Path: nwrddc01.gnilink.net!cyclone1.gnilink.net!newsfeed4.cidera.com!newsfeed1.cidera.com!Cidera!torn!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf2.bellglobal.com!news20.bellglobal.com.POSTED!ophelia Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology From: kady@wwwaif.net (kady@wwwaif.net) Subject: Re: ASI Message-ID: <a8q7v7$n8_006@news1.sympatico.ca> References: <slrnaav00k.108.hendersn@localhost.localdomain> X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.01 Lines: 221 Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 19:51:03 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.230.0.142 X-Complaints-To: abuse@sympatico.ca X-Trace: news20.bellglobal.com 1018208868 64.230.0.142 (Sun, 07 Apr 2002 15:47:48 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 15:47:48 EDT Organization: Bell Sympatico Xref: cyclone1.gnilink.net alt.religion.scientology:121398 X-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 15:57:59 EDT (nwrddc01.gnilink.net) In article <slrnaav00k.108.hendersn@localhost.localdomain>, Zed <hendersn@zeta.org.au> wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >Okay. The ducks are all lined up in a row. Here goes... Well done, Zed. This is a fascinating and succinct little summary of the ASI mysteries. > >1. ASI is for-profit and allegedly designed to market fictional works only I have one question for clarification here. As I recall, and it's been a while since I've read up on the issue, on its formation in 1981, ASI was *originally* designated to be the corporate receiver for Hubbard's royalties during the time that he was alive, to more effectively allow him to evade paying taxes while having access to funds through "thetan corporations" like OTC and slushpits like the Religious Research Fund. With absolutely no hard evidence to back it up, my feeling has always been that the ASI solution bears the hallmark of one Norton S. Karno's particular genius for allowing his clients to slip through tax loopholes. >2. ASI employees are sea org members. Officially, they have resigned from >the Church to work for ASI. However, I have been informed that ASI employees >have been spotted in Sea Org uniform, wearing some kind of badge with the >identifier "ASI". This might be an example of the power of semantics, or following the law to the letter while dancing a jig on the spirit: would it be possible to "resign" from one's official position within a church-owned corporation and head off to work at ASI while maintaining one's rank and membership in the conveniently nebulous and non-formalized Sea Organization? That would allow, and have allowed Scn to claim that ASI employees were "not church employees" while maintaining strict control over personnel through their membership in the Sea Org. (It would also cut down substantially on the salaries these staffers would be paid.) >3. a business management agreement between hubbard and ASI came into being >on May 10 1982. Contemporaneous, it bears noting, with other changes in the power structure and corporate labyrinth related to the overall 1982 "sort-out". >4. This agreement was rescinded and replaced by one between ASI, Author's >Family Trust (no appendage) and the Estate of L Ron Hubbard sometime after >Hubbard's death. In it ASI is described as an independent contractor for AFT >and the Estate. See http://www.zeta.org.au/~hendersn/asi-aft-agreement.html > >This agreement has one clause which isn't 100% clear. Describing the >services that ASI will do for Author's Family Trust and the Estate: >** > a. To collect all income paid to Client > from any source and to deposit these funds in financial > institutions of the Client's selection. Funds shall be > deposited in accounts bearing the name of the Client only; > *** > > Does this mean "no bank accounts which other people can >access", "no accounts which are held by other people for the Client", or both? I think "bearing the name of the Client" (which would be the Estate of LRH, I presume?), would mean that the Estate, in the person of Norm Starkey, could designate individuals both within and without its corporate aegis who would have access to accounts. What this would mean, I gather, is that $1 paid to "the Estate" would be collected by ASI, and then promptly put into bank accounts held in the name of the Estate. Is this correct? >5. The IRS took exception to the fact that ranking church members were also >employees of ASI: >Notice of denial of exemption to CST dated Jul 8 1989: >*** > Lyman Spurlock is President of Church of Spiritual Technology and, along >with Mr. Miscavige, is an employee of Author Services, Inc. Author Services, >Inc., is a for-profit corporation formed to provide services to L. Ron >Hubbard in connection with exploitation of patents and copyrights which >Hubbard owned >*** >and again: >*** >The same persons who were in charge of Scientology prior to Mr. Hubbard's >death hold positions of control or influence in some of these new >organizations. For example, persons who hold positions of influence in the >reorganized Scientology structure also hold positions in Author Services, >Inc., a for-profit corporation formed to benefit L. Pon Hubbard. Lyman >Spurlock, David Miscavige, Greg Wilhere, Terri Gamboa, Marion Meisler, Maria >Starkey, and Becky Hay, persons who hold influence in the reorganized >Scientology structure also hold positions in Author Services, Inc. Author >Services, Inc., is now performing the same function of "collecting >royalties" for the beneficiary of L. Ron Hubbard's estate. Thus, as happened >in the Church of California case, the income of an allegedly exempt >organization (Church of Spiritual Technology should it obtain recognition of >exemption) will be passed through a for-profit corporation which is >controlled by persons who also hold positions of influence in the >Scientology structure. >*** >Current makeup of the staff of ASI is largely unknown. It's very difficult to make sense of the fact that the 1993 Agreement was apparently reached despite the fact that nothing had changed regarding the filtering of 'exempt' money through a for-profit corporation (ASI). What am I missing here? Plus, one has to remember that Norm Starkey is both the Chairman and CEO of ASI *and* the Executor of the Estate, which seems to be -- kind of a strange situation, since the agreement between ASI and AFTb/Estate of LRH is basically an agreement between Norm Starkey and Norm Starkey. >6. Evidence that ASI's money-collection was not limited to sale of fictional >works is presented by Tom Voltz in his book "Scientology with(out) an end". >Here he describes a fax sent out by WISE Europe: >*** >Please let me know what you want and need from me. What is needed and wanted >from you is that you make your payments promptly every week and let me know >of payments immediately, so that I can enter these in my books. > >The license payments and fees are extremely important, and it is extremely >important that you pay them on time, since the money goes directly to ASI >for the Executor. This is your payment for what L. Ron Hubbard has done for >you. When you make your payments [over a certain length of time] at the >beginning of the week with no problems, then you will receive a >commendation. And please make any suggestions as to which game you would >like to play with us. Expecting your answer. >*** Oh, I have a game I'd like to play with WISE EU. It's called "What exactly is the difference between ASI and "the Estate" when both are represented by the same individual, Norm Starkey?" I have another game too, if that one gets boring -- the old classic Semantic Jumble with Interesting Fine Print, which explores how ASI acts not only as the only authorized licencer for LRH fiction while simultaneously works for the Estate to collect all income paid to "client" from *any source*. Would this include royalties for Hubbard works not considered "fiction" under the definition used by ASI et al? What am I missing here? >7. From multiple sources: ASI has produced "Special Properties" which are >misrepresented as investment in collector's items. They take the form of >prints of science fiction art or "special editions" of Hubbard's Scientology >works. There may be others. Once sold, the special properties are worthless. So let me get this straight: if you slap a cheap leatherette cover and a "Love, Ron" signature stamp on a copy of Introduction to Ethics, you have yourself a "Special Property" that can be marketed and sold by ASI, rather than Bridge? Or, even better, you could get some artistic-minded Sea Org painter to splash some watercolour on a canvas, call it "Works inspired by L. Ron Hubbard's fiction", and ASI is in business again? With even a modicum of creativity, and enough willing dupes to fork over cash for special Ron merchandise, ASI could rake in the cash. And since it's not non-profit/tax exempt, that money could be laundered right back into the organizations via "donations" to, say, the IAS warchest, since there's no law against a for-profit company donating to a non-profit charity (and hey, they could even deduct it!), or inured to individuals for "contract work" or "honoraria", or any number of other exercises. Used properly, ASI could be a goldmine for untraceable cash. >8. While it is not baldly stated, money from Church members given to the >Preservation of the Tech project also goes to ASI. It is CST that preservers >Hubbard's writings on golden CDs which are then buried in a nuclear-proof >vault. From "Scientology with(out) an end": >** > More often it occurs that Scientologists, if they buy these works, >contribute to the security of Scientology in that they invest in entire >works of L. Ron Hubbard which are specially processed, pressed onto golden >CDs, stamped into metal plates, etc. so that they may be preserved in >special vaults for the purpose of surviving an atomic war. >*** Is this perhaps something to do with the earlier mentioned clause about "collecting income"? Perhaps CST has designated ASI as its agent in that regard, explicitly or implicitly via that mysteriously vague clause in the existing agreement. One thing that makes me go hmmm, however - taxes on the donations. As I understand it, a Scn donating to CCHR, say, can take a deduction because it's a non-profit. A donation to ASI directly, on the other hand, would not be similarly deductible. Would this cut down on potential donations from Scientologists? Or is the cheque itself made out to "Preservation of the Tech" as a CST dba, and collected by ASI on CST's behalf? >9. ASI is not a book publisher. Hubbard's fictional works are published by >the two Church publication companies Bridge Publications and New Era >Publications. According to Jon Atack, it was ASI that licensed Hubbard's >copyrights to Bridge and New Era. He does not specify "copyrights to only >fictional works". The licensing agreements may have changed in recent years. That makes sense; it's also a great way to filter *still more money* through a for-profit corporation into the operating funds of church-run entities via seemingly legitimate business-to-business contracts. Do Bridge and New Era maintain their own operating funds and accounts, or does the bulk of that money go into the various even more shadowy Publications-related trusts that seem to live offshore under minimum scrutiny as far as IRS-related investigations go? >10. As a privately-owned corporation, ASI does not have to provide much >information about its inner workings to the public. It presumably has to >fill out tax returns, but return information is a private affair between the >taxpayer and the IRS. It is possible that the IRS is aware of the details of >the activities of ASI and has found nothing actionable. It is also possible >that the people involved in looking over the Church of Scientology's special >financial reports have nothing to do with the people who look over ASI's tax >returns. Perhaps someone should mention the possibility to the IRS. Agreed, and this is absolutely fascinating. It's hard to believe that the IRS, as an institution, would be unaware of the relationship between ASI and CST. One thing that you didn't mention in your excellent summary was that CST apparently owns all the common shares of ASI as a result of the departure of Terri Gamboa and Homer Schomer, as per the closing agreement. Given that ASI's existence, and relationship to CST and the Church of Scientology as an entity was immortalized in the draf of the very document by which the exemption is governed, it is difficult to understand how those IRS workers charged with keeping the church's tax-exempt books under scrutiny would not take ASI's activities into account, but as we know, stranger things have happened. It's also possible that the Estate, as the Estate, pays a more significant role as a buffer between the various entities, since it is not (I believe) considered part of the CoS as far as the IRS agreement goes. K
A list of ASI employees collated from various sites around the web:
Barbara Ruiz, executive director
Joni Labaqui, ASI Senior Vice President for Public Relations
Javier Ruiz, Senior Vice President for Properties of Author Services
On Tue, 09 Apr 2002 18:37:48 GMT, kady@wwwaif.net (kady@wwwaif.net) wrote: >In article <slrnab6b5i.2s9.hendersn@localhost.localdomain>, Zed <hendersn@zeta.org.au> wrote: >>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> >>A list of ASI employees collated from various sites around the web: >>Barbara Ruiz, executive director >>Joni Labaqui, ASI Senior Vice President for Public Relations >>Javier Ruiz, Senior Vice President for Properties of Author Services > >Wait, I thought Norm Starkey was the Executive Director of Author Services Inc. >The hell? > >Anyway, here are a few tidbits on these names: > >First of all, there are many, many Ruiz Scientologists sprinkled >throughout various lists. However, it could be a very common name, and >not yet another dynasty. > >Barbara and Javier Ruiz are listed on the IAS Honor Roll at 10K (dollars or >members?), which generally indicates that an individual is, or at least was on >staff. > >Javier appeared as an Internic contact for the enigmatic RTS Movies company: >Ruiz, Javier (JR880) risf_admin@THETA.COM > RTS MOVIES > 7051 Hollywood Blvd. Suite 530 > Los Angeles, CA 90028 > 213-466-8005 > >Joni Labaqui turns up as contact for various ASI events; I believe she is the >sister of Scientologist, Slatkin victim and "lemon law" maven Norm Taylor. > >Labaqui, Joni (JL899) iof_admin@THETA.COM > ILLUSTRATORS OF THE FUTURE CONTEST > 7051 Hollywood Blvd. Suite 560 > Los Angeles, CA 90028 > 213-468-0648 > >>Others: >>Ryland Hawkins > > >Hawkins, Ryland (RH825) asi_admin@THETA.COM > Author Services, Inc. > 7051 Hollywood Blvd. Suite #400 > Los Angeles, CA 90028 > 213-466-3310 > >Also a signatory on some of the contracts related to the LRH, the Estate and >ASI. > >>Alison Fine > >Fine, Alison (AF256) lrhl_admin@THETA.COM > AUTHOR'S ADMINISTRATION > 7051 Hollywood Blvd. Suite 300 > Los Angeles, CA 90028 > 213-466-8851 > >>Scott Welch(probably misspelt) >> >>Zed >>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >> >>iQEVAwUBPLMssCsxIzhyTOOxAQGT3Qf/R5ZAfXdGTelPbnEEEfaetutXJ6jHCjCp >>MzNqB0UK90h+fjwH2vuiRYP5dKdi1pbxOktyamrZmp7fikumZpBbelYqPXYWhVTm >>YHaGLb4z26TmK2/u8jL6Uestf6gj6GIJ/pGGWkXhgk9y9gXOSFhoYm+ZFxG3/SIq >>FjpHP6DzVuwQLHVQ8zPr5D4KHBS+Nmi97X2w4YSyJN2RmyO1qxHVPtLudFZP3FJ8 >>HVJb770fj+TIOT7P51sknH0vZ949uGgs4C3JzXEjxx1dsHofdJIfc90mGRTEA6xT >>B6rJ+3RtsoikmhkCg0ME435QUzR4DQuVCCcVGIPT5c8Q8MY/p4jN6Q== >>=XGE8 >>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----