standards that are valid worldwide. Ob -
viously, Ron referred to these industry standards with the revision letters R, RA, RB etc. in his recordings of his
publications.
FSB 4.3.05RA KSW – Subtle Extinction of Source page 4 of 9

HUBBARD. Any policy letter issues not written by L. RON HUBBARD personally,
were either (1) converted to BOARD POLICY LETTER or (2) cancelled or (3) revised
arid reissued as BOARD POLICY LETTERS.
Therefore, also included in this subject index are appendices for A-policy letters writ-
ten by L. Ron Hubbard (or ordered by him) listed by date order, B-those policy letters
listed in date order that are now Board Policy Letters, C-those policy letters listed by di-
vision which have been given Board Policy Letter status though the mimeo color flash
and format have not been altered (but will be soon) and, D-those policy letters listed in
date order written by others that have been cancelled.
Your use for these appendices will facilitate locating the exact issue you need before
going to Mimeo Files to pull your own copy. These appendices also update the status of
any issues already included in the OEC volumes. You are sure to find these appendices
very useful. [Hubbard, L. Ron, 1976, "Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter
Subject Index under likely titles", First Printing, Los Angeles, Publications Organization
Worldwide, USA]
Attachment A (valid publications by Ron or approved by him) was made up of 60 pages, attach-
ment B (valid BPLs) of 36 pages, attachment C (also valid BPLs) of 4 pages and attachment D
(now voided publications) consisted of 33 pages. Each page had listed up to 20 references.
Thus, only 45% of the publications distributed before the mission were by LRH or approved by
him8. A total of 30% were acceptable but only when marked as non-LRH publication (BPL) and
25% had to be voided because they didn't even qualify as a BPL, thus being real squirrel publi-
cations. A sobering result that is also referred to in the HCO B 24. Jan 1977 TECH CORREC-
TION ROUND-UP. The case was similar with HCOBs that were also sorted out according to
instructions by LRH and, if necessary, republished as BTBs.
The following crime was, therefore, added to the ethics books:
8. Issuing the data or information or instructional or administrative procedures without
credit or falsely assigning credit for them to another. [Hubbard, L. Ron, May 1974, "In-
troduction to Scientology Ethics", Los Angeles, American St. Hill Organization]
In 1979 and 1980, two more Red Volumes were published: [Hubbard, L. Ron, Aug 1979, "The
Technical Bulletins of Dn & Scn - Volume XI 1976-1978", 1st Printing, Los Angeles, Publica-
tions Organization Worldwide, USA] and [Hubbard, L. Ron, Aug 1980, "The Technical Bul-
letins of Dn & Scn - Volume XII 1978-1979", 1st printing, Los Angeles, Publications Organiza-
tion Worldwide, USA]. But here you can see a deviation from the industry's standard of the
technical documentation as described above: already revised publications were no longer
printed, only the latest updates.9 It is also openly admitted that BTBs have been republished as
HCOBs10 and, thus, the above-mentioned felony is routinely being committed. However, as I
have demonstrated elsewhere, Ron was no longer able to object to this.
In 1981, two ring binders were added: [Hubbard, L. Ron, ca 1981, "Chronological Technical
Bulletins for 1980 - Dec. 1979 to May 1980", Kopenhagen, New Era Publications ApS] and

8
The latest, valid reference according to the publication was of 20 Jan, 1976. The chief editor was Pat Brice and
the list was guaranteed by LRH's personal librarian WW Anne Greig.
9
See HCO B 24. Oct 1976R, rev. on 10 Febr. 1977 which was no longer printed in its unrevised version. How-
ever, the revisions were highlighted via cursive letters so that you were able to see what the original version
might have looked like.
10
See HCOB 1. Jan 1972RB, revised 10. Febr. 1977 which is replaced by the BTB 1. Jan 1972R LIX HI-LO TA
LIST.
FSB 4.3.05RA KSW – Subtle Extinction of Source page 5 of 9

[Hubbard, L. Ron, ca 1981, "Chronological Technical Bulletins for 1980 - May 1980 to De-
cember 1980", Kopenhagen, Scientology Publications Organization Kopenhagen].
In 1991, the Red and Green Volumes were finally republished: [Hubbard, L. Ron, 1991, "Tech-
nical Bulletins of Dn & Scn, 18 Volumes", Los Angeles, Bridge Publications, Inc.] and [Hub-
bard, L. Ron, 1991, "Organization Executive Course – 10 Volumes", Los Angeles, Bridge Publi-
cations, Inc.]. Here, they are actually going the extra mile. Not only are the separate publica-
tions and revisions not all listed (only the current status for each is printed) but the revisions
were no longer made visible with cursive letters. Additionally, a lot of BTBs that weren't written
or authorized by Ron were republished as HCOBs11.
Despite these facts, David Miscavige (COB RTC) explained at a public event in 1991 for the
publications of the Red Volumes that he would personally guarantee that only LRH publications
were included in these volumes. They also include publications that were published and revised
years after LRH's supposed death in 1986. Our trust in RTC is immensely strained by that.
Now the management is even going so far as to publishing more and more materials – and not
only for Div-6 – that don't even try to have a connection to source anymore. For example, the
materials from LOC and KTL, the new "Scientology Handbook", the "What is Scientology?"
and also the study materials for Staffs, e.g. the brochures "The leading channels of Scientology"
in which the new hierarchy of RTC, Intern. Management, Flag Exec Office, CLOs, OSA, Pubs
Orgs like Gold, Sea Org, SMI, WISE, ABLE, I-Help etc. since the beginning of the 80s is listed
in detail. It is amazing that it doesn't appear to be necessary to give extensive sources for LRH
references for such an important topic – it is about Scientology's exercise of power after all. Ba-
sically all "verbal data", at least non-LRH and unauthorized. In fact, most of the listed organiza-
tions have no HCOPLs or HCOBs in which they at least lead you to believe that LRH said
something about them.
Just like the bridge cards have changed almost every year since 1972 without being able to refer
to LRH. After all, the central, technical reference in control of all auditing.
You are also betrayed if you believe that a reference has only been revised when it is clearly
stated as such with a date of revision. For example, I received a loose piece of paper for my
study course HCOPL 11. April 1972 WEITERE DATEN ZUR KORREKTEN HAND-
HABUNG DES ZUSTANDES GEFAHR – first published on 12 Aug. 1996 (why backdated?).
This explicitly explains that the HCOPL 22 March 85 was not wirtten by Ron and, thus, voided
thereby. In 1998 this HCOPL 11 April 72 was revised in such a way in the new ethics specialist
course that these explanations were simply removed – without mentioning or marking this revi-
sion. I have published this on my website under the name of „Die CoS gibt Fälschungen eines
HCO PLs zu“.
Another blatant case is the HCO BULLETIN OF 12 AUGUST 1969 (Class VIII) CASE SU-
PERVISOR ACTIONS, which is also at least from 1978: see, for example, CASE SUPERVI-
SOR 250 with the reference to the 10 Aug. 73 handling. Or CASE SUPERVISOR 14 with ref-
erence to the "End of Endless Int R/D" from the HCOB 24.09.1978 and a dozen mentions of
R3RA! Or C/S HHH according to which you cannot go clear without Dianetics!
11
For example, the auditors-admin-series in the old Red Volumes in [Hubbard, L. Ron, 1976, "The Technical
Bulletins of Dn & Scn - AUDITING SERIES Volume IX 1965-1975", 1st printing, Los Angeles, Publications Or -
ganization Worldwide, USA] was republished almost completely as BTBs, and they cancelled the previous
HCOBs to make clear they're not LRH publications. Thus, the same goes for other series in the volume: Basic
Auditing Series, Cramming Series, Expanded Dianetics Series. The volume contains mostly yellow paper be-
cause BTBs were printed on yellow to distinguish them from HCOBs right away. The new [Hubbard, L. Ron,
1991, "Technical Bulletins of Dn & Scn, Subject Volume 1", Los Angeles, Bridge Publications, Inc.], however,
argues that all printed publications of auditors-admin series equal in content are valid HCOBs and from LRH! At
least they point out that the original and same-named BTBs are thereby voided.
FSB 4.3.05RA KSW – Subtle Extinction of Source page 6 of 9

It is a similar case with the publication that is marked as revised: HCO BULLETIN OF 12 AU-
GUST 1969RB REVISED 20 MAY 1975 20. Mai 1975 CASE SUPERVISOR ACTIONS. Be-
sides the already criticized outpoints, the C/S 260D requires LCRD! The LCRD is the HCOB
23 JULY 1980 CONFESSIONAL REPAIR LIST — LCRD. How can an HCOB from appar-
ently 1975 refer to an HCOB that is published 5 years later?! The publication was again adjusted
and the revision was not highlighted.
Given the takeover of the Church, these blatant falsifications make it difficult to fall back on the
original tech and materials because you cannot be sure from where and of which date the refer-
ence really is. Just to be certain, you have to obtain original materials from the first three
decades of Scientology, as sometimes offered on eBay nowadays. Unfortunately, that is why you
also cannot resort to CoS translations of older materials "that were not revised" but have to
translate them yourself.
But it's not only the Church that puts a lot of work into covering up the tracks of the tech falsifi-
cations by publishing12 more and more "consolidated materials" "in order to make it easier for
the student."
The trend within the Church goes into the direction of publishing even more "consolidated,
summarizing materials" that also appear to be from LRH on the outside. No use of headings of
the trusted HCOBs/HCOPLs. How long will it take for HCOBs and HCOPLs to not be found in
the course packs anymore because they are "outdated" and you "can no longer expect this" of
the new students?
Nevertheless, the staffs have been increasingly spared the "loose paper collections" since the
80s. In 1991, the CSI published a 160-page-long book named "Zusammenfassungen der
Abteilungen – Eine präzise Zusammenfassung jeder Abteilung in einer Scientology-Organisa-
tion“. ("Summaries of the departments – A precise summary of each department in a Scientol-
ogy Organization") Of course it is much easier reading something like that rather than fighting
your way through OEC volumes.
It is simply the easy, wide path that's offered here and not the narrow, steep one.
But – as I mentioned at the beginning – the Church is not alone in their efforts. There are mas-
sive attempts of "consolidation" in the free zone as well. And I am not even referring to the di-
verse attempts by squirrels, such as meta psychology, who want to hush up the term Scientology
and other terms and deny the LRH source in their consolidated revision of Scientology. No,
there are also books by L. Kin or websites like Clear-Bird which stay within Scientology's vo-
cabulary and simply want to make it easy for the student to study the field. By removing the re-
dundancy and the rough edges, it is not only made easier for the reader but also impossible to
recognize and correct the growing falsification of the tech (and not only of these authors but
also from the CoS takeover team, especially since 1973). Due to the fact that everything seems
consistent and all "outdated data" has been removed, no one can return to the origin. In a few
years, once all old-timers who were trained on the basis of source have passed away, it is most
likely that no one will bother with source anymore but rather learn the tech "free & easy". The
fact that this tech will hardly keep what it promises seems to be part of the concept, in my opin-
ion. Because only once everyone can convince themselves that Scientology „viel verspricht

12
„Der Kurs für die TRs und den Ko-Audit der Objektiven Prozesse“ (The course for TRs and the co-audit of the
objective processes) of 1990 (Copenhagen, New Era Pubs Int) seems to fully consist of regular HCOBs. But when
taking a closer look, you will see first that some HCOBs have the date of 1990! Then you can see that HCOBs
from 1978 to 1980 are also restatements of publications from the 50s. Startled by this information, you check the
rest and see that the HCOBs from the 60 aren't from Ron either but are also based on original references from
the 50s. The reader can be certain that the materials did not improve after being rewritten. Quite the contrary.
Important concepts were lost so that delivery of the objectives has to fail in difficult cases.
FSB 4.3.05RA KSW – Subtle Extinction of Source page 7 of 9

und nichts davon halten kann“ ("promises a lot but can't keep any of it"), it will be possible for
it to leave planet earth.
Of course there are still some legitimate ones, e.g. in the RON's Orgs, with real academies and
"old course packs" and check sheets. Unfortunately, these Orgs tend to rather work with materi-
als from the 1978 wave of revision of the Church and believe that the Church was only taken
over in 1982. Thus, the consolidation is carefully finding its way in there as well: In Div-6 (if it's
even dared) other authors besides LRH are preferred anyway. And when scanning, OCRing or
translating materials, parts that don't suit their books are generously left out:
In the translation of the book "Book of Case Remedies", they do state that "this translation is
based on the extended version 1968", however, they then quietly leave out the "preface of this
edition" in which you find a very central, technical statement:
„There is not the slightest question about any part of the route. People from everywhere and all
sorts of backgrounds are taking their steps easily. The Clearing Course, and the training and Re-
lease Grades leading smoothly to it, are all utterly provenly successful. Any new list of Clears as
of any date has to be revised upward fast as new graduates finish the Clearing Course13, grow-
ing and doubling in numbers. – And to graduate from that course one has attained the state
which is philosophy’s win after thousands of years. – There were no Clears before, ever.“
[Hubbard, L. Ron, July 1977, "The Book of Case Remedies - A MANUAL COVERING PRE-
CLEAR DIFFICULTIES AND THEIR REMEDIES", revised and reprinted, Los Angeles, Pub-
lications Organization Worldwide, USA]
But why bother translating this when no one in the RO has to go through the Clearing Course in
order to count as a Clear. You are already „Natural Clear, Past-Life Clear oder ging auf den Ob-
jektiven, den TRs, Dianetik oder beim letzten Schnupfen „Clear“ ("Natural Clear, Past-Life
Clear or went "Clear" on the objectives, the TRs, Dianetics or with the last cold".) – I apologize
for the cynicism but this isn't just about small technical omissions but about an essential break-
through from LRH: the Clearing. And the Clearing is an indispensable requirement to make it on
the OT levels.
But this is no exception. I continue to find flaws that don't just result from MUs but also from
mismatches with the source in materials, which were scanned, digitalized and translated by RO
members – to whom I am very grateful for this extensive and diligent work that required years
of work.
One example for that can be found in the digitalized Red Volume VII 14: The following text is
written on page 98 under the headline: DIANETIC CLEAR:
Only about 25% go actually Clear on Dianetics.
But it's actually supposed to be: Only about 2% go actually Clear on Dianetics.
Apparently the wish was father to the thought there. Someone tried to justify this as an OCR
mistake to me. But if you have worked a bit with OCR, you know that an OCR program hardly
adds any letters. This seems to be a conscious Alter-Is of the materials in order to justify the RO
practice in which many "Dianetics Clears" start on the OT levels right away without even giving
the first Clearing Course, as is requested in this reference.

13
Both highlights were added by me.
14
The file is called 1970-71.PDF or redvol1970_71.PDF and has this MD5: 5c8609e84a287f5a985844065f3a-
d39d
FSB 4.3.05RA KSW – Subtle Extinction of Source page 8 of 9

LRH is being shaped in such a way that he fits into the "modern way of processing" a la Capt.
Bill and RTC. There is a bit of bitterness in this observation because it's not easy to confront
that LRH materials are tweaked and cut and changed in every way.
Only five years ago did the RO – I can't and don't want to name names – distribute scanned
faxes of handwritten OT materials from Ron in their digitalized material collections, which they
also passed on to interested students. I am thankful that I have – via detours – received these
copies. But last year, at the latest, when a new RO group was being established, these handwrit-
ten OT materials were replaced by flawed transcripts 15. "Why?", not only I wondered while the
copyright infringement did not become any less significant due to the transcript compared to the
scan of the handwriting.
In fact, the transcript's deviations from the handwriting tended to be "consolidation". Outpoints
suggesting further research were removed. Maybe unintentionally, I don't want to insinuate the
worst. But why are handwritten scripts replaced by transcripts in the first place? I think it would
be okay to use them as amendments because not everyone can read Ron's handwriting very eas-
ily. Especially when you don't speak English very well. But removing the handwritten scripts al-
together is very severe.
There is another aspect that struck me badly. So many people have started digitalizing LRH ma-
terials. There is hardly a book, lecture or publication left that hasn't been digitalized. However,
usually any information about publisher and publishing date of the printed edition were re-
moved. So, as a "consumer" I can't see what publication they are based on. Considering the
massive falsifications by the Church, this isn't a small outpoint. The people working on this
project have, however, – as far as you can tell – resorted to older materials a lot, but given the
ROers' blind confidence in materials until 1982, that is not enough for me. I want to know pre-
cisely what materials a scan is based on.
In light of the undocumented revisions by the CoS, and now the FZ as well, it seems important
to me to stick to precise, academic citation rules in research work, as they have been set in the
DIN 1505-2. Here we also have lighter fares instead of studying these difficult to obtain DIN
standards. I can recommend a file called litverz.pdf off the Internet with the title: „Das Liter-
aturverzeichnis in wissenschaftlichen Arbeiten - Erstellung bibliographischer Belege nach DIN
1505 Teil 2“16 ("The references of academic works – creation of bibliographic references accord-
ing to DIN 1505 part 2")
I tried to give the sources in this FSB according to the DIN. Quotes, therefore, become reliable.
The reader can find the quotes in his or her library. Any deviations can be traced so that the
source of the falsification can be found. This will hardly be possible when working with digital-
ized texts whose templates are unknown.
In the 80s, the CoS reprinted a lot of LRH books from the 70s without any indication of
whether revisions had been made. Same goes for the Red and Green Volumes. It is not insignifi-
cant for my research whether or not these digitalized works, that I can fortunately work with,
are based on "reprints" or "first editions".
We should work on keeping the original works by LRH exactly as the source.

15
I have documented the changes of these transcripts in great detail in confidential FSBs about the OT levels II
and III and can – if required – verify these claims to every insider.
16
Von Klaus F. Lorenzen, 2., erw. und verb. Auflage FH Hamburg, FB Bibliothek und Information, Jan. 1997
(By Klaus F. Lorenzen, 2. obtained and cased edition FH Hamburg, FB Library and information, Jan 1997
FSB 4.3.05RA KSW – Subtle Extinction of Source page 9 of 9

Part of that is attention to biographical information in the case of digitalization of publications

that are difficult to obtain.
Then we will be able to deliver standard tech and make the promised profits: Clear, Theta-Clear
and OT!
Andreas Gross
for the
Independent Scientologists

Copyright © 2014 by
Dipl.-Ing. Andreas Gross
All Rights reserved