post 52: comm with warren mcshane's wife

From: "Virginia McClaughry" <[email protected]>
Subject: post 52: comm with warren mcshane's wife
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 22:21:47 -0800
Message-ID: <[email protected]>


What is it with these guys and having their wives do the "dirty work" --- just noticed that. LOL

Virginia


2 March, 1999

Marcy McShane
Tech Reports Off Asst.
1710 Ivar Avenue, Suite #1105
Los Angeles, California 90028-5111


Dear Marcy,

Thank you for your letter concerning the reports I wrote to RTRC. I appreciate your taking the time to read my reports, as well as the references mentioned therein.

Per C/S Series 73RB, the part that covers when the C/S adjudicates the need for sec-checking states: “Pre-OTs progressing well in the No-Interference Area should not be interfered with by Sec Checking or anything else. However, when a pre-OT is stalled or moving slowly, any of the actions listed below, as appropriate, can be ordered by a qualified C/S....”

Per HCOPL INVESTIGATORY PROCEDURE “In auditing when one reviews or “corrects” a case that is running well, one has trouble. It is made trouble.”

“When justice goes astray (as it usually does) the things that have occurred are: 1. Use of justice for some other purpose than public safety (such as maintaining a privileged group or indulging a fixed idea) or 2. Investigatory procedure.”

“Whatever the motive for investigation, the action itself is conducted by sequences.”

“If one is incapable mentally of tracing a series of events or actions, one cannot investigate.”

“Altered sequence is a primary block to investigation.”

Per your letter, you stated 1. “What I see is that the very references you say are being violated, are the references that apply as to why you should get the security check” and 2. “.....as if you were really doing well and moving, you would be in session.” These statements are altered sequence.

The correct sequence is 1. I am moving well on Solo Nots 2. I get sec-checked 3. in the middle of the sec check, I say that doing this sec check is an overt because it violates C/S C/S Series 73RB. 4. I refuse to continue to violate C/S Series 73RB. 5.I receive Method 2 wordclearing and False Data stripping on C/S Series 73RB, CONFESSIONALS AND THE NON-INTERFERENCE ZONE, by the Senior Qual Sec-Checker Flag. 6. I apply and complete The How To Defeat Verbal Tech Checklist. 7. I continue to not violate C/S Series 73RB, and CONFESSIONALS AND THE NON-INTERFERENCE ZONE. 8. My Eligibility gets suspended unjustly. 9. I take “Maximum Recourse” and write it up to Int terminals. 10. I request a Board of Review, which is presently underway.

What I am seeking to do is apply the HCOB’s C/S Series 73RB, and CONFESSIONALS AND THE NON-INTERFERENCE ZONE exactly as LRH states they should be.

Your help would be appreciated in ensuring that HCOB’s C/S Series 73RB, and CONFESSIONALS AND THE NON-INTERFERENCE ZONE, get applied exactly as stated by LRH, so that I can get back onto, and complete Solo NOTs.

Love,






cc: Mr. Marina Pezzotti, RTC Inspector Sandcastle
Senior C/S Int
RTRC Director, Senior C/S Int Office
Tech Reports Officer, Senior C/S Int Office
Senior C/S Fso
D/Senior C/S Fso