DAY 7, Zenon and McShane
30 Jan 2001
Zenon Panoussis <email@example.com>
And they suggested I post that. So there you go, from an OT 7 who paid not only for OT 5 (prolly $45-55,000) New OT 5 rundowns (prolly another $45,000 or more) OT 6-the course covering NOTS (not sure of the cost) and OT 7, every 6 month check having to get tested and then "crammed" on the material twice a year for 7 years, paying for it hourly, as well as ALL of the sec checking we had to pay for. ARGH.
There were two legs to McShane's statement on this:
1. The NOTs in themselves are not part of any course except the Class IX Auditors course.
2. You pay for the course, not for the course material as such.
With regard to the first part he had to back and admit that parts of the NOTs are part of the OT6 and OT7 course material. However, he never confirmed my detailed list (see my brief in Karin's posting "day 5&6"); he just said that he "didn't know" how big a part of the Internet NOTs are included in OT6 and OT7 and that he "would need to compare" the courses in order to give an exact answer.
The second part, the "you pay for the course, not for the course material" is not an issue of facts, but of legal assessment: if you pay for a course and you get the course material for free, is that material then really free? Swedish law answers this with a very clear "NO", so we don't need to bother further about this statement.
However, it would be interesting to compare notes and see which parts of the NOTs were part of OT6 and OT7 at what times and what was charged for them. This is what I filed with the court:
To put it more precisely: normal paying members who do the OT6- and OT7-courses can themselves read the following sections of the NOTs that are the subject of this court case:
Parts of series 1, the whole of the series 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 13, 14, 15 and 16, attachment 1 of series 18, the whole of series 19, 20 and 21, the parts "correction list" of series 24, the whole of series 25, 26R (of which parts are missing in attachment 37), 28 and 31, HCOB 29 October 1978 issue II, the whole of series 33, 37, 43 (including material from OT3), probably the whole of series 44, the whole of series 45 and 46, the first part of series 47, approximately half of series 49, the whole of series 51 and 55, approximately half of series 62, together with "correction actions on OT ser II flying ruds" (pages 170-172 in the copy of Stockholm's tingsrätt's administrative department).
Who can corroborate or correct any of this information? To which period of time does your information apply? (CoS drones, don't even bother).
-- oracle@everywhere: The ephemeral source of the eternal truth...
Any text written by other authors which may be quoted in part or in full within this exposure of the Scientology cult is provided according to U. S. Code Title 17 "Fair Use" dictates which may be reviewed at http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html If you're an author of an article and do not wish to allow it to be mirrored or otherwise provided on The Skeptic Tank web site, let us know and it will be removed fairly promptly.E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank