Dear Editor (continued)

waiting for 'Lo these many years'. It is not intended to satisfy everyone just as group auditing takes in the majority of the group and leaves the fringes for future reference so such a policy statement is presented to the majority of the entire field. This is a step in the right direction; in a group, the heckler is either audited to a point where he can join the group or be is ejected from that group by the members of that group who are interested in getting somewhere with the materials at hand. There isn't any argument that from his own standpoint the heckler might be right. We would, as you say, defend to the death, his right to heckle wherever and whatever be pleases, but wish to get on with our work so we eject or audit him. In the beginning of such an operation, we are likely to eject him rather than spend the time necessary to audit him to a point where he can join the group because we realise that later, when the necessary work is done, we can go back and pick him up...

"As for getting angry with you, I had hoped you knew better than that. There's no anger, only the hope that by some means we can get together and really move toward a better future for all of Scientology. Of course, you are going to have to do it your own way as I will do it in mine. I can see a hell of alot of good in what has been presented. There is some there that is not so good but none of it which is entirely bad and it is all going in the direction we wish to go. This organization can survive and if I have anything to say about it, will survive and I expect that sometime later, you'll look at it and wonder what the hell all the fuss was about. "--Ernie Wirick, Detroit, Mich.

"I read the attack on you in the recent issue of Ability.

"Anyone who knows you knows this attack was unjustified. In consequence, you have my sympathy.

"However, you should remember that if you are going to play with skunks, you must expect to get a little skunk ---- on you now and then."--Bob Williams, Cactus, Ariz.

"I was extremely glad to see the last Aberree, with its many items of usually unusual interest, especially the bit About the item in Ability regardingus psychotics, I thought the tone of your rebuttal extremely gentle, all things considered...

"Several here (myself included) received-, a letter of Steves' anouncing that be had heard we-were practicing -Scientology to the detriment (he spelled it detrement) of the society and did we have any clarification of this. In answer to letter, I wrote that I had not be en using Scientology for about 5 months, and would he please advise me who said this, when, where, etc., since I felt I should handle further with the individual responsible or if necessary with my attorney to disabuse him of the idea that slanderous statements may be made without due regard for consequences. Without answering any of my questions, Steves replied be was glad to hear I was not using Scientology (!) but since I referred to members of the Scientology Group of Portland in my reply, and since they bait nogroup registered in Portland, perhaps I could -*again this. I bows not, for obvious reasons. replied.

"Now I see that van Vogt, whom Hubbard was so 'tickled pink' to welcome back into the fold, is again out on a limb, together with 'Andy' Andersen and Wayne Dunbar. Can the HASI sink lower! Probably!

"It really depresses me almost to tears to consider how the goals sod purposes of the earlier Scientology appear to be simply being thrown dawn the coal chute...

"A friend remarked be thought Alphia wasn't very funny any more, to which I replied that there were, in my opinion. some things about which it was very difficult if not impossible to be funny..."—Jon R. Skinner, Portland, Drs.

"Received the Aberree. The new format is interesting. There was one misprint, Which I suspect may have been deliberate, you debii! In my letter, paragraph 3, it should have read 'Right now we are interested in developing synergic teams.' You had 'terms"." -- Art Coulter, M.D., Worthington. Ohio

"I was much pleased to receive both the ABERREE and the Clinical Course Notes much sooner than your letter acknowledging the order led me to believe. A monumental piece of work, indeed. Question: if you and Hubbard are as mad at each other as you both pretend, how come you are allowed to publish this thing,?...

"I have looked and looked, but fail to find any kudos in the letter column concerning the justified margins in both the Aberree's and the Course Notes forest, as well as the generally terrific all-round fine job of lay-out. Someone is sweating blood over these--I suspect the publisher. And it's about time it was mentioned!

"You aren't fooling ME with the small type used in the letter columns--I know it's nothing as prosaic as a Vari-Type job, as we are supposed to believe. Actually, you merely do up the letters on a special stencil with a wool-fiber backing, then dip it Into the bathtub a couple of times until it has shrunk down to the size to fit the sheet. Very clever, VERY clever.

"I just came back from hearing a duper congress--the run-off-which you-noted—of the last Phoenix lectures, in Detroit, by Refa Postel's gang. This is the first group-processing in which I have participated that actually worked--apparently-

the two-way communicaticam formula was the hitherto missing factor. IT miss I-left here with a -.rather wearisome physical condition,-case back without it. I suspect the processing,-I've a rather nasty, suspicious type mind, I'm afraid." --Curtis D. Jenks, Sheboygan, Wis.

*Any resemblance between the attached and what you might have got from Kitselman or Mathison may e only an accidental meeting of thought streams:

A PRIMER FOR CULT LEADERS

"First, pick your cult. This has two parts:

"A. What are you going to preach about? "B. To whom are you going to preach?

"This problem is the heart of the business and the successful cult leader will give it steady attention. When you pick a crowd to preach to, you want one that will stay steady in the harness and not be gazing to left or right. Any resemblance between. a crowd Of cultists and a mule is just apt. You pick a mule that will pull steadily and stand when told, and if he has a tendency to look back with calf's eyes, why that is your bay.

"As for picking a subject, select one on which a LOT of work has already been done, but where the work has not come to the attention of your particular crowd. Almost anything you care to deliver from such a store will appear new and delightful to the uninformed.

"Second, adapt it. Change something. Give it new names. Trot out a new vocabulary, for some reason or other. Floss up your set of reasons so that even reasonable people are taken in on this one. And when you have this part going good, start talking.

"Third, make it simple. Get the thing down in language that any kindergarten will recognize, and give it some simple ideas. If your crowd listens to these very simple items and thinks they understand, that is what you want. It does not really matter whether it may be too simple to work as described. What you want is for them to feel, I TOO CAN UNDERSTAND THIS ISN'T IT WONDERFUL. Your typical member isn't going to worry about his punctua, tion. (This leaves you free to use almost any kind of language YOU like.)

"Fourth, organize your presentation so you can keep bringing out new stuff over a period of several years. This has several obvious advantages, but the main one is that if you pick your crowd carefully, some bright but unshrewd lads are going to up and GIVE you