Another contradiction in the debate about Scientology is the so called „Free Zone" (in German: "Freie Zone e. V.") a group of Scientologists, who do not want to work together with the official Scientology Organization.

At the end of the eighties, some Scientologists outside the organization joined together, with the purpose to bring Hubbard into society by other inroads than through the official organization.

In many talks with officials I found out that they judge with different measurements. On the one hand there is the Scientology Organization in the form of several registered societies. This Organization is under surveillance by the office responsible for defending the constitution and governmental and church sect-specialists are warning about it.

On the other hand there is the so called „Free Zone" which is not even using the same foundations but is disseminating as well without any restrictions. The Free Zone is not under surveillance and works without any limitations. On the contrary: It even goes so far that one of the heads of the Free Zone in Bavaria is working in a big company without any limitations. When this Scientologist got into work trouble, it is said that even the office responsible for defending the constitution helped him out, so that he could retain his job. Members of the Scientology Organization in the same concern were "removed" by dismissal.

Whether it's relevant that this Free Zone member was very cooperative with the office responsible for defending the constitution or generously exchanging files to Caberta’s office „Arbeitskreis Scientology„ in Hamburg , so that nobody bothered his Hubbard-goals, is an open question. As well as if these goals were dangerous at all, should he have been dismissed, as well. The fact is, officials judge with different measurements.

Either it is about a "clarification" of what Hubbard's objectives are and if the actual activities of Scientologists are contrary to the state under the rule of law. If so, one can not observe the ones who are organized with a membership card and leave the others to act freely, just because they have no official membership card. Or is this not about clarification?

One case for example: In a business the managing director got a hint that one of his employees might be a Scientologist member. In a roundabout way he learned, that to avoid further orders from the city that he would dismiss the Scientologist. So he dismisses the Scientologist. Official reason for dismissal: Rationalizing!

In the same company works a former Scientologist, who did not make a secret of his enthusiasm for Hubbard and did not make a secret of his defection to the Free Zone. Nobody bothered him! Neither the city which gave the orders, nor the managing director and not even the office responsible for defending the constitution, as investigations in the spring of 2002 revealed.

So what is it about?

I can prove that I posed in all my publications the question: „If the objectives of Scientology are contrary to this state under the rule of law". After eleven years neither the government, nor the churches, nor any sect specialist and for sure not the office responsible for defending the constitution could prove in detail that this is the case. But one thing they proved to me:

How one could instigate with just one word without any legal foundation a boycott, an exclusion from a civil service profession by government ruling, exclusion and libel - and nobody bothers.