post 36: more false reports from Wendy

From: "Virginia McClaughry" <[email protected]>
Subject: post 36: more false reports from Wendy
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 21:31:32 -0800
Message-ID: <[email protected]>


Ethics section SC 15 March 1999
----------------
Virginia McClaughry

False Report Report
------------------------
Wendy Ettricks
cc: Wendy Ettricks
cc: Virginia’s ethics file

Wendy wrote a KR on me dated 26 February 1999.

It contains false data as follow;

First 3 paragraphs are the same as her “Things that Shouldn’t be Report”, see False Report Report regarding Wendy’s Things That Shouldn’t be Report.

Para 4.

I did not “attack” Wendy for “writing a KR”. I asked Wendy how come she did not give me a copy, and told her that it was not ok to report on someone to Ethics, and not give them a copy of the accusation. I also told her the LRH ref on this, and told her to look it up. It is true that I asked her what did she write a report on me about. Other than that, the rest is False.

Para 5

“I repeated that her comm asserting that my getting sec checked was off policy and was very entheta and enturbulating.......” etc. After Wendy said this, and BEFORE I received the KR later that day, I corrected her False report on what I said. IE: I told her I said “You read the 2 references, right? and that she said yes, and that I had next said :What are you going to do about it?” After correcting this with Wendy, she did not disagree with it. She leaves all the above out of her report, and also repeats the same false data on what I said, even though I have corrected her once already.

Next point is I did not say “I wouldn’t stop telling people about her disagreements because in my universe this is how she IS keeping Scientology working” I never said this, this is False.

The statement “basically those guys who agree with her viewpoint of not sec checking on the level.”, is an opinion, misduplication, and is 1.1 criticism. It is also not something I said, and is False.