Mark Rathbun: The Battle of Portland (May 28, 2013)


Men in general judge more from appearances than from reality. All men have eyes, but few have the gift of penetration. — Niccolo Machiavelli

Everything hung in the balance at the spring, 1985 trial of Julie Christofferson-Titchbourne vs Church of Scientology. This was the very case that my brother’s friend had tried to tell me about in 1977 in Portland, when he was making an effort to get me out of Scientology. Christofferson was a young woman who had taken a simple Communication Course. It was the very Communication Course that I had taken, at the same Portland mission I’d attended.

Christofferson had, however — according to her — an experience completely opposite to my own in taking the course. She and her Flynn-allied attorney Garry McMurry claimed that she was defrauded into taking the course in the first place, by false representations about L. Ron Hubbard’s credentials and Scientology’s scientific guarantees to bring her health, joy and happiness. According to the lawsuit, the course hypnotized Christofferson and the mission subsequently used that hypnotic state to turn her against her family. The case had originally gone to trial in 1977, and a Multnomah County jury had returned a verdict in her favor for more than two million dollars.

In 1982, the Oregon Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the case for new trial. The appeals court decision was one of our first major religious recognitions. While Miscavige took full credit for the victory with L. Ron Hubbard, in fact he had served as little more than a nuisance to its accomplishment. The case had already been argued and was pending decision when Miscavige’s Special Project came on the All Clear scene in 1981. His then-deputy Starkey had attempted to intervene in the matter, and wound up blowing off the attorney who would ultimately win the great precedent, Charles Merten.

Merten refused to re-try the case because of his disgust with the church’s new order. But he had already briefed and argued the appeal of the 1979 verdict, so there was no way for the Special Project to mess that up. Had it not been for the original Christofferson case appeals court decision, we likely would not have attained several of the more minor — but useful in their cumulative effect — religious recognition precedents we did wind up achieving through the perilous fight for an All Clear.

A new trial lawyer had been retained in Portland to try the case. Ted Runstein was a personable, seasoned and successful trial attorney. He was, however, demoted to ride shotgun to Earle Cooley and keep his mouth shut as local counsel after saying something for which Miscavige never forgave him. Runstein had suggested that “the jury needs to hear from some real Scientologists from the witness stand.” Miscavige replied that we have plenty of Scientologists on our witness list. Runstein countered, “Those are all Sea Org staff; I am talking about having them hear from Scientologist parishioners who live and work in the same community as the jurors — real Scientologists.” Miscavige snapped, “Sea Org members are real Scientologists, public Scientologists are dilettantes.” Miscavige ruminated on this affront by Runstein throughout the trial, calling him a “theetie-weetie, airy-fairy idiot” behind his back.

So when Earle Cooley rolled into town he had free rein.

David Miscavige, as the chairman of the board of Author Services, would spend the next several weeks in Portland supervising and dictating every last detail of the trial. He was going to show me, the dozens of other attorneys he categorized as “defensive losers,” and the entire OSA network how a trial was conducted, Scientology style. No more counter-intention from lawyers who knew best. He had a soul mate in Earle, so that in his view L. Ron Hubbard’s slash-and-burn policies with respect to detractors and attackers would run into no internal interference. David Miscavige would prove to Ron once again why he needed him to ramrod his intentions through. Hubbard himself was apparently incommunicado, as evidenced by little to no dispatch traffic arriving — which made Miscavige’s two-month, full-time battle of Portland stint possible.

We rented a number of units at a downtown condominium, walking distance from the courthouse. One unit was inhabited by Earle, his long-time mistress Jeannie and their fourteen-year-old son. Another one-bedroom unit was occupied by Miscavige and me. Another was reserved for a couple of Office of Special Affairs staff, and served as a document preparation area and repository. We had a dozen more staff working out of the offices of the mission, which were only a few blocks away. One more condo unit was occupied by Earle’s partner and protégé, Harry Manion.

Harry would prove pivotal to the case, though he did very little speaking in court. Harry was in his early thirties. A big, strapping man — if overweight, like Earle — with a boyish face and an infectious smile and personality. Harry was the archetypal hale fellow well met. He had a glib, friendly word for everyone he encountered, and a natural ability to make people feel comfortable and light. Harry had something else going for him. He was a former college and minor-league professional baseball player, and that really meant something to the judge.

Judge Don Londer was respected by many locally. But because he was Jewish, he was not really accepted into Portland’s traditionally WASP judicial circles. Londer consider himself an old jock, often reminiscing about his boxing career during his younger days in the Navy. He was also a decent, considerate man. However, he was not very bright. In the condo we used to joke that maybe he had his lights knocked out one too many times during his boxing career. But because Harry was a real professional athlete, in Londer’s eyes Harry could do no wrong. Harry struck up a relationship gradually by arriving a little early to court, and thus “bumping into” the judge regularly. The latter always wanted to hear jock war stories from Harry. Harry was the son Don Londer wished he had fathered.

In Miscavige’s view, the Christofferson case was the perfect test case. Christofferson had only ever had a few months engagement with Scientology. She had spent a total of $3,000 on auditing and courses. She had not been harassed by the Guardian’s Office. The court of appeals had already ruled that she could make no case for infliction of emotional distress/outrageous conduct.

Her only remaining cause of action was for fraud. The court of appeal had even narrowed the issue to whether the representations made to her were motivated by sincerely-held religious belief.

In retrospect, it was probably the stupidest move imaginable to not settle the case before trial, for those very reasons. Christofferson claimed fraud primarily based on alleged false representations about L. Ron Hubbard’s pre-Scientology credentials. These were the very issues aired in the Armstrong case, which had made an All Clear all but unattainable. By going to trial, we were affording a woman — who effectively had no damages to claim — a worldwide platform to replay the Armstrong inquisition all over again. Except this time Flynn’s stable of witnesses was bolstered by the former Executive Director of International Scientology, Bill Franks, and the former head of the organization Christofferson had interacted with — the Scientology Mission of Portland, Martin Samuels.

Samuels had been the owner of the Portland mission when both Christofferson and I were parishioners there. He was the owner of the Portland mission when the first Chistofferson trial played out. Samuels had joined the Flynn camp shortly after being expelled, during Miscavige’s mission holder purges of 1982. Samuels testified in the first Christofferson trial on behalf of the church. In the second trial we knew that he would testify that the mother church had not only run every single detail of the trial, but even forced Samuels to lie on the witness stand. And thus Christofferson II was rather a cinch for the Flynn camp to hit the mother church with a sizable judgment (something that had not occurred in the first trial).

But Miscavige — and thus we — looked at it in the simplistic, black-and-white, good-vs.-evil worldview of L. Ron Hubbard. This was our big opportunity to play it all over again. In our view, the 1979 Chistofferson verdict had been what motivated Flynn and FAMCO in the first place.

All of the testimony in the Armstrong trial (including that of Armstrong and Laurel Sullivan) came pouring into the record. More horror stories were added by Samuels and Franks, and by a host of other witnesses. Miscavige and I directed a couple dozen staff, frenetically working through each and every night to provide Earle with material to discredit each witness on cross examination. While direct examination was still in progress, I, Miscavige and several other staff would pore over the real-time transcripts being relayed from court, marking them up for every bit of discrediting documentation we had available in a massive file room at the mission. When the court day ended, we would huddle with Cooley and outline the preps required for the cross exam the next morning. The crews stayed up until 1 or 2 every night, putting the material together and getting final ok from me and Miscavige. Then we would sleep for two to three hours, wake up at 4 a.m. and prepare to meet Earle in his condo at 5 a.m. We would spend the next three hours briefing him on details about how each witness had lied, exaggerated, and twisted the truth or was somehow morally reprehensible. We liberally used material from the ethics records from their days in the church, even copying internal reports to use on cross. This went on for weeks. We continually engaged in echo-chamber, confidence-reinforcing sessions, reviewing how Earle had so thoroughly destroyed each witness’ credibility.

There were external indicia to support our overconfidence. Earle Cooley brutalized the plaintiff’s witnesses on cross examination. So dramatic were his cross exams, that each day Earle was up, the courtroom was packed with local lawyers. They had no interest in the case itself, but Earle’s cross examinations were so dramatic that word had spread through the legal community that Cooley was the best show in town. They were there only to watch a master of their own trade at work. What we were blind to was the cumulative impression that so much manhandling conveyed.

We received a wake-up call of sorts in the middle of the plaintiff’s case, but collectively chose not to heed it. We had planned to enter the covert Armstrong-Griffith-Park surveillance tapes into evidence during the cross examination of Armstrong. Earle set up Armstrong masterfully, leading him to deny that he had ever talked to anyone about taking over the church, orchestrating federal raids, and least of all manufacturing and planting documents in church files. Then Earle started quoting Armstrong from transcripts of the surveillance tapes, clearly demonstrating he was lying from the witness stand. The warning we did not heed came in the form of Judge Londer’s reaction to the courtroom spectacle. In chambers he loudly chastised the church’s behavior in being involved in such cloak-and-dagger activity to begin with. Londer, who clearly did not think much of Chistofferson’s case based on comments he had made up to that point in the trial, was more disgusted with the secret video-taping than the lies they revealed. Had we not been so thoroughly in the throes of a thought-stopping, alternate-reality creation, we might have given thought to how the jury felt about the aggressive, “gotcha” manner we were using with all the plaintiffs witnesses.

Even though it backfired in the case at hand, getting the Armstrong surveillance videos on the public record would serve as a major step in dealing with the more serious government threats of criminal indictments then still extant. The stakes were far higher than merely the Chistofferson case, and there was a great deal of tension in getting the tapes put on the record. We did not want to submit the producer, private eye Gene Ingram, to cross-examination, for fear that he would be forced to disclose anything about the increasing number of operations he was privy to. In the course of coordinating the transportation of the tapes to Portland and into the hands of church coordination attorney John Peterson, Miscavige insisted upon bypassing me and speaking directly to Ingram — something he had not done up to that point in time. I advised him that was a bad idea, should Ingram or he ever be subject to deposition.

I picked up the phone to make the call to Ingram, and Miscavige came flying at me — tackling me into a sofa and attempting to wrestle the phone from my hand. I would not relinquish my grip even though he was strangling me. I threw my chest out to buck Miscavige from me. He violently stabbed his fist into my chest and said menacingly, “Don’t you ever cross me,
motherfucker! I’ll have you declared [excommunicated] in a heartbeat if you ever fuck with me again.” I looked Miscavige in the eye for a moment and considered the weight of that statement. For four years no one on planet earth could communicate to L. Ron Hubbard but through Miscavige — not even his wife. Miscavige was the recipient of personal communications on a weekly basis from Hubbard — but for the extended periods the latter went incommunicado entirely. He was right, he could have me declared in a heartbeat, and all I’d fought for to date would have been for naught. I handed him the phone. He had established himself — much as he had done with Mary Sue Hubbard — as boss buffalo.

So dramatic were Earle Cooley’s cross examinations that we were all swept into the sweet oblivion of the drama of it all. We heard from Judge Londer, through Harry, and we heard from dozens of lawyers who attended as spectators and students: Earle Cooley was magnificent. Earle huddled us up in the condo one evening over beers.

“Have you guys ever heard of Percy Foreman?” Earle asked us.

We all replied that we had not.

“Foreman was one of the premier trial lawyers in American history. He once defended a woman who was up for a murder rap in Miami. The government brought a bunch of scumbag convicts in to bolster their case against her. Foreman demonstrated on cross examination that the testimony was obviously paid for. When he saw the jury understood that, he surprised everyone. After the case in chief, he rested the defense without calling a single witness. He wanted those cross examinations fresh on their minds when they went to deliberate.”

“Brilliant!” exclaimed Miscavige. “We don’t want to serve up our people to McMurry anyway.”

“Exactly,” Earle replied, “sending in Runstein and his ‘real Scientologists’ would be like sending sheep to slaughter.”

“You’re fucking-A right, Earle!” Miscavige proclaimed, as final authorization of the strategy.

And so Earle Cooley shocked the judge, the plaintiff’s team, and all who were watching when he announced the next morning in open court that the defense would call no witnesses, and rested. Judge Londer thought it was a great idea. He didn’t want to sit for another several weeks on this case. And he agreed with Earle that the plaintiff had never made a case worth a hill of beans. It was judge Londer’s nonchalant manner of dealing with jury instructions that helped set us up for the shock of our lives. Londer told Earle and Harry to relax on their stressed arguments to attempt strict control of the jury before their deliberations began. He said, “Hey, what has she got, three grand in damages? The jury isn’t stupid.” And so, with the judge’s assessment of the merits, we were optimistic — albeit nervous — as we awaited the verdict.

Nobody was prepared for the result. On a Friday afternoon the jury awarded Christofferson $39 million. That not only buried any idea of an All Clear, it put the church’s very future at risk. Earle Cooley wasn’t sure why he did it, but he asked the judge to hold off on recording the verdict for a few days. The judge wasn’t sure why either, but he granted Earle’s request.

Miscavige had flown back to Los Angeles after closing arguments. Cooley left that night for Las Vegas to blow off steam and to try to deaden the devastating loss with a weekend of amnesiainducing recreation. In a way, I was left alone holding the bag at the scene of the crime. Early Saturday morning I met with two associates of our local counsel in their Portland office. We frantically traded ideas for challenging the verdict before the case went up to the court of appeals for the two-to-three-year appellate process. One of the associates was a cheery, bright British woman. She came up with a wild idea. Since the verdict had not yet been recorded, we could still make a motion concerning the case before the lower court. That court retained jurisdiction until such time as the verdict was recorded.

We reckoned that since there were motions brought by our side continuously, against prejudicial matter being entered into evidence throughout the trial, and since those motions had been consistently denied, there was no way to challenge rulings already made along the way. However, what if we brought a motion for mistrial based on what was put before the jury during closing arguments? That was the one small window of trial history we had not already brought legal challenges to. With Cooley incommunicado, we got busy dissecting the transcript of the closing arguments to find something, anything we could hang our mistrial motion on. We noted some particularly prejudicial statements that plaintiff’s counsel had made, and drafted a motion for mistrial on the basis that the statements were so outrageous and prejudicial as to have potentially caused the jury to act on passion and prejudice, rather than on the evidence presented over several weeks of trial.

When Cooley returned at the end of the weekend, he thought the motion was brilliant. We filed it early the following week. Harry Manion artfully used his weeks of informal credibility-and-sympathy- building with judge Londer to obtain his agreement to set a hearing for a few weeks down the road, to consider the motion. Londer would not and did not ever record the jury’s verdict.

Miscavige returned to Portland and we had a conference in Cooley’s condo with a couple of legal staff. Miscavige was distraught and desperate. He talked of moving L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology management to a South American country in order to assure the church’s future survival. We discussed how with a 39-million-dollar judgment being publicized internationally, the three dozen similar FAMCO suits heading toward trial, and the DOJ and IRS champing at the bit to clean up anything remaining after the damage was done, the United States was about the least safe territory in the world for Scientology.

Miscavige railed about the stupidity of Judge Londer, how he continued to allow the trial to go out of control while reassuring us that the worst-case scenario was a few thousand dollars in damages. He ruminated how a mighty institution like Scientology could be brought to its knees by a group of degraded “wogs” (non-Scientologists) from a cow town. His own characterization prompted a lightning bolt from the blue.

“I got it!” he exclaimed. “We’ll take over this shit-hole town. I’ll bring in one hundred thousand Scientologists from around the world and we’ll surround that courthouse and make this town comply. We’ll overwhelm them. We’ll overwhelm not only the judge but every other criminal judge he talks to in his town.”

The battle of Portland had only just begun. We called in every Public Relations officer assigned to every church of Scientology in the world (several dozen) and gave them orders to call every person who had ever taken a service at each local church and order them to get to Portland for the biggest, most important event and contribution they would ever make to Scientology. Ken Hoden was pulled out of mothballs and put in charge of the “religious freedom crusade.” Hoden had been the Guardian’s Office person in charge of external affairs in Portland during the original Christofferson case appeal. Miscavige and Starkey had busted him and relegated him to backlines PR work in Los Angeles back in 1981, when they decided he had screwed up the appeal of the original case (the result of which was ultimately the vacating of the original two million-dollar judgment, and Scientology’s strongest religious recognition to date). But now Hoden was integral — he was the only one who knew the ropes in Portland, as well as all allies of the church and public officials in the Portland area. Hoden was instructed to wear a religious “dog collar” shirt and coat at all times in public. He would be the spokesman and he would position all utterances along the line that the Christofferson judgment was the worst assault on religious freedom in the United States in modern times.

Within days, several hundred Scientologists had shown up in Portland. Hoden organized them up, made signs and began regular marches around the courthouse. The trademark chant of the crusade echoed down the streets of Portland:

Hoden: “What do we want?”
The crowd: “Religious freedom!”
Hoden: “When do we want it?”
The crowd: “Now!”

Initially, the protesters came across as angry, in compliance with Miscavige’s orders to intimidate the city into compliance. As Miscavige was back in LA, and there was no allowance
for discussion of mitigation of his ideas, instead Hoden discussed with me the need to tone it down and create a far less threatening and far more dignified presentation. I told Ken he was right, and told him follow his instincts, just learn to report to Starkey and Miscavige in the language they liked to hear. That was to emphasize, in briefing them, how loud you were, how numerous you were, and how shocked and awed the public watching was — while taking a slightly different approach in conducting affairs on the ground. It was an art I had come to learn out of necessity, to avert many church catastrophes over the years.

Ken got the knack of how to play shock absorber to the brass — and did a masterful job in controlling the masses in a fashion that had maximum impact. Over the next week, thousands of Scientologists showed up and the regular protest marches easily surrounded the entire block the courthouse occupied, with parishioners marching in ranks of several abreast. Hoden took care to brief each arriving Scientologist on the importance of being polite and friendly, cleaning up after themselves and generally creating a good impression of “regular Scientologists.”

We wound up having two hearings before judge Londer, separated by several weeks. As much as the crusaders were creating the impression we wished they would, Londer could not wrap his wits around the constitutional arguments we were making. In one chambers meeting with counsel, he uttered something which, despite the public relations gains we were making with the “religious freedom campaign,” flagged our hopes of success. Earle Cooley had made a lengthy presentation, backed by citations to court case precedents. Londer had seized on one particular case that Cooley cited, buoying our attorneys’ hopes that he might understand and adopt our position. After a back-and-forth conversation about its parallels to the case at hand, Londer shocked them all by saying, “Wait a second. That was a court of appeals decision; this isn’t a court of appeals.” Of course, all legal precedent is created by opinions rendered by courts of appeal, and these are binding law for the lower courts to apply and follow. Londer’s statement belied a challenged cognitive capacity. As Earle Cooley put it, “Oh my God, we’re in the hands of the Philistines!”

We kept orchestrating Harry’s having “chance” encounters with Judge Londer, hoping to divine where he stood and hoping that he might begin to understand this case was not only important to the church and Earle, but to Harry’s future. Try as he might, Harry would come back from his meetings befuddled. His refrain was that Londer was as dumb as a sack of rocks, and he couldn’t tell whether anything we were presenting was getting through.

On the afternoon prior to the final hearing and the announcement of decision on the mistrial motion, Earle, Harry and I sat in Earle’s hotel room in Portland preparing our arguments. We had a last-minute brief to file, and had purposely waited until mid afternoon, when we knew Londer took a break. That way, when Harry was bringing the brief into the clerk, Londer might see him and invite him into his chambers for a chat. That went like clockwork. Earle and I beseeched Harry to call in any chips he might have with Londer. Earle told Harry to tell him outright that Londer needed to do this for Harry. Harry reported back that he had schmoozed with Londer, but that it wasn’t appropriate under the circumstances — open chambers doors — to make his ultimate personal pitch. However, Londer had invited Harry to come to his home that evening to meet his wife, since it might be the last time they would see one another. Harry had not committed, out of concern for doing something that would smell of impropriety and could come back to haunt us.

Earle and I discussed the matter in some detail. He explained the downsides of a visit — if it were ever found out it could raise the ugly specter of the decades of GO improprieties we were attempting to live down. “On balance,” Earle said, “this is up to the client. You need to brief the boss [Miscavige] and I’ll trust his instincts.” I called Miscavige and briefed him on all that had transpired. He said, “What is your hesitance? It’s a no brainer. Of course he sees Londer, and he does whatever he has to do to get the product.” I told Earle the verdict. Earle told me, “Okay, now it’s between me and Harry. I’m going to protect you and Dave. Leave it to me.”

Earle did report that Harry had gone to Londer’s home. He did not give particulars beyond saying that Londer was thrilled with the visit. He gave no guarantee of any particular outcome, “But,” Earle added, “tell Dave to relax.” And then Earle told me an anecdotal aphorism he would repeat several times to Dave and me over the next couple of years. He said, “Here is my only test of friendship. I know you are going to testify tomorrow in front a grand jury investigating me.

Do I sleep tonight…or don’t I?”

Even though Earle said he would sleep well that night, I did not. Of secondary importance was my own life. I was so thoroughly invested in the crusade to protect LRH and Scientology that the possible impact on them loomed larger than my own spiritual death — which would be a virtual certainty if we did not win. As I had learned by then on Hubbard’s lines of operation, there had to be a head on a pike after a catastrophe of this magnitude. And I had been around Miscavige long enough to know that regardless of his having micro-managed every move in the trial, down to strangling me the first time I attempted to counter him, it would not be Miscavige’s head on this particular pike.

The next morning, the Multnomah County Courthouse was surrounded by Scientologists. The hallways and wide stairways inside were packed with Scientologists, from the front door,
through the lobby, up to the third-floor courtroom of Judge Londer. Londer gave a touching soliloquy about how well the “real Scientologists” who had descended upon Portland had
conducted themselves. He said he might not have been so gracious and polite had his own religion been compared to botulism soup, as plaintiff’s counsel had done to the jury. He found
such conduct to be extremely prejudicial, and in violation of his own orders — having already determined that Scientology was a religion. The judge granted the mistrial motion, wiping out in one breath the $39,000,000 judgment.

After having survived a nuclear explosion by, among other things, successfully defrauding the court as to L. Ron Hubbard’s inaccessibility (Ron had been a named defendant, but we managed to get through the entire trial without the issue of his personal liability ever being adjudicated), Ron had two handwritten messages relayed to Miscavige. The first was a short note to the “real Scientologists,” the crusaders, commending them for having pulled off a feat of historical proportions by influencing the winning of the mistrial motion. The second consisted of two words and a single letter, sprawled across a full page in Ron’s signature style. It read, “Earle, congratulations! — R” The “R” stood for Ron, a signatory he had used for years on internal church dispatches.

Two months later, at our annual Sea Org Day celebration, Miscavige and I would be awarded special medals of honor, of a type never before issued by Ron. We had slipped on a banana peel and somehow managed to fall on a fur rug.


Mark Rathbun: on Michael Flynn, Geoffrey Shervell and Gerry Armstrong (May 28, 2013)

Sure enough, right in alignment with Sun Tzu’s Art of War – which was a Hubbard-recommended read , Flynn became very resourceful once we had his back against the river. Just as it appeared he could not keep up with the mountain of paper under which our now-coordinated team was burying him, he was saved by an angel of sorts. Wayne B. Hollingsworth, recently-resigned Assistant U.S. Attorney in Boston, came on board. Hollingsworth, though not well-heeled after years of government work, outfitted Flynn’s offices with the latest in computer equipment. He brought on more attorneys and support staff. And all of these new troops apparently were not asking for a dime to devote their next several years to the FAMCO plan (or, as we suspected, they were being paid by some vested interest that was inimical to Scientology). Flynn also received a windfall, care of the fruits of Miscavige’s enemy-making proclivities. Gerry Armstrong, the archivist whom Miscavige and Starkey nearly hung for trying to protect Hubbard and the church against the very claims Flynn had been making , had made contact with Flynn. We knew this because for several months Miscavige had been directly supervising surveillance of Armstrong, through a former GO intel staff member named Geoff Shervell. Shervell utilized teams of private eyes to shadow Armstrong everywhere. Shervell reported directly to Miscavige through all those months, just as I had on litigation matters from our Special Unit. On more than one occasion, Shervell groused to me about the incessant, obsessive pressure Miscavige put on him, demanding to know Armstrong’s every move. He said, “Marty, he knows we’re on him, which kind of defeats the purpose of the surveillance .” Thinking for a moment, Geoff added, “Unless the purpose is to drive him crazy.”

Armstrong became increasingly paranoid under pressure and finally got spooked enough to go to Flynn for help. Armstrong also brought with him several boxes of biography archives he had lifted from the church; documents that demonstrated to him that Hubbard’s personal biography, promoted by the church, was full of holes. I did not connect the dots until years later, but Miscavige had essentially chased Armstrong right into the enemy camp. In September, 1982, all I knew was that Shervell had evidence of Armstrong lifting the documents, and I had direct, urgent orders from Miscavige to sue Armstrong back to the stone ages. We sued, and obtained an injunction which impounded the files with the Los Angeles Superior Court pending trial (which would occur years later). But that did not stop Armstrong from – in fact it drove him to – writing long, detailed declarations claiming L. Ron Hubbard was a fraud and that the church would stop at nothing to prevent him from proving so. Flynn now had a fresh, inside witness who knew Hubbard’s personal archives better than anybody on Ron’s side. 1


  1. Rathbun, Mark (2013-05-28). Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior (pp. 193-194). Amazon Books. Kindle Edition.

Armstrong v. Grieboski: Defamation Analysis (January 12, 2012)

What follows is the subject defamatory statement that Grieboski published on February 29, 2007, and an analysis of the content to assist in understanding the facts and my claims against him:

Because we protect the rights of all people, we are continually under scrutiny by those who do not. I make this point because of the source you referenced who is striving to give credence to the belief that we are a front for Scientologists. We have repeatedly dealt with bad press from this person and I leave it to you good readers to determine whether or not his views are based on fact.

Gerald Armstrong is a former clerk in a Scientology organization. Armstrong intended to seize assets of the Church of Scientology. When attorneys of the Church discovered the plan, they obtained permission from the Los Angeles police to conduct an investigation into Armstrong’s plans. The investigation caught Armstrong on videotape stating that he intended to forge and then plant incriminating documents on Church premises, to be discovered in a subsequent raid. When challenged on how he would obtain proof of the allegations he intended to make, he responded that: “We don’t have to prove a god dam thing. We don’t have to prove shit. We just have to allege it.”

If that is not enough, Armstrong once posted a message on the Internet concerning a letter he sent to Saddam Hussein during the Gulf War. In the letter, he offered himself to Hussein as a hostage in the Iraqi war. “If either side failed to perform any part of the agreement, the other side could execute me,” he concluded. Armstrong makes clear in his posting that he did not think the letter to Hussein was a joke, but was deadly serious. He quite proudly republishes it and other similar writings from time to time. There is much more I could say on the subject, but will leave it to the readers to research for themselves if they wish to discover the more sordid background of this “gentleman,” who currently has several outstanding warrants for his arrest.

1. Because we protect the rights of all people, we are continually under scrutiny by those who do not.

Grieboski implied that I do not protect the rights of people. This is baseless.

The “we” that he claimed protect the rights of all people are obviously himself, the Institute on Religion and Public Policy (IRPP) that he heads, and the other directors, officers, employees, representatives or agents of the IRPP.

I did not and do not protect the rights of people to suppress or destroy others’ human rights or the rights of people to commit torts or crimes against others. I have fought and do fight, however, for basic human rights for all people, and specialize in protecting the rights of the Scientologists’ victims.

The Scientologists specialize in, and are notorious for, suppressing and destroying basic human rights, both the rights of their own fellow Scientologists and the rights of those people who, like me, oppose this suppression and destruction. The Scientologists cloak their anti-human rights policies and practices and their widespread human rights violations with pretentious pro-human rights claims and campaigns and sham organizations such as “Youth for Human Rights” and “Artists for Human Rights.”

Grieboski supports the Scientologists’ suppression and destruction of their victims’ basic human rights, most egregiously these victims’ right to religious freedom. It is a willful and cruel lie that he and the IRPP protect the rights of all people. Even this one defamatory attack on me that I am responding to here demonstrates that he not only does not protect my human rights, and the rights of persons acting in concert with me, but actively collaborates with the Scientologists in the suppression and destruction of our human rights.

2. I make this point because of the source you referenced who is striving to give credence to the belief that we are a front for Scientologists.

I am not named in the NE Pennsylvania Media blog entry to which Grieboski was responding. It is clear, however, from reading what follows in his response that he is referring to me.

I do not believe that before Grieboski published his letter on the NE PA Media blog I ever strived to give credence to the belief that he and his Institute on Religion and Public Policy (IRPP) were a front for the Scientologists. In my open letter to him of October 25, 2004, I did accuse him of supporting the Scientology organization, of shilling for it or collaborating with it, indeed irresponsibly shilling for Scientology, but I did not then accuse him or the IRPP of being a front for the cult.

My 2004 open letter was, I believe, the only public statement I made about Grieboski and the IRPP’s relationship with the Scientologists prior to a second open letter that I wrote to him on May 11, 2009. Although I sent both letters to him directly as well as posting them to my web site and Scientology-related forums, he did not reply to either letter.

This is some basic Wikipedia information on “fronts” as Grieboski is using the term:

A front organization is any entity set up by and controlled by another organization, such as intelligence agencies, organized crime groups, banned organizations, religious or political groups, advocacy groups, or corporations. Front organizations can act for the parent group without the actions being attributed to the parent group.

Front organizations that appear to be independent voluntary associations or charitable organizations are called front groups. In the business world, front organizations such as front companies or shell corporations are used to shield the parent company from legal liability. In international relations, a puppet state is a state which acts as a front (or surrogate) for another state.

The same Wikipedia article contains a section about Scientology fronts:

The Church of Scientology uses front groups either to promote their interests in politics or to make their group seem more legitimate[]. The FBI’s July 7, 1977 raids on the Church’s offices (following discovery of the Church’s Operation Snow White) turned up, among other documents, an undated memo entitled “PR General Categories of Data Needing Coding”. This memo listed what it called “Secret PR Front Groups,” which included the group APRL, “Alliance for the Preservation of Religious Liberty” (later renamed “Americans Preserving Religious Liberty”).[] The Cult Awareness Network (CAN) is considered by many to now be a front group for the Church of Scientology, which took the group over financially after bankrupting it in a series of lawsuits.[]

Time identified several other fronts for Scientology, including: the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR), The Way to Happiness Foundation, Applied Scholastics, the Concerned Businessmen’s Association of America, and HealthMed Clinic.[] Seven years later the Boston Herald showed how Narconon and World Literacy Crusade are also fronting for Scientology.[] Other Scientology groups include Downtown Medical, Criminon and the Association for Better Living and Education (ABLE).

Not long after I published my 2004 letter, as I explained in my 2009 letter to Grieboski, one of his former employees Daniel Chapman contacted me and told me that when Grieboski started the IRPP in 1999 he had been receiving $8,000 per month from the Scientologists. It is possible that the Scientologists paid to set up the IRPP, and that it was their front from its inception, but I had no way of knowing this when I wrote the 2004 letter.

On December 21, 2011, Mark (“Marty”)Rathbun published on his blog what purports to be a Scientology program order entitled “Grieboski Program” dated January 29, 2007, which lays out “targets,” or actions that Grieboski’s Scientologist handlers were to take, and get him to take, to more effectively use his contacts and communication lines to resolve the Scientologists’ identified problems in Europe and help get Scientology into Muslim countries.

I have added a few notes at the end of the program [link], which is otherwise as I received it, to explain some terms, acronyms, etc. I am familiar with such Scientology programs, and have no reason to doubt the Grieboski Program’s authenticity, even though this is an electronic (not printed) document, the program number and distribution list are not provided, and the Scientologists or “posts” to whom each target was assigned for execution are not identified. The program states that as of January 2007 the Scientologists were paying Grieboski “on a flat rate,” but that was “being changed to payment on a “by product” basis.”

I do not know whether the Scientologists were paying Grieboski a flat fee or had him on commission on February 29, 2008 when he published the letter containing the subject defamatory statement. I also know of no evidence that he and the Scientologists had ended their agency relationship before that date. The Scientologists acknowledge in the 2007 Grieboski Program that they were then running him, but wanted him “being run him for product” so they would get more return for the money they were paying him.

On December 21, 2011, Tony Ortega, Editor-in-Chief of The Village Voice, blogged about the Scientologists’ “leaked” Grieboski Program, and concluded that “the document is unequivocal [ ] that Grieboski had been, at least at that point in 2007, a paid agent for the church.” Ortega also wrote:

I just talked to Mike Rinder, formerly Scientology’s top spokesman and the executive director of OSA until he left the church in 2007. I asked him whether Grieboski really was on the church’s payroll.

“Yeah. I hired him,” Rinder told me.

“He was absolutely employed by the church, and it was because of his Catholic connections,” Rinder continued. “He had connection into the Vatican, and all of the Catholic countries where the church was having problems. Italy, France, Belgium. That’s why he was on the payroll. He’s a lobbyist. That’s what the guy is.”

Ortega wrote that he had tried to reach Grieboski about his agency relationship with the Scientologists, and received a reply, which stated in part:

In response to your question, THE INSTITUTE on Religion and Public Policy does not take nor has it ever taken funds from any religious institution or denomination


In a personal capacity aside from my work with THE INSTITUTE, I have advised a number of institutions – religious and non-religious – on policy issues. I have advised the Scientologists as I have numerous other groups.

In addition to operating the IRPP, Grieboski is also Chairman and CEO of the for-profit firm “Just Consulting,” and it is possible that he used this firm to receive and hide payments the Scientologists sent him. Just Consulting, which gives its address as 500 N. Washington Street, Alexandria, VA 22314, says about itself on its web site:

just consulting is a dynamic, innovative and energetic comprehensive social justice consulting firm committed to the belief that people are more important than profit.


From social networking management to international mediation and conflict transformation; from business development to search engine optimization; from crisis management to governmental education; from political campaigns to ngo development; from public relations to image development, just consulting achieves and exceeds our clients’ goals with efficiency, ingenuity and integrity.

The Scientologists’ goals for me, as stated in their policies or “scriptures” and as demonstrated by their actions over thirty years, are to suppress and destroy my basic human rights, to silence me about my religious beliefs and experiences, to punish me for not being silenced, to degrade my image to beast level, and to just go all the way in and obliterate me. See scriptural policy letter from Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard entitled “Battle Tactics,” dated 16 February 1969, revised and reissued 24 September 1987:

The defamatory statement, Grieboski’s “repeated” dealings about me, and his other actions over the years against me, were carried out by a man who either possessed or claimed to possess, and be internationally renowned for, extraordinary expertise in, and resources for, influencing or manipulating people’s minds and public opinion. He has Just Consulting say about his connections:

His extensive travels to every corner of the globe have allowed Joe to meet, interact with, and befriend leaders of business and industry, government, entertainment, advocacy, and other arenas, giving him one of Washington’s best and most sought after rolodexes.

Because of his agency relationship with the Scientologists, and with any pay arrangement, Grieboski was also, and remains, a “beneficiary” of the injunction that the Scientologists obtained against me in 1995 in the case of Scientology v. Armstrong, California Superior Court, Marin County, no. 157680.
Doubtlessly both the IRPP and Just Consulting are also beneficiaries of the Scientologists’ injunction.

This injunction prohibits me and “persons acting in concert” with me from expressing our religious beliefs or experiences regarding the Scientology religion to anyone anywhere. The injunction also prohibits us from discussing any of the myriad “Scientology affiliated Churches, organizations and entities, and their officers, directors, agents, representatives, employees, volunteers, successors, assigns and legal counsel,” which substantially comprise the global class known as “beneficiaries.” The injunction does not prohibit any of the beneficiaries, e.g., Mr. Grieboski as an agent or employee of one Scientology entity or another, from discussing me, as he has done in the subject defamatory statement. Even if Grieboski was not being paid by any Scientology entity when he published this statement, he was still a beneficiary as an unpaid “volunteer.”

The injunction prohibits me and persons acting in concert with me from assisting the class of persons or entities whose interests are adverse to any of the beneficiaries’ interests. In practical terms, these are persons or entities that the beneficiaries treat or handle as “enemies.” The class of persons or entities that comprise the beneficiaries’ “enemies” are those that the beneficiaries have damaged or victimized, those that seek to defend themselves or stand up for the beneficiaries’ victims, or those that oppose or threaten the beneficiaries’ ability or freedom to victimize others.

In Scientology scripture, and in the Scientologists’ common communications, their individual enemies are known as “Suppressive Persons” or “SPs.” Entities that the Scientologists target as enemies are known as “Suppressive Groups” or “SP Groups.” In his scripture, Hubbard called the treatment or handling of SPs and SP Groups “fair game.” Adherence to their Suppressive Person doctrine is universal among Scientologists, and motivates and justifies their victimization of SPs. For further information on the SP doctrine, see this web site that my wife Caroline Letkeman and I maintain to expose and oppose the doctrine and defend its victims: See specifically:

Scientology scripture and Scientologists applying their scripture vilify SPs as destructive, psychotic and criminal, the cause of all illness, accidents and bad conditions, and deserving no civil rights. Scientology scripture and Scientologists equate SPs with psychopathic mass murderers like Hitler, Stalin and Osama bin Laden. SPs, however, are simply those people who tell the truth about Hubbard, Scientology, Scientologists and their collaborators, despite being fair gamed for doing so. Some of the truth about Hubbard, et al. is ugly because these people and entities, who largely comprise the beneficiaries, have a long history of lying, fraud, fear mongering, extortion, harassment and human rights violations. SP groups are those that facilitate the truth being told, or which defend SPs or anyone else the Scientologists victimize.

Since Suppressive Persons are created and labeled in Scientology scripture, and their vilification and persecution is ordered in scripture, SPs comprise a persecuted religious class. It is a cruel irony that Grieboski and the IRPP claim to be standing up for persecuted religious classes such as the SP class, when they are actually supporting the persecutors. Grieboski, the IRPP, and likely Just Consulting, are beneficiaries of that persecution by court order, based on contract. Grieboski and his organizations stand up for the right and freedom of religious corporations to persecute individuals and suppress and destroy individual human rights as protected religious exercise.

The injunction’s prohibitions are in clear violation of international human rights charters, and unlawful by US and international law. The Scientologists obtained the injunction by unlawful means, and their actions, the prohibitions, and the beneficiaries’ efforts to enforce these unlawful prohibitions constitute violations of federal criminal statutes, specifically 18 U.S.C. §241 “Conspiracy against rights,” and 18 U.S.C. §242 “Deprivation of rights under color of law.” See, e.g., my 2004 complaint report to U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division:

Mark Rathbun, who “leaked” the Grieboski Program, was for many years, under current Scientology head David Miscavige, responsible for the Scientologists’ fair gaming of the SP class. In reality, fair game is more specifically directed against those SPs that Miscavige, et al. view as threats to their ability and freedom to operate, expand, and get away with their violations of human rights and criminal statutes. The Scientologists that Rathbun directed, and his replacement directs, handle designated SP targets on covert and overt intelligence, public relations and legal channels according to the Scientologists’ post function, orders, missions, operations and programs. Rathbun oversaw activities that resulted in the unlawful injunction and the efforts to enforce it, and he is knowledgeable about other torts and crimes committed against me over many years.

Over the last approximately three years, Rathbun has publicly and consistently claimed that he has split from Miscavige and certain Scientology related entities. Rathbun has been criticizing them for their antisocial actions against Scientologists, and in early 2009, he publicly offered to help people in my situation. I wanted his help to end and redress the beneficiaries’ ongoing injustices against me that he had helped perpetrate, e.g., the injunction. His testimony concerning his personal knowledge of actions taken against my attorneys and me to perpetrate those injustices would help end and redress them. I wrote Rathbun a series of letters requesting his offered help, but he has so far refused to help in any way. His treatment or handling of me instead of helping indicates that he and Miscavige still share the same malevolent intentions toward me and people acting in concert with me.

Rathbun was also responsible for many years, under Miscavige, for what Hubbard called in scripture “black propaganda” or “black PR” against me. Black PR is the Scientologists’ policy, technology and practice of defaming their designated SP targets to destroy their reputations, credibility, relationships, livelihoods and lives. Black PR is often covert, on hidden channels from hidden sources. Rathbun knows the facts and truth behind the Scientologists’ black PR against me, knows about programs to black PR me, and knows what individuals and entities received what black PR and when. This includes black PR on me that the Scientologists included in their submissions to the IRS to get tax exemption for the Scientology and Scientology-affiliated entities, and black PR to the US Department of Justice, the State Department, and foreign governments.

I asked Rathbun for help correcting the Scientologists’ black PR on me and repairing the damage done, but he has refused to help. See, e.g., Instead, he has continued to treat and handle me as an SP target, continued to black PR me, and encouraged his fellow Scientologists to black PR me. Grieboski’s defamatory statement about me is part of the Scientologists’ long black PR campaign against me, and uses specific points and language from that campaign.

Mike Rinder, who confirmed to Village Voice Editor Tony Ortega that he had hired Grieboski and that the Scientologists had him on their payroll, was also for many years involved in actions victimizing designated SPs, including illegal actions against me personally. Under Miscavige, and for much of that time under Rathbun, Rinder ran the intelligence, PR and legal bureaus and personnel around the world. Rinder was also an official representative and spokesperson of the Scientologists’ central organization for several years, and participated in the global black PR campaign against me. Like Rathbun, Rinder claims that he has left the Miscavige faction and that he wants justice for the people that Miscavige and his Scientologists have victimized. So far, however, Rinder has refused to help me, and still black PRs me.

3. We have repeatedly dealt with bad press from this person and I leave it to you good readers to determine whether or not his views are based on fact.

The “we” in this context, as Grieboski obviously intended, were he and the IRPP. For legal purposes in connection with the subject defamatory statement, this could include Just Consulting. I am clearly “this person.”

Grieboski did not identify the “bad press” supposedly from me that he claims to have repeatedly dealt with. What “press” from me existed, however, is generally what I had said or published about Hubbard, Scientology, Scientologists and their collaborators like Grieboski prior to February 29, 2008 when he posted his letter with the subject defamatory statement to the NE PA Media blog. Virtually everything I have said or published about Hubbard, et al. is “bad press” from the beneficiaries’ perspective, because it is the truth about them, which includes the ugly truth about their lying, fraud, human rights violations, etc.

The way the Scientologists have for thirty years dealt with the truth I have told about Hubbard, et al., has been to attack and black PR me as the source of that truth, and never to confront and respond to the truth being told. See, e.g., the Scientology policy known as “Attack the Attacker:” Grieboski has followed the same policy with his publication of the subject defamatory statement. He did not identify the “bad press,” or the truth, from me, and although he said he was leaving the determination of the factual basis of my “views,” he did not even say what my “views” were. He simply attacked me with the black propaganda that his Scientologist handlers or paymasters provided him for that purpose.

Before Grieboski published the subject defamatory statement, I had told the truth about Hubbard, Scientology, Scientologists and their collaborators in over seventy days of oral testimony in depositions or trials, in dozens of sworn declarations or affidavits, and in thousands of essays, articles or comments. All such expressions by me include my religious beliefs, religious experiences and religious knowledge of Hubbard, Scientology, Scientologists and their collaborators, which are all connected and classed by religion.

The persons, offices or entities that Grieboski communicated or interacted with between 1999 and 2008, or up to the present time, in his repeated dealing with my statements, views or “bad press,” perhaps can only be identified with greater specificity in the discovery stage in a legal action against him, the IRPP, etc. The list he provided in his letter, however, of his claimed actions or accomplishments, would be sufficient to understand the range and global scope of people and entities with which he had dealt: US House and Senate Committees; the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe; countless international parliamentary committees; numerous organizations including the United Nations, Council of Europe, and the European Union; the President of the United States; Tony Blair; the Panel of Experts for International Religious Freedom of the British Foreign Ministry; foreign heads of state and government officials; International Diplomats; and thousands of interested parties. Getting to these and more people and entities, and communicating with them once they’d been gotten to, is where Grieboski would have dealt with the “bad press” from me.

This astonishing list of people and entities that Grieboski admitted to have been dealing with also provides a basis for understanding the massiveness of what it will take to correct the black PR on me that he and his entities have been spreading about me, and to repair the damage their black PR campaign has done. I would expect that, unless Mr. Grieboski’s conscience is at some point shocked and he honestly undertakes to correct all the lies he has told and redress the damage he has done, I would be dealing with all the recipients of his black PR the rest of my life.

The list of person and entities identified in the Grieboski Program that he had been dealing with or his Scientologist handlers intended him to deal with is also quite substantial: individuals in the RCC and other major religions as well as political personalities; congressional allies (House and Senate); Belgian, French and German authorities; contacts to the top level of the RCC; the Belgian RCC and the government; rabid parliamentarians; upper strata officials of the Belgian national government; in France, the upper executive strata of the national government, the national Senate, the RCC and the Protestant Church; French government officials, Senate leaders and religious leaders; contacts in the German federal government and pertinent German states; German churches (RCC and Protestants); federal officials; state government officials; contacts in the ministerial strata of Poland’s national government and in the RCC; Polish government officials and RCC leaders; all member MPs around the world; Muslim countries; and in key Muslim countries, high level government officials, key legislators, religious leaders and top court judges.

The subject defamatory statement is the only act I know of in his repeated dealings with me and my my words. The rest of his repeated dealings, as far as my knowledge goes, were covert, pure black propaganda. I have not been able to find where Grieboski has openly and publicly black PRed any other person as he has black PRed me.

4. Gerald Armstrong is a former clerk in a Scientology organization.

This is a ridiculous bit of resumé black PR that the Scientologists and their collaborators have been generating for decades. The intention is to make nothing of my actual history and resumé in Scientology and so disparage the experiences and knowledge I acquired while occupying positions that were not just being a clerk. The June 1983 Penthouse, e.g., contained an interview with Heber Jentzsch, identified as “president of the church,” which included this exchange:

Penthouse: The allegation has been made that the Church of Scientology has hounded ex-members who have spoken out negatively about the church.

Jentzsch: Can you give me the names?

Penthouse: Gerald Armstrong is the first that comes to mind.

Jentzsch: Mr. Armstrong is my step-son-in-law; I know him quite well. He was a clerk, and he also drove a car. And that’s all he ever did. When he left, he sort of tried to raise his status.

Since the 1990s, the Scientologists have maintained Internet sites to black PR different sets of their targets and victims including me, and have used the same clerk claim, always presented as valuable knowledge that explains so much by first putting me in my place. This is from what I believe is the latest incarnation of one such site that the Scientologists call “Religious Freedom Watch:”

Gerald Armstrong is a former clerk in a Scientology church.In former days, Armstrong hatched a plot to seize the Church’s assets in collaboration with the Los Angeles IRS Criminal Investigation Division.

When the Church discovered this, its attorneys obtained permission from a Los Angeles police officer to conduct an investigation into Armstrong’s plans. The investigation caught Armstrong on videotape stating that he intended to forge and then plant incriminating documents on Church premises, to be discovered in a subsequent raid.

I wrote to head Scientologist David Miscavige on November 23, 2006 protesting being black PRed as an anti-religious extremist, when I am anything but, indicating some of the lies about me on hate sites under his control, and requesting that references to me be removed from those sites.
Neither Miscavige nor any other Scientologist responded to my letter and request.

On December 10, 2002, Graeme Wilson, the Scientologists’ Public Affairs Director UK & Ireland, sent to Mike Garde, head of Dialog Center Ireland, an e-mail and attachment, which contained the clerk claim in black PR on me generated for the purpose of attacking the July 23, 1984 judgment in the case of B & G (Wards) in the High Court of Justice Family Division, Royal Courts of Justice:

One of these “experts” was Gerald Armstrong. Armstrong worked for the Church as a clerk.

For the B & G (Wards) judgment, see:
Appeal affirming the judgment:

On May 24, 2011, a Russian website, which claims to be dedicated to news about religion, posted an interview with Alexei Danchenkov, identified as Church of Scientology of Moscow spokesman and editor-in-chief of “Right to Freedom,” which (unofficial translation) contained this exchange:

Church of Scientology of Moscow spokesman and editor-in-chief of “Right to Freedom”, Alexei Danchenkov: “Armstrong was invited to Russia as an expert on Scientology, but he left the church 30 years ago”

Interview by Valery Stepanov
for “Portal-Credo.Ru”

Gerald Armstrong spoke a few days ago at St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University in Moscow and he was presented as a former senior official of the Church of Scientology. Is his name familiar to you?

Aleksei Danchenkov: Actually, Gerald Armstrong was a former clerk of the Church of Scientology of California. He left the church in 1981, stealing more than 10,000 pages of documentation. He is currently wanted by the police of the United States on a number of charges for which he could face imprisonment and be required to pay fines for contempt of court.

On June 2, I posted a response to the interview, and specifically addressed the clerk attack line:

Mr. Danchenkov and his Scientologist accomplices are further implying, of course, that “clerk” is some unimportant, degraded position in Scientology, and that the Scientologists filling that position are necessarily prevented from acquiring any experiences or knowledge that could conceivably make them experts in anything.

The truth is that I successfully held several positions during my years in Scientology, and none were termed or described as “clerk.” Another truth is that in those actual positions and years I acquired a great deal of experience and knowledge. I have also acquired a great deal of experience and knowledge in the almost thirty years since I left Scientology. Throughout these post-Scientology years, I also was in many positions and had functions different from clerk; for example, as a Scientology target, victim and opponent, and as a witness, writer, speaker and researcher.

Along with certain God-given abilities, and the necessary willingness, of course, my honestly acquired, now forty-two years of experience and knowledge have, in fact, made me an expert on Scientology. My experience, knowledge and testimony is particularly expert regarding Scientology’s “Suppressive Person” doctrine, or “SP” doctrine, and regarding the doctrine’s application, which is commonly called “fair game.”


On December 9, 2011, a Scientologist or collaborator “J. Swift,” also identified to me as Jeffrey Augustine, posted on the Scientology-related “Operation Clambake Message Board” some resumé black PR:

Because Gerry is a high level critic, I had uncritically accepted for years that what he had written was the gospel truth. Imagine my shock, then, when I discovered that Gerry had instead offered the Critics Community his highly distorted version of events that is not congruent with the Court records or even former Apollo Crew:

For example, Gerry claims he was the Legal Officer and the Intelligence Officer on the Apollo. There were no such posts on the Apollo according to Karen#1 and Mike Rinder. Why has Gerry embellished his resume?

In the same thread, my wife Caroline, who then participated on that board, challenged “Swift’s” black PR on my post history:

For a malevolent purpose – to black PR Gerry as an embellisher of his resume — you assume or invent facts of which there is no evidence. Please identify where Karen [de la Carriere] and Mike Rinder stated that Gerry was not the legal officer or intelligence officer on the Apollo, or where they stated that there were no such posts on the ship. If they stated this to you orally, please say what exactly they stated, and when.

“Swift” refused to support his assertions, and Caroline nudged him:

In any case, you just made the factual claims that (1) “according to Karen#1 and Mike Rinder,” “there were no such posts on the Apollo” as “Legal Officer and Intelligence Officer,” and that (2) Gerry “embellished his resume.” You based the resume embellishment charge on the factual claim that Rinder and Karen had made a statement of fact that the posts Gerry had occupied and put on some — also so far unproduced by you — resume, never existed on the Apollo.


You should either provide a link to Karen and Rinder’s statements (they are awfully specific), or provide the statements, or acknowledge that they didn’t say what you say they said, or back pedal, or get them to back pedal. Feel free to back pedal all you want, and you’ve got quite a track of false claims of fact, lies and black PR to back pedal from.

Caroline requested twice more publicly that “Swift” support his assertions, and he did not, but added more black PR to his attack on both of us. “

I have testified about my Scientology organization positions or posts in many legal proceedings, and have identified and described them in sworn statements I have written. I have always told the truth about these posts to the best of my ability, none of which had the title “clerk.” I was indeed, at different times, the Deputy Legal Officer, the Legal Officer, the Intelligence Officer and the Public Relations Officer on the Scientology ship “Apollo.” I was also, at different times on board, Dishwasher, Storesman, Deck Project Force Member, Boats and Transport In-Charge, the Driver, and the Port Captain.

Still in Scientology, but on land after the “Apollo” period, my posts included, chronologically, Intelligence Officer, Mimeo Operator, Hubbard’s Deputy External Communications Aide, the Bosun in the Rehabilitation Project Force (RPF) Scientology’s penal and reprogramming camp, RPF Section Member, Hubbard’s Proofreader, Set Builder, Lighting Assistant, Props In-Charge, Location Scout, Cine Services Chief, Assistant Producer, RPF Section Member, RPF Master-at-Arms, Hubbard Renovations Purchaser, Hubbard Renovations In-Charge, Deputy Commanding Officer of the Hubbard Household Unit, Hubbard Biography Researcher and Archivist.

5. Armstrong intended to seize assets of the Church of Scientology.

This is false. I had no such intention, and having such an intention would have been ridiculous. I was in no position to seize any of the Scientologists’ assets. There were Scientologists that in 1984 claimed they wanted to seize organization assets because of criminal activities their leaders were involved in; and such reformers, if they were real, would have had standing to seize, or freeze, organization assets. The Scientologists invented such a group of claimed reformers, called the “Loyalists,” in order to run a covert operation against me to entrap me or commit other crimes against me, but their claimed intention of freezing assets was a lie.

I have written about this operation that the Scientologists ran on me in a number of declarations or articles, e.g.,

6. When attorneys of the Church discovered the plan, they obtained permission from the Los Angeles police to conduct an investigation into Armstrong’s plans.

There was no such plan for the Scientologists’ attorneys to discover.

The Scientologists paid a corrupt LAPD Officer for an “authorization” for the Scientologists’ agents to phone tap and eavesdrop upon my attorney Michael J. Flynn, me and anyone else the Scientologists wanted to target. The Scientologists and their agents did illegally video record me, and used this “authorization” to justify their illegal activities. The LAPD Chief, however, on April 23, 1985, denounced any cooperation with the Scientologists’ agent, and declared their “purported authorizations directed to him, signed by any member of the Los Angeles Police Department, [ ] invalid and unauthorized.”

The Scientologists needed no permission to conduct an investigation into my plans. The “permission” they needed and purchased was to commit crimes against me, my attorney and others, which the Scientologists did. As the Chief of Police stated, whatever the Scientologists and their collaborators paid for as a permission was not a correspondence from the Los Angeles Police Department, was invalid and unauthorized, and therefore could not have been a permission from the Los Angeles police.

The Scientologists who contacted me to set me up in this operation claimed to be afraid for their lives, and for that reason they insisted they had to meet me in secret, and could not let me in on their plans. These Scientologists were lying about their fear obviously, because they were themselves the people they claimed to be afraid of.

7. The investigation caught Armstrong on videotape stating that he intended to forge and then plant incriminating documents on Church premises, to be discovered in a subsequent raid.

This is false. I have written or spoken many times over many years to counter this lie, and the rest of the black PR here about this covert and illegal intelligence operation. Also see this video made in Berlin, Germany on September 17, 2011, which describes this operation and certain other actions the Scientologists, particularly Rathbun and Rinder under Miscavige, took against me:

The Scientologists and their collaborators made the videotapes unlawfully, edited them, and for years have lied about what they did and what even the edited videos show. The Scientologists initiated a black PR letter writing campaign about the videos to government officials to get them to pressure the FBI. See, e.g., this letter dated August 6, 1985 from FBI Director William H. Webster to Don Edwards, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights in the House of Representatives:

Your letter of June 3, 1985, requesting FBI review of allegations made by Reverend John Standard III, Director, Office of Public Affairs, Church of Scientology International, concerning a “bizarre multi-agency plan to disrupt the Church of Scientology” has been brought to my attention.

The FBI has received other inquiries on this subject. I want to stress that the FBI is not involved solely or in conjunction with other Federal agencies in any attempt to destroy the Church of Scientology. In those cases where a violation of Federal law falling within the FBI’s jurisdiction has occurred, the FBI investigates such situations with complete fairness to all parties involved. The facts are then presented to the appropriate United States Attorney’s office which determines the prosecutive merits of the case.

The particular allegations made by Reverend Standard are based on conversations recorded during “secret” videotaping of a former Church member, Gerry Armstrong, whom Reverend Standard alleges is a “government covert operative.”

Gerry Armstrong, a former church member, has been interviewed numerous times by various Federal investigators and attorneys in connection with pending litigation in this and other Federal investigations. Partial transcripts of Mr. Armstrong’s videotaped conversations have been provided by the Church as exhibits to various pleadings filed in litigation with the Department of Justice, and they fail to substantiate claims of a counterintelligence program directed against that group. Conversely, review of the unexpurgated transcripts of those videotaped meetings referred to by Reverend Standard conclusively negates any inference of government conspiracy.


NOTE: Reverend John D. Standard III, Director, Office of Public Affairs, Church of Scientology International, wrote to Representative Rodino, Chairman, House Judiciary Committee alleging “a bizarre multi-agency plan to disrupt the Church of Scientology”, and requested Representative Don Edwards hold hearings on this matter. Representative Don Edwards requested the FBI review Reverend Standard’s allegations. Videotaped conversations of a former Church member, Gerry Armstrong allegedly establish the government-wide conspiracy and have been utilized as exhibits in various pleadings filed by the Church; however, the transcripts selectively omit a pertinent portion of the tape which conclusively negates any inference of government conspiracy. The context of this letter was taken, in part, from similar replies to congressional inquiries. This reply was coordinated with [blacked out] Legal Counsel Division.

[Handwritten] Copies of the transcript of the videotaped conversations of former church member Gerry Armstrong were filed as an exhibit to a motion to vacate summary judgment entered on behalf of the defendants in Founding Church of Scientology v. Director FBI etc. (USDC, DOC, CA No. 78-0107). A review of these transcripts by DOJ attorneys and by SA [blacked out] reveals several statements by Armstrong to the effect that the government is “not out to get” the Church of Scientology or any Scientologist. Copies of the full text are in possession of LCD and DOJ Federal Programs Branch. 8/1/85

8. When challenged on how he would obtain proof of the allegations he intended to make, he responded that: “We don’t have to prove a god dam thing. We don’t have to prove shit. We just have to allege it.”

This misrepresents what was going on when I said whatever I said, and misrepresents what I said. I have responded to this black propaganda many times, e.g., in my February 22, 1994 declaration, referred to above, which was in response to false statements about me made by Miscavige in a declaration he filed in the case of Scientology v. Fishman & Geertz, United States District Court for the Central District of California, Case No. CV 91-6425 HLH(Tx).:

Mr. Miscavige states that I advise one of his covert operatives to accuse the organization of various criminal acts and when I am told that no evidence exists to support those charges I respond to “just allege it.” (Miscavige Dec. p. 32, l. 5 – l. 8) “Better Basket” describes something of the context in which I make a statement differentiating between “allegations” and “proof.” The operative I’m talking to is Mike Rinder. Before this meeting I had already, on request of the “Loyalists,” provided them with a “bare bones” draft of a complaint. Complaints contain allegations. Complaints do not contain proof. Rinder, who had been represented to me as the Loyalists’ “best legal mind” couldn’t seem to get the distinction between allegations and proof in the complaint, and I was frustrated in our conversation because he seemed so dense. Now, of course, his denseness is fully understandable. He had to appear stupid and had to deny that there was any “proof” of the sort of allegations that would be made in a complaint because he knew he was being recorded on a videotape which was going to be used to attack, and if possible destroy me. Even what the organization has done to me alone (see, e.g., crimes listed by Judge Breckenridge and the list in paragraph 7 above) is enough for actual true-hearted reformers to bring a lawsuit to take control of the organization from the criminals now in charge.

9. If that is not enough, Armstrong once posted a message on the Internet concerning a letter he sent to Saddam Hussein during the Gulf War. In the letter, he offered himself to Hussein as a hostage in the Iraqi war. “If either side failed to perform any part of the agreement, the other side could execute me,” he concluded. Armstrong makes clear in his posting that he did not think the letter to Hussein was a joke, but was deadly serious. He quite proudly republishes it and other similar writings from time to time.

Grieboski has written the entirety of the subject defamatory statement as if he had personal knowledge of what he was communicating. At no point did he identify another source for this knowledge and the fact assertions he made, or even hint that there was another source. As any perusal of the Scientologists’ attacks on me over many years would show, Grieboski got this black PR on me from them.

Obviously, he does not have personal knowledge of what he was talking about. According to his own statements, he was nine years old in Scranton, PA when the Scientologists were paying an LAPD officer for authorization to commit crimes against my attorney, me, etc. Grieboski was fifteen, and reportedly still in Scranton, when I wrote to Saddam Hussein in Iraq in an effort to avert the Gulf War and arrange a hostage swap.

Grieboski really was implying that he had researched the facts, and certainly had confirmed the veracity of everything he was saying. He was communicating as if he was a legitimate historian, knowledgeable about his subject because he had honestly examined the best evidence and studied the best, most reliable reports available.

His PR about himself is a man of great ability, honesty, integrity, courage, understanding and compassion. His single defamatory black PR statement about me belies his white self-PR and reveals a black PRing man of malice. His repeatedly, over years, dealing with me and my “bad press” with his black PR, without ever attempting to contact me or ever acknowledging the truth about his black PR’s victim, shows no conscience.

Clearly, his intention regarding a letter to Saddam Hussein, and other similar writings from time to time, was to portray me as mentally deranged or psychotic. If Grieboski could get his power list of people and entities that he dealt with to accept his portrayal of me as psychotic, they would grant no credence to whatever truth I might be saying, about my religious experiences and knowledge of the Scientology religion and his Scientologist clients or bosses and their collaborators.

The Scientologists have portrayed me as deranged or psychotic ever since I left Scientology, and have even emphatically pronounced me psychotic. In their submission to the IRS, on which their 1993 tax exemption was granted, they stated:

Our consistent view has been that the civil litigants are solely motivated by greed. The exception is Armstrong who we truly believe to be psychotic. During the 1980’s, the IRS used every single civil litigant against Scientology as an IRS witness. The government, however, has no business in taking sides in a religious or civil dispute. It is indeed ironic to note that once the Flynn civil litigation in the 80’s was settled, with the exception of Armstrong, we hear no more of their “horror stories” from these paragons of virtue claiming to be interested only in “principle” and “what is right.”

The Scientologists claim to know more about the mind than psychologists or psychiatrists, and to possess the only cure for psychosis, and for virtually every non-optimum mental health condition. It is helpful to view and consider the Scientologists’ labels for people, such as “psychotic,” in light of these claims of superior knowledge and technology of the mind. Indeed the Scientologists claim to have only “workable” mental technology. If the Scientologists truly believed that I am psychotic, their treatment or handling of me has been all the more unconscionable, as has Grieboski’s.

See, e.g., this black PR handout about me dated October 26, 1997 that the Scientologists distributed in Berlin, Germany:

“They searched the whole world for the leading speaker against Scientology and all they found is a fugitive from American Justice, who fled to Canada. His normal activities consist of conversations with the dead” said lawyer Elliot Abelson who represents the International Church of Scientology. “To present such a psychotic person as Gerry Armstrong as a reliable witness is a new low in the losing international campaign, which is organized by people with governmental backing, against the fundamental rights of the members of the Church of Scientology.”

See, e.g., this black PR post on July 11, 2004 to the Usenet group alt.religion.scientology (a.r.s.) from Scientologist agent “CL:”

Hey, Spacetraveler, do yourself a big favor: if you wouldn’t try to reason with a skunk turd, don’t try to reason with Gerry Armstrong.

He is a moron. He is a pathological liar. He is a professional victim. He is a whining, pathetic, pitiful, “poor me baby,” writhing, squirming, lying, amoral, thief. He is so psychotic that he believes, and tries to make everyone else believe, that he is God’s own perfection sent to this earth to explain to everyone who looks at him cross-eyed how utterly inferior and stupid they are not to recognize his own divinity and superiority, his unblemished perfection, his bleeding wounds of infinite and endless martyrdom.

I have dealt with, and had to live with, the Scientologists’ black PR about my writings in relation to Saddam Hussein and the Gulf War for many years. See, e.g. this post to a.r.s. on February 22, 1998:
This is from my June 2, 2011 response to Russian Scientologist Alexei Danchenkov’s black PR, which shares material with Grieboski’s:

Scientology and Scientologists are driven to use whatever exists and whatever can be manufactured therefrom to show that their thoughts, words and actions against me are right, and completely justified, indeed necessary and honorable. One of their most important and often repeated pieces of “evidence” that I’m truly psychotic is my 1990 letter to Saddam.

The letter, obviously, is unrelated to Scientology. It could stand alone for consideration without reference to Scientology. Anyone could have written it without my history and present relationship with Scientology. The cult made the letter “relevant” in a lawsuit it filed and prosecuted improperly against me in the 1990’s. Once it obtained the letter in the legal proceeding, Scientology has used it in its black PR campaign.

I’ve just re-read the letter. It is grammatically solid, philosophically consistent, literary, and sincere. I was, of course, aware that there was little likelihood that Saddam would pay any attention, or even hear of my offer. I was, nevertheless, willing to make my life available if called for to avert or in relation to the coming war. Doubtlessly my offer on behalf of people who don’t participate in national negotiations could have been preferable to the wars that have since happened in Iraq.

The letter does not, however, evidence a personality disorder, legally, medically or societally, any more than any other understandable and sincere offer within a person’s capability in a tense situation evidences a personality disorder. Scientology’s leaders do not truly believe I’m psychotic, but clearly believe that their survival depends on getting others to believe I’m psychotic so that what I say won’t be believed.

In addition to black PRing me for writing Saddam Hussein to try to prevent war, Scientology also black PRs me for my writings about my plan for peacefully resolving the world’s economic problems. Scientologists have demonstrated that no matter what I say or do, no matter how unrelated to Scientology, no matter how enlightened, beneficial or even holy, they will attack it to attack me.

Yet, the attacks on me, and my associates, besides being hurtful, are irrelevant. It would not matter if I was truly psychotic, or truly evil, or the evilest person on earth, it is not right or lawful to try silence me about the Scientology religion and its religionists, by court order, by threat, or by any other means. And I am not such a person.

Because I have had to repeatedly deal with the black PR use the Scientologists and their collaborators have made of my offer to Saddam, and because I have had to confront what I had said and done that is being used for this purpose, I came to realize that I had simply offered to do as Jesus Christ declared in John 15:13: “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” (King James Version) I didn’t have this verse or idea in mind when I offered myself as a hostage, or for execution. I did not even consider myself a Christian then, although I was clearly moving in that direction. Being willing to be imprisoned, tortured or killed to somehow prevent other deaths, destruction and great anguish was a certain step along the way. Laying down one’s life like that implied, until the moment of death, a willingness.

As with many difficult or scary things that a person might be willing to do or might volunteer for, I ended up not being called to do it, and not having to lay down my life. Obviously many others did lay down their lives in the Gulf Wars that followed. It is possible that many of those people were unwilling, I do not know. I really did try to reach Saddam, via my local newspaper at the time, a few other media contacts, and some top government or diplomatic people involved in the buildup to war. I did not go overboard, however, or harass or taunt Saddam, or stalk the guy. I reasoned that if God was going to have him accept my offer, or even receive it, or if someone in government or media was going to think my idea had merit, for purposes of détente, literature, or even commercial exploitation, I had done enough to make my willingness known.

When I have published, republished, or linked to the already-published text of my letter to Saddam, as I have done here, I really have not done so quite proudly as Grieboski says. Saying that I have done whatever I have done “quite proudly” implies that what I have done is immoral, and not something a moral person would do proudly, or publish proudly. There is no reason for me to not be proud of my what I had done, except pride itself. It was not immoral, nor deranged. I think I have published or linked to my letter, however, and even published whatever Grieboski has black PRed as “other similar writings,” more quite matter-of-factly than quite proudly. The black PR that the Scientologists and their collaborators like Grieboski have published about me really is immoral, and they really do publish it quite proudly.

Grieboski writes in his February 29, 2008 letter:

As a devout Roman Catholic, I can and do have my own opinions about other faiths, but as a human rights advocate, it is not my responsibility to judge the worth of the beliefs of others.

The Catholic Bible I found online contains slightly different language in John 15:13 than the KJV, but the meaning of the verse in both Bibles is the same. “No one can have greater love than to lay down his life for his friends.” Although Grieboski says it to mock me and make me sound psychotic, he does acknowledge that I wasn’t joking in my letter to Saddam “but was deadly serious.” It is observable within the letter that although I was writing about deadly serious matters, about hate and death and war, and although I was serious in what I said, I did not lose a sense of humor. The Bible does not instruct Christians, Catholics or not, to mock or revile people who are willing to lay down their lives for others.

Scientologists can be expected to pervert and ridicule any Suppressive Person’s willingness to lay down his life, or his willingness to do almost any kind of good deed, or think or express any good idea. Scientologists can be expected to black PR and work to destroy the SP class, and never grant them a crumb of credence. See Scientology Policy Directive 28, “Suppressive Act – Dealing with a Declared Suppressive Person.”

Few people would expect a devout Catholic, however, to pervert and ridicule such a biblically recognized willingness, the willingness elevated by God above all other willingnesses. Fewer people would expect, or suspect, that a devout Catholic who is also a human rights advocate, and multiple Nobel Peace Prize nominee, was participating in a campaign, in fact a criminal conspiracy, to black PR a known, already grossly persecuted member of the same persecuted minority religious class that Scientologists persecute.

That Grieboski is also a beneficiary in the Scientology v. Armstrong injunction, which unlawfully persecutes the same class, is added inescapable irony. See the biography for the IRPP’s Chairman of the Board:

Mr. Grieboski’s guiding principle for the Institute is that religious freedom is not simply a church-state issue, but involves the engagement of every segment of society to secure freedom of belief for each person.

Freedom of belief without freedom of expression, of course, is nothing to secure. And Grieboski is a contracted beneficiary in mass suppression and punishment of the freedom of expression regarding religion and undeniably religious beliefs, experiences, knowledge, scripture, entities and persons.

Grieboski’s IRPP COB bio continues, and, I believe it could be argued, quite proudly:

As a religious freedom and human rights expert, he has testified before the United States Congress, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and many other legislative and international bodies.

Mr. Grieboski has traveled to Kosovo, China, South Sudan, Darfur and countless other areas to investigate the status of religious freedom.

He currently serves as the Founder and Secretary-General of the Interparliamentary Conference on Human Rights and Religious Freedom; editorial board member of the China Law and Religion Monitor; board member of the Committee for a Responsible Defense; and as a member of the Panel of Experts on International Religious Freedom of the United Kingdom’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

He has lectured for the Close Up Foundation; the National Youth Leadership Forum on Defense, Intelligence, and Diplomacy; and the Washington Semester Program on Peace and Conflict Resolution at American University. Grieboski has also served as a faculty member of the Boston University Institute on Religion and World Affairs (IRWA) Seminar “Religion and Democracy.” Grieboski investigated a run for the United States House of Representatives in 2002.

Before founding the Institute, Mr. Grieboski worked as Director of the International Religious Liberty Program of the Center for Jewish and Christian Values.

He holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Foreign Service and a Master’s in National Security Studies from Georgetown University.

Specializations: National Security; Conventional and Non-Conventional Threats to Security; Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism; Human Rights Law; Conflict Management, Constitutional Law, International Organizations

10. There is much more I could say on the subject, but will leave it to the readers to research for themselves if they wish to discover the more sordid background of this “gentleman,” who currently has several outstanding warrants for his arrest.

I look forward to hearing much more from Grieboski on the subject, in a deposition on the subject or during examination on the subject at a trial of my claims against him, which include the subject and much more.

He did not really leave anything to the readers to research. He was telling them that the more sordid background is there and real, that the research of the already agreed upon sordid background was done, and that it was discovered to be more sordid. He let the readers know that if they wanted to discover the more sordid background that he had discovered through his research, well knock themselves out, but all the research has been done, the sordid background is more sordid.

The Scientologists used the same sordid adjective in their submission to the IRS, which also included the psychotic adjective quoted above, and which obtained for them their religious tax exemption in 1993:

Church of Scientology v. Gerald Armstrong:

We have included some background information here and an epilogue to the decision in question. That is because the Service has continuously thrust the Armstrong case at us, demanding an explanation. The Armstrong case decision was so inflammatory and intemperate that it was used to stigmatize the Church in the legal arena and make other outrageous decisions possible. As we shall demonstrate below, all this decision ever involved was Armstrong’s state of mind, which subsequently obtained evidence proved conclusively to be one sordid, sadomasochistic nightmare. Furthermore, Armstrong’s state of mind horror stories have fallen on deaf ears in recent litigation. Relying on Armstrong or the Armstrong decision is wholly unjustified.

This is the decision the Scientologists are referring to in their submission:
The decision, filed June 22, 1984 in Scientology v. Armstrong, Los Angeles Superior Court, case no. C 420153, became the judgment in the case on August 10, 1984, and was affirmed on appeal on July 29, 1991.

My state of mind is not and has never been a sordid, sado-masochistic nightmare. My background is not more sordid, or sordid at all, as backgrounds go. I thank God that my background and my life are as unsordid as they are.

The quotation marks around “gentleman” here are obviously sneer quotes, signifying that I am anything but a gentleman. A gentleman, as Grieboski was using the term, would be, e.g.: A well-mannered and considerate man with high standards of proper behavior. With sneer quotes, Grieboski was saying that I am an ill-mannered and inconsiderate man of abysmal standards of behavior. With sneer quotes too, he has elevated himself to a height where his sneering at me is for everyone else’s good.

What warrants for my arrest were outstanding, if any, at the time Grieboski published his defamatory statement can only be determined by checking the records in the relevant jurisdictions. My belief is that there were not then several such outstanding warrants, and very well might have been none.

It is true that the beneficiaries have obtained jail sentences against me in California for discussing my religious beliefs, experiences and knowledge, and for assisting members of the SP class that the beneficiaries persecute, in violation of the injunction that unlawfully prohibits any such discussion and assistance. It is also true that the beneficiaries have obtained warrants to have me arrested because I have failed to serve these jail sentences. See, e.g., this bench warrant dated May 15, 1998:

In 2004, the Marin Superior Court dispensed with the pending jail sentences against me. The Scientologists appealed, and got the jail sentences reinstated on October 5, 2007. Whether or not the Scientologists obtained several warrants for my arrest between that date and February 29, 2008 I do not know, but it seems impossible. Regardless, the jail sentences, fines and any such warrants for my arrest are unlawful and bring shame upon the beneficiaries, the California Courts, the US Government, and the California and US bars; and shame upon Grieboski for using this shameful crime against me to further injure me. Having such unlawful, shameful sentences against me, arrest warrants outstanding, and all the black PR about all this all around the world, although cruel and injurious, brings no shame whatsoever.

Regarding the 2004 ruling, see the record in Scientology v. Armstrong, Marin Superior Court No. CV 021632: and this record in the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Nos. A107100 and A107095, and California Supreme Court Case No. S139389:

Markus Thoess Interview of Mike Rinder (ca. June, 2011)

1; 2


GA Letter to Jesse Prince (May 3, 2011)

Dear Jesse:1

I’m writing to ask you to rethink what you’re saying about the people who settled with Scientology. I’m, of course, one of those people, and I know a number of other people in that group very personally. I consequently know quite a bit about that group’s experience, and am able to discuss and defend them or us.

I don’t know how many people reading here know or know of Lawrence Wollersheim, but the above Scientology drill proved to be a complete waste of time. Lawrence would have none of it. Lawrence is the only person I know of in the history of litigation with Scientology that brought his case to court, won the case, got paid for his trouble and NEVER signed a confidential agreement with Scientology about anything period. Lawrence and his team (which I joined in 1998) kicked Scientology’s ass in the courts hands down. Anyone else that I know of has sold a piece of their soul for Scientology’s money by promising to keep quiet. Accepting Scientology’s money in this way in the end proves to be a sellout. By settling money for silence how can you warn others? It’s a selfish decision to know of something that actively hunts and preys on good people just like you and not warn them for money, not to mention the lifetime Scientology tether agreement is always around your neck.2

Some months ago, a longtime friend told me that you were talking smack about me, and the reason you gave for bad-mouthing me was that I had taken Scientology’s money in settlement. I’m hoping to get you to change this computation.

You’ll recall that I was asking you some years back, by e-mail and phone, for a declaration regarding your knowledge of Miscavige’s possession of my manuscript, artwork and other documents that were stolen from my car in 1984. You had told me, I believe in 1999, about Miscavige possessing these stolen materials and talking to you about them, and I was asking you for a declaration concerning that knowledge to help me defend myself in ongoing litigation, and even defend myself in life. A declaration providing your knowledge of Miscavige’s possession of my materials would also have been useful, of course, in any legal action to get my materials returned to me, which I continue to pursue. I mentioned what you had told me in a 2009 letter to Marty Rathbun3, who was obviously more personally involved and knowledgeable about the theft, the thieves, and what Miscavige did with my materials.

I remember too you telling me about how Miscavige used to humiliate Terri for loving me at one time, and you told me other things you had knowledge of. You knew inside that I was a major target of Scientology, and you knew of the attitude and communications about me, and something about the black PR and operations against me. Your knowledge of the Scientology v. Armstrong war in a declaration would have been legally helpful and morally supportive.

Marty Rathbun uses the same “reasoning” to not help me, even to not correct ongoing crimes against me that he perpetrated or participated in and could do something about. Since he began to communicate publicly after claiming to have left the Miscavige Scientology operation, I’ve written Rathbun several letters. He wrote back one nasty e-mail, refusing to help, and providing this “critical difference” between us as a reason: “You sold out twenty-three years ago – and are apparently still mad at yourself for the indelible taint it left. I will never sell out.”

Rathbun’s “logic” is, of course, the logic of sociopaths. Rathbun and his crew fair gamed my attorney Michael Flynn and fair gamed his clients, who were already Scientology victims. Rathbun, et al. insisted that Flynn have his clients sign the cult’s silence contracts, or the Scientologists would continue to fair game him and them. Scientology’s victims, having delivered what Rathbun, et al. wanted, then get attacked by the Scientologists, and in this case even some wogs, for “selling out.” It’s typical of sociopaths to victimize people and then blame their victims for the evil the sociopaths did to them. You, Jesse, were inside the cult, in a high position, and added your weight to the criminal pressure put on Flynn and his clients to sign your cult’s contracts. You were a party and beneficiary in these contracts.

From what I recall of your story, you also signed one or more of Scientology’s silence documents (didn’t we all?) and waited several years to speak out after you left the cult because of your fear that the cult would enforce these documents. You have also acknowledged that you took yourself out of the Scientology conflict for another several years, and have only recently rejoined the conflict. You took off those years, didn’t speak out, didn’t warn people, didn’t help the people asking for your help, and not because you were constrained by a contract, but because of the way you were apparently treated by people you’d helped in the 3 or so years you were speaking out and helping. It seems to me that makes your disparagement of Scientology’s victims for settling with the cult disingenuous, and something to be corrected.

Marty’s boast that he will never sell out is just so much BS. He sold out every day he was inside the cult, and he continues to sell out. Every Scientologist sells out. He knew way more than other Scientologists, and his sell-out is monstrous. He took money from Scientology, and you took money from Scientology. What went with your weekly wages was the agreement to not speak out, to not help Scientology’s victims, to not warn people, but to support their victimization.

Lawrence didn’t sign a settlement contract with the cult, but he has, nevertheless, removed himself from the Scientology conflict, doesn’t speak out, and to that degree doesn’t warn people. Even though he has other reasons than a silence contract to do so, he’s able to remove himself from the Scientology conflict, and to not speak out to warn people, because the cult paid him a great deal of money. I don’t see where not speaking out for one reason is necessarily or automatically morally superior to not speaking out for other reasons. I’m sure Lawrence would understand that and not object. He deserves to be away from the Scientology conflict, as much as any of us.

You portray Scientology’s victims that settled as taking the cult’s money for their silence, or selling out for money. You also say that the effect of the sellout is because the victims’ knowledge then can’t warn people about Scientology, which actively hunts and preys on good people. The fact is that all the people I know of who settled with Scientology had legal justiciable claims, and it was for the dismissal or removal of these legal claims that the cult paid the settling claimants. The silence conditions of the settlements were severable, and have become virtually meaningless and unenforceable. In any case, all of those settling victims could be subpoenaed, could testify, and their sworn testimony could be used to help other victims or warn people.

Scientology didn’t pay me for my silence. I wasn’t selling my silence. It paid me to dismiss my claims for 12 ½ years of fraud and abuse inside, and 5 years of fair game after leaving. Despite their claims, the cultists did not pay me to continue to be fair gamed the rest of my life. I wasn’t selling my torture. The contractual conditions that silence me, or render me in any way unable to defend myself and my class, are unlawful and lawfully unenforceable. That Scientology and Scientologists have had the California courts rule these unlawful conditions lawful is but another crime in the Scientologists’ global criminal conspiracy.

As a sort of aside, regarding warning people, the fact is that people, largely, in this part of the world, are warned, even Government. Maybe in Third World counties they haven’t been warned, and maybe lots of people haven’t got the warning. But in, for example, your Internet public, they’ve been warned. In the warning department, Scientology is a lot like cigarettes. Nobody has to warn people that they’re harmful or deadly. The question is, now that people have been for years fully warned about cigarettes, and people have been for years warned about Scientology, how do you combat the evils they’ve been warned about?

As you know, when you stopped being an expert witness in the McPherson case, Caroline was suggested by Bob Minton to replace you. Ken Dandar contacted her, asked her to testify, and flew her to Florida in early 2002 to be briefed, familiarize herself with the case, and prepare an expert declaration. She was presented with a non-disclosure agreement, and pressured by Lirot, Dandar and Patricia Greenway to sign. This was also despite the fact that she had agreed to work on the case and testify as an expert without remuneration of any kind. Because of the evil that such contracts do, as you’ve observed, and because of how the “agreement” was going to be applied, Caroline’s and my security would be compromised, so she didn’t sign and didn’t testify. It is my understanding that both you and Hana Whitfield signed such documents. The claimed fact that you had signed was used to pressure Caroline.

She was also being pressured, as part of the “agreement,” to stop communicating on the Internet, stop posting to alt.religion.scientology, and, consequently, of course, to not warn any of the people you’re concerned about who don’t know of Scientology and its active hunting and preying on good people. Caroline asked Dandar if he’d read what she had posted about Scientology or Lisa McPherson on the Internet, and he said he had not, and that he deferred to Ms. Greenway regarding Internet matters.

So, did you sign such a document? What was presented to Caroline to sign follows: mcpherson-silence-contract

I realize it’s hard to think with, and, of course, it flies in the face of your conviction that people who sign Scientology’s silence contracts are selfish and sellouts, but I am actually glad I signed the cult’s contract.4

I’ve written about the contract extensively, including the circumstances, my relationship to my attorney and to the 20 or so settling parties, my attorney’s representations, my reasoning, etc., so won’t rewrite it all here. To better understand what went down, I would suggest this 2004 declaration, particularly paragraphs 108 – 175:

The contract is evil, its purpose is evil, how Scientology and Scientologists have used it and still use it is evil. It’s true that I’ve had to take a bunch abuse for signing Scientology’s evil document – lawsuits, judgments, bankruptcy, injunction, fines, jail sentences, threats around the world, a sick black PR campaign, alienation of friends and colleagues, marginalization, loss of opportunities of many kinds, and even the deleterious psychological condition that long term abuse engenders. I have, nevertheless, been very grateful for the message and the courage to sign.

I was positioned as the dealbreaker in a “global” settlement, and my signing was to have fair game end against my attorneys, the other victims and myself. In fact Scientology was promising to end fair game against everyone else forever. It didn’t work out that way for me and for the everyone else, but the 20 victims and a bunch of attorneys could get away from the conflict, which I think they did to one degree or another. The cult, with my attorney’s participation, positioned me to be responsible for the whole settlement for a number of reasons, some of which are probably obvious.

But I’m actually glad about signing Scientology’s evil contract, and, of course, standing up to the cult’s campaign to enforce it, because it has provided such a very important lesson to the Scientologists. The massive effort to judicially enforce Scientology’s contract has shown, despite the cult’s apparent judicial triumphs, the contract’s utter lawful unenforceability.

The Scientology v. Armstrong case is practically the pinnacle of Scientology depravity, and it is an ongoing crime Scientologists still have to take care of. If I had not signed Scientology’s evil contract it would never have become a public document and warned millions of people about the sociopathic nature of Scientology, and how, even by contract, the cult generates an antisocial nature and anti-human rights actions in Scientologists.

Marty says I sold out and postulates an “indelible taint” onto me to justify not helping correct a serious injustice. I didn’t sell out. Any indelible taint is only in Marty’s mind.

I hope you’ll reconsider your poor view of Scientology’s victims who settle with the cult and stop talking about their experiences and knowledge. In terms of contributions, they’ve done a lot more than the thousands of victims who don’t even file claims that could settle, or don’t even consider themselves victims. In any case, I don’t think it’s right to classify and put down that group of victims for what amounts to more victimization.

I could still use your help with a declaration about my stolen materials, etc.



GA letter to Mark Rathbun: Apology not needed or wanted (September 4, 2009)

Dear Mark:

Some people have been saying that I wanted an apology from you, or you should apologize to me, or even that you’ll never apologize to me, for the fair game you perpetrated against me and got others to perpetrate against me while you were in the Scientology organization. I want to assure you and everyone else that I am not seeking or asking for an apology. In fact, an apology from you without you doing what you can to correct the wrongs you perpetrated and are ongoing could be yet another cruelty. With your apology plus a quarter I could make a local payphone call.

What needs attention and resolution are ongoing black PR, ongoing injustices, ongoing human rights violations, and the ongoing effects of other crimes, which you were involved in and can help resolve. I know that you know this.

The situation between you, me and Scientology is analogous to a conspiracy that gets a person falsely imprisoned. The victim sits for years in prison. One of the co-conspirators leaves the conspiracy, perhaps because the head conspirator, the crime boss, beat up one too many of the otherwise happy criminal co-conspirators. The falsely imprisoned guy learns that the ex-conspirator has left the conspiracy (or at least the ex-conspirator claims he’s left the conspiracy) and is publicly offering to help people that he or the conspiracy had hurt. The ex-conspirator seems to be claiming that his ethics are now one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to what his ethics were when he was a lieutenant conspirator under the head conspirator.

Although the Sea Org/Scientology is more a criminal organization than a spiritual organization, because it calls whatever it is and does “religious,” you could use the usual Catholic analogy, in which an ex-Catholic had been a Cardinal Conspirator under the Pope Conspirator. The Catholic Conspiracy, from the Pope through some Cardinals down through some more clergy to attorneys and lay thugs, would have been carrying out the Pope’s Holy Command Intention to have the earlier ex-Catholic falsely imprisoned, and in other ways criminally attacked. The person who’d left the Church years before the Cardinal blew could have been a Bishop, or maybe just a Clerk, but perhaps was an uncommonly blessed Clerk, who’d known God personally, and had been authorized by God to do the research for His Biography. The Catholic analogy is not inapt, but I think the conspiracy is easier to follow and understand without the vaticanist trappings, since it is a simple criminal conspiracy, even if called a sacrament.

The falsely imprisoned guy writes to the ex-conspirator asking for the offered, and clearly needed, help. The ex-conspirator doesn’t respond to his victim’s request, which his victim e-mailed to him and posted on various Internet sites to make sure the ex-conspirator got, and very clearly, where his victim was coming from. With good reason and, especially given the circumstances, good humor, and with accuracy and care, the victim communicated some of his sincerely held thoughts about the situation and the human relationship. As an icebreaker, the victim made his initial communication an interparagraphing analysis of a perjurious declaration the ex-conspirator had executed to cause the victim trouble and harm a number of years even before getting him falsely imprisoned.

As you can see, the ex-conspirator would be even crueler than he had already been if he “apologized” to the victim and then did nothing to bring the ongoing crime against the victim to an end. In our analogy or scenario, the ex-conspirator does neither. He doesn’t apologize and he doesn’t help. In fact, clearly contemptuously, he doesn’t communicate back at all.

Not receiving a response from the ex-conspirator, his victim again writes him requesting his help to correct the injustices the ex-conspirator had for many years perpetrated and prolonged against the victim. Specifically, the ex-conspirator had known about the conspiracy’s theft of the victim’s valuable documents and artwork, also years before the false imprisonment, and could have been, if he really had left the conspiracy, a great help in getting them back to the victim. Again the victim receives no acknowledgement, not a word granting him a shred of credence.

The victim waits another month or so then writes the claimed ex-conspirator again, about another cruel injustice that the conspiracy had perpetrated against the victim. Some people had suggested to the victim that victimizers like the ex-conspirator wouldn’t help their victims unless their victims were extremely polite to them. The victim thinks that this is what bullies or sociopaths standardly do to their victims; nevertheless, he is extremely careful to be extremely polite, and even pre-apologizes in case he was being thought of as overly polite. Again, the victim insures the victimizer gets his communication by sending it directly and publishing it publicly. Despite his victim’s extreme politeness and his care in making sure the claimed ex-conspirator really got his communication, the claimed ex-conspirator again doesn’t even acknowledge his victim.

As you can imagine, by this point, the victim is fairly certain that the claimed ex-conspirator is still part of the conspiracy, doing some twisted nastiness for the conspiracy as he’d done for many years; or he is simply a coward and a bully, and just blowing smoke about helping victims. Nevertheless, the victim writes yet again, trying to assuage his victimizer’s guilt, if he was feeling any, and if he was using the guilt he was feeling in excusing not helping his victim. The conspirators, including the ex-conspirator, as a key part of their criminal conspiracy to destroy the victim, had conducted a global defamation/psychoterror campaign that included lies the ex-conspirator knew were lies. The ex-conspirator had been in places and positions in the conspiracy to know the truth, including the truth about the other conspirators’ knowledge of the crimes they were committing against the victim. The ex-conspirator knew that the conspiracy against the victim and his rights was unlawful, and knew that unlawful acts were committed in furtherance of the conspiracy. The ex-conspirator correcting those lies and confessing to the knowing unlawfulness of the conspiracy and its actions would be a very effective step to start righting the wrongs they had committed and were ongoing.

Despite the victim being one of the conspiracy’s most victimized victims, and despite the claimed ex-conspirator’s vital participation in the victimizing, yet again the claimed ex-conspirator doesn’t respond, or even acknowledge the victim’s existence. Yet again, the victim’s letter had been reasoned, factual, accurate and polite. The ex-conspirator comments publicly in another matter about only responding to communications that are civil, and he’s probably intimating that he hasn’t responded to his biggest victim because he wasn’t civil enough. His victim, of course, was not only civil, but polite, and not overly polite, and the ex-conspirator, whether or not he really had left the conspiracy, is treating and handling him with contempt.

Again too, I’m sure you can see, an apology from the ex-conspirator without his doing whatever he could to correct the judicial injustices and other ongoing iniquities, would be cruel. The ex-conspirator’s contempt for the victim, which the silent treatment à la Lisa Tech evidences, was made willfully more contemptuous and crueler by the ex-conspirator’s setting up a “practice” in which he is the possessor, seller and deliverer of superlative “ethics.” If the ex-conspirator would help his victim as he could and never apologize, doubtlessly the victim wouldn’t object. If the ex-conspirator apologized at any point in their relationship from here on, doubtlessly the victim, being reasonable and not at all like the black PR the conspirators had manufactured about him, would be grateful. An apology could even help, and psychologically and socially could even help the ex-conspirator. But the victim isn’t asking for an apology, because, without the requested help, it would be cruelty.

The analogy is closer to reality than most people would imagine, I would imagine, because, although I have not been falsely imprisoned all the years of your analogous victim above, the Scientology conspiracy did obtain and currently possesses a series of unlawful orders jailing me in California and fining me. I simply didn’t comply with these unlawful orders because they’re unlawful, and no one has any lawful obligation in California, or anywhere in the US, to comply with any order that isn’t lawful. There are still unlawful orders to jail me in California, and you could be very helpful in getting them canceled. If I had complied with even one of those unlawful orders jailing me, the Scientology cultists could have kept me jailed for years, or decades or forever.

You know all the details of the Miscavige regime’s unlawful orders against me, in fact you know details of all Miscavige’s and his regime’s fair game on me, up until 2005, I suppose, when you say you blew from Gilman. I’ll provide a brief description of the unlawful orders and circumstances, and some comments on the relevant related issues, however, so that others who will read this will have enough information to create a pretty clear picture. The available and relevant documents, of course, for all Scientology’s legal cases against me are well organized on my site.

The 1995 injunction Scientology got against me in California Superior Court in Marin County was obtained unlawfully and is on its face unlawful. The injunction has been one of the most insane, self-destructive successes imaginable for Scientology. What a flap! And it’s still ongoing. And you, Mark, were involved in the litigation to obtain the injunction, and in the enforcement actions following its unlawful grant. In fact, you were, throughout many of those years, directly over the litigation. It’s funny really, if you could think about it, that you write to Bert Fields that you held the “second highest ecclesiastical position in the [Scientology] religion” when you were over litigation. This supports the reality that litigation is an ecclesiastical activity, or religious expression, or religious exercise. In my life, as I have proven, it certainly is.

You were on the approval line for the unconscionable contract that would make every Scientology church, every affiliated entity, and all of their directors, officers, employees, volunteers, agents, assigns and attorneys, beneficiaries, not only in the unlawful contract, but in the unlawful injunction that enforced the unlawful contract, and in all the actions, which are all unlawful, taken to enforce the unlawful injunction. I won’t focus on the injunction here, although clearly it is an injustice that must be corrected, even for the benefit of the Scientologists it makes universally and willfully suppressive of basic human rights, but I’ll deal mainly with the enforcement efforts, which resulted in the unlawful jail sentences and fines against me.

You were also involved in fair gaming my attorney Michael J. Flynn from the day you were assigned to the Special Project or MAC. The “Juggernaut” eval is actually a criminal conspiracy. You were also involved in the operation to frame Flynn with the $2 million check forgery, using testimony Scientology purchased and which you knew to be false. From Vicki Aznaran’s July 19, 1990 declaration:

I have been informed by Mark (Marty) Rathbun, a high ranking Scientologist, that his private investigator, Gene Ingram, “fed” confession to Ala Tamimi when visiting him in an Italian prison. This false confession was, in substance, that Tamimi had been involved in a bad check scam involving an account of L. Ron Hubbard. This false confession implicated attorney Michael Flynn in the check scam. Michael Flynn was at the time considered a major enemy of Scientology because he represented numerous clients with claims against Scientology. This purported confession was used to slander and attack Michael Flynn. Michael Flynn has also been sued by Scientology as part of its “strategy” for handling enemies.

So you know what was done to conspire against, threaten, manipulate and degrade Flynn to get him to get me to sign your unlawful contract. These actions too must be confronted, the contract rescinded as unlawful, and the record cleared. As I said above, however, I will just deal now with the efforts to enforce the injunction that enforces the contract, and the unlawful jail sentences and fines you and your fellow religious conspirators obtained against me.

You will recall my August 14 letter, in which I requested your help to correct the black PR on me that you and Miscavige submitted to the IRS to get Scientology’s 1993 tax exemption. I mentioned in the letter that in January 1997, while living in San Anselmo, California, I discovered some of this black PR on the Internet, and that the discovery was so shocking that I felt I had to flee. I was also well aware at that time, of course, of Scientology’s leaders’ willful dishonesty, evil intentions toward me, and their propensity for physical violence, and I felt I had to be in a place, Canada, where I could more safely deal with this black PR and Scientology’s other attacks and threats. As you know, now twelve plus years later, time has proven me right. I also was painfully aware, obviously, that I could not get justice, or even reason, from the Marin Court Judge who’d issued the unlawful injunction and other unlawful orders and who had unlawfully denied me a fair trial, or any trial, Gary W. Thomas.

Back in January 1997, as Randomity would have it, just a few days before I actually left California, and while I was getting ready to leave, which was an extraordinarily threatening and troubling time, Grady Ward, a friendly fellow fighter against Scientology lies, abuses and criminality, served me with a subpoena for production of documents in the US District Court copyright infringement case he was defending against the cult. The following day, Andrew H. Wilson, the cult’s attorney in the Scientology v. Armstrong state case, sent me a letter claiming that my production of the subpoenaed documents to Ward would be a violation of the contract and injunction, and threatening me with enforcement if I produced the subpoenaed documents to Ward. Wilson didn’t copy Ward or the US District Court with his letter, and, although Wilson stated that Scientology would file a motion for a protective order in the Ward case to prevent my production of the subpoenaed documents, the cult never did file the motion.

Because Wilson’s threat and attempted interference was clearly unlawful, since I was a subpoenaed witness, I wrote a declaration reporting the threat and sent it to US District Court Judge Ronald M. Whyte, who presided over the Ward case and the related copyright infringement cases, Erlich and Henson. It was completely lawful, in fact arguably a legal duty, to report Wilson’s threat, and the report could not lawfully be prohibited by any injunction, certainly any State Court injunction. After reporting the threat, I left California for Canada. I had already filed a notice of appeal from the injunction and was awaiting the Marin County Clerk’s creation of the record and transcript for the appeal.

While I was in Canada, Scientology had Wilson file an application in Marin for an order to show cause re contempt against me for sending the declaration reporting Wilson’s threat to Judge Whyte. Scientology never served me with the application, or the OSC. Only many years later did I obtain a copy of some of the documents Wilson and Scientology filed in this matter. In his declaration in support of the application, Wilson omitted any mention of Grady Ward serving me with a subpoena duces tecum, any mention of Wilson’s threat, and any mention of the fact that I was sending my declaration to the federal judge to report that threat.

Scientology and Wilson, with machinations you would know about, then got the Judge Thomas, who had already granted the unlawful injunction and an equally unlawful judgment, to grant the cult’s contempt order, punishing me with two days in jail and a $1,000 fine. There is no mention in the order of Grady Ward serving me with the subpoena duces tecum, of Wilson’s threat, or that my declaration reported that threat to Judge Whyte.

While reasonably safely in Canada, I received the Marin Superior Court Clerk’s Transcript on Appeal, and I wrote and timely filed my Appellant’s Opening Brief in August 1997 in the California Court of Appeal in my appeal from Scientology’s unlawful injunction and judgment. Given where I’d written my brief, my situation, condition and resources, my brief is actually very good, and eminently civil, and no one has offered any reasoned and legally supported opposition to its substantive arguments. Scientology didn’t file a respondent’s brief, but filed a motion to dismiss the appeal based on the unlawful contempt order Judge Thomas had signed, which, the cult said, made me a fugitive from justice and therefore barred me from appealing.

What machinating Scientology, Scientologists and your attorneys organized to get Division Four of the First Appellate District to dismiss my appeal from the patently unlawful judgment and injunction, after I had filed a competent, well-supported and civil brief that showed that the injunction on which the contempt order, jail sentence and fines were based was unlawful, you would know, I’m sure, in considerable detail. After you got that appellate division to dismiss my appeal, it became clear to me that defiance and not civility was what was needed for Scientology and Scientologists.

My becoming very defiant as a result of your criminal abuse of process and conspiracy against my rights led me to see, of course, that defiance and civility weren’t mutually exclusive. My civility as a terrorized victim was simply transformed into the civility of a victim who has become very defiant. Defiance, as I intend it here, is “bold resistance to an opposing force or authority” and is, as you can see, neutral. Scientologists, for example, defy me to try to correct the injustices you’re perpetrating against me, and, of course, they defy logic, and even defy God. I defy Scientology’s and Scientologists’ lies. I defy you all to confront your “Suppressive Person” doctrine. I defy you, Mark, to prove that you’re on the right side. I defy you to prove you can’t understand what I’ve written. I defy all Scientologists to prove their “reason” is superior, or even reason at all.

Throughout my adult life, I have been civil, and in fact consciously and automatically polite and courteous. In an earlier communication to you, I mentioned my need to communicate as I communicate, and to publish what I publish, to counter Scientology’s and Scientologists’ lies and black PR on me. I mentioned specifically the big lie to the IRS to get your tax exemption that all of you truly believe I’m psychotic. The very same abundance of my writings and other communications now also has to prove, and does prove, that I’m civil. I am as civil as anyone as defiant as I am could be. I defy you to find anyone as defiant as I am and more civil than I am. In fact, I defy you to find anyone who is, whether a defiant victim or not, as big a victim of Scientology persecution as I am, and more civil.

The common, non-social emotion and attitude among Scientologists, which is installed in them by the application of Scientology, is contempt. They even watch each other to make sure they’re contemptuous enough of the right victims. Scientologists are universally contemptuous of me. Contempt is also, you should be aware, the actual, non-social tone and attitude of bullies and sociopaths. Scientologists’ group contempt for someone, or for others, facilitates aggression toward the targets or victims of their contempt. One of the available tones and attitudes in response to Scientology’s and Scientologists’ contempt and aggression or fair game is defiance, bold resistance. I’m happy to be able to report that the number of wogs defying Scientology’s and Scientologists’ contempt and aggression has grown exceedingly over the past several years. This expansion of planetary defiance, of course, has validated my own choice to defy these evils, and even made my defiance more defiant.

Your communications indicate that you are elevating your contempt for me to the point of demanding that I be civil. Yet, as a defiant victim of Scientology and Scientologists, you included notably, I am excruciatingly civil, dotting every i, crossing every t, and obeying every other convention or rule of grammar, etiquette and civility. You’re actually demanding that I stop being a civil defiant victim and just be your civil lickspittling victim, which I could never be even if I wanted for some insane reason to be. Your demand, of course, is both impossible and ludicrous. Victimizers demanding politeness from their victims is a form of what Hubbard called in scripture “double-curving.”

My defiance of your contempt is good for you, for me, and in fact it’s good for everyone. When you stop being contemptuous, naturally, I’d stop being defiant. I’d still be civil, but I’d appear very differently to you. You’d see in fact what you already know; that I’d been civil all along. So really, an apology from you, as long as you remain contemptuous of me and don’t help to end the continuing injustices and other fair game against me, would be just more contempt, more fair game, and, as I said, more cruelty, which, of course, is what contempt and fair game is intended to be.

Following your success getting Judge Thomas to sign your contempt order jailing and fining me for my sending my threat report to Judge Whyte, you also got Judge Thomas to sign a second contempt order for thirteen religious expressions about the Scientology religion I expressed in Europe and Canada, punishing me with another twenty-six days in jail and another monetary fine. Such an order is no more lawful than it would be to jail a person for expressing religious expressions about the Christian religion. The idea that an injunction issued by a California State Court judge, clearly either deranged or degraded, can lawfully prohibit a Canadian citizen from expressing his religious expressions about a religion in Canada or anywhere else is, of course, obscene, and clearly impossible.

After Judge Thomas retired, you used his series of unlawful orders and the Court of Appeal’s unlawful dismissal of my appeal to get another Marin Court Judge Vernon F. Smith to sign another contempt order against me for one hundred thirty-one religious expressions of my religious experiences and religious knowledge of a religion and its religionists. Being as defiant as I humanly could be, knowing that the contract’s and injunction’s conditions that I was violating were inarguably unlawful, and just living my life, I had, even by that time, actually violated these conditions hundreds of thousands of times. I would say that I have violated these unlawful conditions millions of times.

Over my sincere opposition at every stage, you priced each religious expression of my religious experiences and religious knowledge at $50,000 per expression, and you got Judge Thomas to agree that was a reasonable, fair and judicially enforceable figure. I disagreed that my religious expressions of my religious experiences and religious knowledge had that monetary value, but Scientology and all Scientologists, and certainly you, who were then in charge of litigation, insisted upon that valuation, and Judge Thomas went along with you. To further unlawfully help Scientology and Scientologists to unlawfully persecute me, he also went along with your unconscionable math, ruling it perfectly fathomable. The multiplicand for the $50,000 would be determined by the recipients, or even intended recipients, of any religious expression of my religious experiences in and religious knowledge of the Scientology religion.

You’ll recall that you had Scientology state in its early lawsuit to enforce its contract against me that I had sent a single religious expression to 19 people establishing its value at $950,000. All my religious expressions times their recipients times $50,000 a pop, I’m sure you’re aware, generates more monetary value than there is money in the world. In his deposition in the case, your junior during many years Lynn Farny provided the ecclesiastical adverb “a pop” when explaining how Scientology performed its monetary valuations of my religious expressions.

[Attorney Michael L. Walton:]  Q. The sending of this letter Scientology has alleged entitles it to $950,000 in liquidated damages. Can you explain that to me?

[Lynn R. Farny:]  A. Yes, I can. The letter which is attached to the Complaint as an Exhibit E is nine pages long and provides an extensive amount of information. Now each of the individuals designated in paragraph 87 received a copy of this letter, so it’s the disclosure of information to those individuals at $50,000 a pop which totals 950,000.

This letter to you, which I intend and expect conservatively a million people will receive, is worth, according to the Scientology “beneficiaries,” $50 billion.

Based on the unlawful injunction, judgment and contempt orders, in 2002 you had Scientology sue me again, seeking $10 million for two hundred of my religious expressions, virtually all of which were expressed in Canada or Europe. Your suit was also against Bob Minton and the Lisa McPherson Trust, seeking more millions from them for “acting in concert” with me in violation of your unlawful orders against me. You sued Minton for purchasing a computer for me because that computer would be used by me to express my religious expressions about the Scientology religion. Your attorneys unlawfully threatened several people with judicial enforcement of the unlawful injunction.

In 2004, at a trial of your $10 million suit, which was not the fair trial I seek in which I can put on a defense, Marin Superior Court Judge M. Lynn Duryee dispensed with the jail sentences and fines Scientology had obtained against me as unconscionable punishment. Amazingly and demonically, and through a very dishonest connection in the same appellate division that had dismissed my appeal of the unlawful injunction on the basis of the unlawful contempt order, Scientology was able to get this unconscionable punishment reinstated. I have the complete appellate record on my site.

Thus there are still these unlawful jail sentences and fines that prevent me from traveling to California, and even threaten my traveling anywhere else in the US. You know they’re unlawful, and shouldn’t want them, if you have any conscience, to be considered lawful by anyone; and you’re perfectly able to help me correct these and all the injustices Scientology and Scientologists have perpetrated against me all these years. That you worked so assiduously under Miscavige to silence people about Scientology, and make it appear lawful to silence people about Scientology, is a crime not only against me but against all wogs, and even more, against all Scientologists.

Scientology and Scientologists, as you know and doubtlessly directed, have also used, and continue to use their unlawful California jail sentences and other unlawful orders against me to black PR me and cause me trouble all around the world. See, e.g. this 2001 OSA black PR to a huge list of Russian Federal, and Provincial departments and officials, the clergy, and the mass media :

I am talking about Gerald Armstrong, a man who will take part in this conference and will present a paper on April 24, 2001.

In May 1998 the Supreme Court of the State of California issued an order to “arrest him and to bring him to the court” and that this arrest “can be conducted any time day or night” (cited from the court decision). I should add that this Armstrong was to be brought before the court and held accountable for anti-religious propaganda.

The order has not been executed until now for the simple reason that Armstrong is not at the moment residing in the US and thus is outside the reach of American justice.

I have no doubt that neither the Diocese of Nizhny Novgorod nor the authorities of Nizhny Novgorod Province and the city of Nizhny Novgorod have access to this data; otherwise this man would not have been put on the list of participants in the Conference.

I include here a copy of the document sent to me from the USA and I ask you to find out whose initiative it was to invite this man to Nizhny Novgorod, deliberately not informing the government that he is a criminal element. It is necessary to carefully screen all the list of the participants as well.

I also would like to inform you that this document, with an explanatory letter similar to this one, has already been submitted to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation, and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation. Moreover, the information about the arrival of Armstrong in Russia has been handed to the U.S. Embassy in Russia so that the necessary measures may be taken for his detention.

Or see Scientology’s false statement to have me prosecuted in Ekaterinburg, Russia in 2003, which included this “support” for the demanded false prosecution:

We ask you to take measures, which are provided for by the law in relation to the members of this group of people. And we inform you, that G. Armstrong was brought to justice for his illegal activity. Namely, the Supreme court of the state California, County of Marin, case #157680, sentenced G. Armstrong to be guilty and demanded him to pay the compensation in the amount of $300 000 to the plaintiff. The Supreme Court of state California county of Marin, case #152229, awarded the Order to immediately arrest G. Armstrong, who purposely violated the writ 13 times. Also, the Supreme Court of California county of Marin, case #157680, #152229 declared, that the defendant G. Armstrong is guilty in 13 acts of contempt of court. Also he is punished for the previous contempt of authorities by the fine $200 for each infringement (totally $2600) and confinement in the County Jail for a period 48 hours for each infringement (totally 26 days). G. Armstrong should appear before the Court of the county of Marin, obeying the law, or should be brought to suffer punishment till 10 of February 1998. In case G. Armstrong does not obey to the mandate of the court, the bench warrant will be issued to arrest him immediately and subject to confinement, till the punishments for the contempt of the court are fulfilled.

If you stick with the Scientology position that the orders jailing me and fining me for expressing my sincere religious beliefs, experiences and knowledge about this religion, or any other religion, are desirable, moral or lawful, then you support Miscavige on this most key issue confronting Scientologists. On the other hand, if you really want to bring Miscavige to justice, to get justice for the victims of his regime’s injustice, and to actually defend human rights, then these orders and my relationship with Scientology and Scientologists provides an excellent opportunity. My case and the orders against me are all about human rights, and I have fought for this opportunity for over twenty-seven years. The help I need from you is your knowledge of what you were doing, or getting others to do, or of what Scientology was doing, that was not lawful, or fair, or conscionable, or even arguably advisable in its conspiracy to silence, imprison, ruin, and beastify me. If you tell the whole time, place, form and event, my attorney and I will make great use of it to do great good.

Yours civilly as always,

Gerry Armstrong
[contact info]

GA letter to Mark Rathbun for help getting back stolen documents (July 7, 2009)

Dear Mark:

In my May 31 2009 letter to you, I brought up the incident of Scientology agents breaking into my car in 1984 and stealing a bunch of my things, and Miscavige’s having them after their theft. I asked for your help getting them back; in fact I wrote the whole letter essentially asking for your help in righting years of wrongs Sea Org personnel under Miscavige, including you, have committed, and continue to commit, against me – and yes, many, many others.

Oh, now that I’ve mentioned it in the above list of Fair Game attacks on me, I’ll also ask you about the theft of my original manuscript, artwork and other materials from my car. I know from both Vicki Aznaran and Jesse Prince that Miscavige actually claimed to them that he had these things in his possession after they were stolen my car, which was during the Armstrong videotape operation in the fall of 1984, so I trust you won’t pretend the theft didn’t happen. Just help me get my things back from Miscavige, okay? 1

After writing you, I remembered that Jesse Prince had told me that both Miscavige and you had told him about having my things after their theft. I also found this from a 1999 letter to Miscavige that I posted to a.r.s.:

You will recall that a cult operative broke into the trunk of my car in 1984 and stole my briefcase which contained about 300 original pages of my art, almost all handwritten or drawn. You will recall that my attorney Julia Dragojevic wrote to the org demanding return, and that your org attorney John Peterson answered, denying the theft and possession of my things.

Recently I had the happy opportunity to talk with Jesse Prince about all this. Jesse stated that while inside he too was told by both you and Mark Rathbun about your agent’s theft of my things from the trunk of my car and your having possession of them. Jesse recalled you describing my work as weird writing. You stole them, you know where they are and you can put your hands on them. Now get them back to me, and be known thereuntil as a thief.

I’m aware that you could be another Loyalist op, Mark, but I’m taking you for now at face value. So far, on its face, what you’ve said, and to me not said, indicates that in the Scientology v. Gerry Armstrong war, you are on the cult’s side.

Accepting what you’ve said about yourself, it isn’t easy for you to do what’s necessary to change that indication. I think, however, that if you start by debriefing about the 1984 theft of my things and what happened with them, and doing what is within your power to help me get them back from Miscavige, you’ll get the necessary courage.

It’s almost 25 years since my things were stolen. Following Vicki’s and Jesse’s debriefs to me about Miscavige possessing my things, I’ve written him and other Scientologists many times, requesting my things’ return. Doubtlessly you saw some of those requests in your years inside.

You knew John Peterson lied in his denial of Scientology’s knowledge of the theft. He was, of course, your organization’s front attorney just because he would willfully lie and would help Fair Game his clients’ victims.

I’d bet you knew about someone in the LAPD altering/losing my police report. These documents on the incident could refresh your memory:

My manuscript and original artwork, and every other piece of paper, are very valuable to me, and Miscavige, you, and many other Scientologists have known of their great value to me. Consider the nature of a group that would willfully inflict that pain on an individual all these years. It’s cruelty, Mark. And it’s an ongoing crime that should be confronted, stopped and expiated.

Yours steadfastly,

Gerry Armstrong


GA Open letter to Mark Rathbun (May 31, 2009)

Dear Mark:

I’m writing to you at this time, initially anyway, to see where you’re at on your August 13, 1991 declaration that was filed in the first Scientology v. Armstrong case appeal, and to see if you’ll do something about what you stated in this dec.

I’m sure you’re knowledgeable about many of the years of attacks on me while you were working under David Miscavige. But right now I just want to address your August 13, 1991 dec. While I’m at it, because DM is steamed and some of his Scientologists or ops have been communicating particularly insanely recently about Hubbard’s Admissions or Affirmations, I’ll also take this opportunity to ask whether DM ever let you read them.

I’m communicating to you about your dec after all these years because of your recent statements on your website and on ESMB. You offered to help those in need who once formally participated in Scientology but who now hold no hope nor intention of ever seeking help from that organization. That’s me to a T.

You also say that Scientology (you’re not talking about some other “Church,” right?) “stand[s] one-hundred and eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental tenets.” And you add that, despite the one hundred eighty degree diametrically opposed stand to its own most fundamental tenets, “the tenets can still be workable.” It’s an indirect sort of way of saying that, for example, the golden rule can still work even if the members of the Golden Rule Church, whose fundamental tenet it is, stand opposed to it. From the Goldenrulologists’ point of view, the people who might have the same or a similar golden rule tenet but don’t stand in opposition to the tenet, and instead apply it, are suckers, or, as in the Scientology case, raw meat, or wogs.

A “tenet” is “a principle, belief, or doctrine generally held to be true; especially, one held in common by members of an organization, movement, or profession. Your declaration presents what you stated are Scientology’s fundamental tenets, or basic values, of honesty, integrity and ethical behavior, and you supported this statement with the assertion and evidence that the organization’s or religion’s scripture is “replete with admonitions to its adherents to build their lives on the foundations of honesty and integrity.” I don’t really disagree; Scientology scripture is full of it. You’d also probably have a hard time finding organizations or religions, or even businesses or business models, with the most fundamental tenets of dishonesty, out-integrity and unethical behavior. Or, at least, again, that is, who claimed these evils were their own most fundamental tenets.

In your declaration, you used these claimed ethical tenets and Scientologists’ claimed honesty and integrity in demonstrating, manifesting or applying them as your basis to attack my allegations or assertions, or evidence, in the 1984 Los Angeles Superior Court Scientology v. Armstrong (I) trial that Hubbard and Scientology were dishonest, lacked integrity and engaged in unethical behavior. You asserted that my allegations or assertions of dishonesty, out-integrity and out-ethics were “patently absurd and unbelievable.”

It’s fascinating, in view of your post to ESMB, that you wrote in your 1991 declaration that I had “twisted and perverted the facts about [the Scientology] religion and its system of ethics and justice one hundred and eighty degrees from the truth.” It’s clear to me that you’re now acknowledging that actually nothing could be further from the truth. I’m very much looking forward to hearing back from you with all the details.

The following is the whole dec with some interparagraph or intersectional comments and questions:


I, Mark C. Rathbun, hereby declare:

1. I am the President of the Religious Technology Center (”RTC”). RTC has the responsibility of ensuring that the nature and quality of the services and products associated with the religion of Scientology and with its technologies of spiritual counselling, ethics and administration are properly applied in accordance with the standards set forth by the Founder of the Religion, L. Ron Hubbard.

In that Scientology stands, as you now publicly say, one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental tenets, it must have been Hubbard’s standards that he set forth, as well as his policies, orders, and his actual, deducible, most fundamental tenets that made the organization stand that way. This conclusion is supported, of course, by the fact that Hubbard was a judicially declared pathological liar, by the wealth of good evidence that resulted in that judicial ruling, and by Scientology’s long documented history of lying and other unethical behavior. Your purpose and function in RTC, in fact, were to ensure that Hubbard’s ethics technologies were applied, in accordance with standards he set, which were one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to his own claimed most fundamental standards.

It is not believable that Scientology was aligned or in agreement with its own most fundamental tenets while you were responsible, or claiming you were responsible, for ensuring that the nature and quality of Scientology “ethics” were applied in accordance with Hubbard’s standards, and that only when you left the organization did its stand become one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own claimed most fundamental standards. Nor is it believable that Scientology was not aligned or in agreement with its own most fundamental tenets while you were inside, but is now after your apparent leaving. It is only believable that Scientology’s stand was always one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its claimed most fundamental tenets, and still is.

The organization was one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental standards before you were recruited, one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental standards while you were inside, and remained exactly one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental standards after you left. When it finally happens, should it ever happen, and Scientology’s stand actually aligns with its own stated or claimed most fundamental tenets of honesty and integrity, the change in the organization’s nature and behavior will be profound and nobody who deals with Scientology will miss it.

I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth below, and if called upon to do so, I could and would competently testify thereto.

Thank you. I’m so calling on you now.

2. In addition to my corporate position as President of RTC, I also hold the ecclesiastical position of Inspector General for Ethics. The function of that position is to ensure the standard application of the ethics technology of the Scientology religion. I am responsible for ensuring that the ethical standards of Scientology are observed to the letter.

If you ensured that Scientology’s ethical standards were observed to the letter, and the organization stood one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental tenets, which it did, then you were ensuring Scientology’s stand was and remained just that: one-hundred and eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental tenets. Or rather, its own claimed most fundamental tenets. Scientology’s actual most fundamental tenets, because the group, organization, religion or cult does have actual tenets, are dishonesty, out-integrity and unethical behavior.

In truth, I think you have to acknowledge, you were not in the position you claim in your declaration of ensuring the standard application of ethics technology, because it was David Miscavige who actually said what “ethics” were enforced, and you executed his orders. You don’t even mention Miscavige in your declaration. And in fact you don’t even mention him on your site or in your ESMB post. Yet he is the guy virtually totally responsible for Scientology’s stand being one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental tenets.

My life is dedicated to the support and preservation of the Scientology religion and its scripture, which consists of the religious writings of Mr. Hubbard.

What you were supporting and preserving, clearly, was a religion that was one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental tenets. It appears that you are now claiming that your life is no longer dedicated to the support and preservation of the Scientology religion and its scripture, which religion and scripture resulted in that stand that is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the religion’s own most fundamental tenets.

3. I am familiar with this litigation and the outrageous accusations introduced against the Church of Scientology under the guise of an explanation of Armstrong’s “state of mind.” Armstrong was thus permitted to introduce evidence which twisted and perverted the facts about his former religion and its system of ethics and justice one hundred and eighty degrees from the truth.

So you see the astonishing irony. If my facts and explanation about Scientology and its ethics and justice were one hundred eighty degrees from what the organization was claiming was the truth, and you now see that Scientology’s stand, by which you must mean the reality of Scientology’s and Scientologists’ behavior, is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the religion’s own most fundamental tenets of honesty and integrity, then what I was saying in 1984 must be the truth. Which, of course, it was, and is.

In fact, Scientologists, as a group, comprise the most ethical people, following the highest ethical standards, of any group in the world today.

You used this descriptor “most ethical people” three times in your dec. It comes, of course, from Hubbard, who stated in HCOPL “Keeping Scientology Working:” Yet there is no more ethical group on this planet than ourselves.”
Being the most ethical group on the planet is a meme that Scientologists universally “know” and mouth in all sorts of contexts; e.g., in their condition formula steps. An organization that stands, not a few degrees off, but one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental tenets, cannot be the most ethical people or group in the world, but must be, or be among, the most unethical. You can’t get more diametrically opposed to the highest ethical standards than one hundred eighty degrees.

4. At trial, the Church of Scientology of California was effectively prevented from placing into the record the overwhelming evidence of Scientology’s emphasis on honesty and integrity, or from demonstrating to the Court the truth about its system of ethics and justice which its parishioners prize so highly.

You know that this is false. Scientology’s public claims on honesty and integrity were admitted into evidence from both sides. I put such materials in evidence to demonstrate in 1984 what you’ve since acknowledged: that what Scientology was claiming as its fundamental tenets of honesty and integrity were one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its actual fundamental tenets, stand or behavior. The organization could have offered any pieces of its scripture, or any other relevant documents, into evidence. The truth is that as more and more of Scientology’s claims of its honesty and integrity were placed in the trial record, just as with your multitudinous claims of Scientology honesty and integrity in your sworn 1991 dec, the clearer the organization’s willful hypocrisy became to the trier of fact, and to any other observers who care to observe. It is Scientology’s willful hypocrisy that you’ve now observed after eighteen years is its stand that is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own claimed most fundamental tenets. Or seen another way, willful hypocrisy is Scientology’s own actual most fundamental tenet.

The trial court erred when it accepted, as has this Court, Armstrong’s evidence concerning his alleged “state of mind” and then used that evidence to support findings of fact as though such supposed evidence had been admitted for the truth of the assertions. Consequently, the false accusations leveled by Amrstrong were never answered, as they could have been, with a resounding demonstration by the Church of the standards of ethical conduct that are required of each and every Scientologist and of the developments of L. Ron Hubbard which led to the creation of an ecclesiastical ethics and justice system that is honest, ethical and fair.

So really, what in 1991 you called my “false accusations” were actually one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to false accusations, which is to say, the truth. And what you were then averring was the truth was actually one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the truth, which is to say, false accusations and false assertions.
The reason that the truth I leveled was never answered, which is actually just another false assertion, was because it was the truth. Scientology’s answer, which is not really an answer, was to simply make more false claims of honesty and ethical conduct, and to level more false accusations at me, as you did in this dec.

You are also aware by now, I’m sure, that Scientology’s ecclesiastical ethics and justice system is not honest, ethical and fair, but one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to honesty, ethics and fairness. The system is based on Hubbard’s “Suppressive Person” doctrine, which is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to honesty, ethics and fairness. It is an immoral, hateful, anti-human rights, anti-human doctrine based on lies, and it is used to justify and incite immoral, hateful, anti-human rights and anti-human actions.

Consider what it has been like all these years for the target of your false accusations and of Scientology’s willful hypocrisy and anti-human actions. Isn’t it time now to at least correct your part in the targeting? The world has waited a long time for Scientology’s resounding demonstration of standards of ethical conduct that are required of each and every Scientologist, which is not the resounding demonstration it has been for half a century, of conduct one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to ethical.

This declaration is an attempt to demonstrate to this Court just a fraction of the evidence that the Church would have supplied to the Court below, had it been allowed to do so, to prevent the reliance by that Court and now this Court on the distorted picture of Scientology created by Armstrong.

No, your declaration was one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to preventing a distorted picture of Scientology. Your declaration in fact was attempting to create a distorted picture of Scientology being one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the factual and accurate picture my evidence made.

There is not one item among the scriptural entries you include, cite to or quote from in your declaration that Scientology was not allowed to put into evidence in the trial court. Each item would have supported the conclusion that you have now articulated 25 years later: that Scientology’s reality is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental tenets. Or, as Judge Breckenridge described this phenomenon or condition:

The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder LRH. The evidence portrays a man who has been virtually a pathological liar when it comes to his history, background, and achievements.

5. Armstrong spent a considerable time at trial asserting that an alleged practice of “fair game” made him fearful, and that this fear was a justification for his theft of documents. Armstrong’s use and description of the term “fair game,” and his allegations of fear concerning it, are entirely belied by Church scripture, doctrine and essential philosophy. “fair game” was a term used in the Church for a short while in the 1960’s. By the time Armstrong first entered the Church, the term was no longer used, and the policy referring to it had been expressly cancelled.

You know very well that this is untrue. Scientology was adhering to, using and enforcing the “Suppressive Person” doctrine when you signed your dec, and is still doing so. Although you imply that you disagree with the Scientology organization’s practices of evaluating who SPs are, and demanding disconnections, you obviously still embrace and employ the SP doctrine. You state in your ESMB post that you provide “education on the mechanics of suppression,” and you refer to “suppressive individuals.” The application of the doctrine to SPs is Fair Game; that is to say, the manner in which identified SPs are viewed, handled or treated. Your claim in your dec that Suppressive Persons, after that short while in the 1960’s, essentially, were not viewed, handled or treated in any way or manner by any Scientology director, officer, employee or agent, is false and ridiculous.

I have studied the SP doctrine, both inside and out, and along with my wife Caroline built a website devoted to its exposure and opposition.
This bit I wrote recently about the doctrine and fair game, as part of a larger piece, provides my position and reasoning, and could be helpful at this or some point in your relationships with Scientology, Hubbard and Miscavige.
The following section may correct some Fair Game misconceptions, and provide some talking points should we ever talk:

The philosophy Hubbard adopted to govern and justify the treatment or handling of SPs is technically and commonly called “Fair Game,” meaning that the “enemy” in that condition or status is legitimately open to attack or pursuit. Scientology’s position is that the Suppressive Person doctrine, being from Hubbard and being religious scripture, makes attack and pursuit of SPs wholly legitimate, and protected, indeed mandated, religious expression. Fair Game is the basic philosophy of war, the condition in which attacking or pursuing the designated enemy is legitimated, and failure to attack or pursue may be illegitimate or even punished. Fair Game in Scientology has also come to mean the battle tactics the organization employs against SPs, and the actions its personnel and agents have taken in their treatment or handling of SPs over the decades since Hubbard first ordered his troops to adopt and apply the Fair Game philosophy.

In his scriptures during a period in the 1960’s, Hubbard even called the treatment or handling he intended for SPs “Fair Game;” although he later ordered that the use of the term “Fair Game” be discontinued because “it causes bad public relations.” In one of his directives, which has come to be known as the “Fair Game Policy,” Hubbard stated:

“ENEMY – SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.”

Scientology has for decades claimed that Fair Game, as a philosophy, policy and practice, was cancelled, but this assertion is patently false since all that Hubbard cancelled in scripture and in application was use of the term.

Although it has unquestionably caused Hubbard and his organization bad PR, and has repeatedly been exposed in the international media and condemned in court judgments, Fair Game continues to be the only treatment or handling Scientologists are permitted to administer on SPs. The tactics and actions that comprise Fair Game in the organization’s long war of total attrition vary according to target, opportunity, availability of resources, fear of exposure or legal repercussions, the sociopathy and whims of the organization’s head, and other factors. Scientology’s state of war against SPs, however, and the Fair Game philosophy and decision necessary to wage that war, have remained constant and unchanged into present time.

Scientologists’ or their agents’ Fair Game against me in execution of the Suppressive Person doctrine include: physically assaulting me on six occasions; breaking into my car; stealing my property, including photographs, documents, a manuscript and original artwork; spying on me and my spouse; scaring our neighbors; menacing our families; threatening to assassinate me; terrorizing my companions and me on highways in California and Germany; paying a corrupt Los Angeles Police Department officer for fake authorizations to eavesdrop on me, my attorney and my associates and to tap our telephones; Fair Gaming and compromising my attorney; covertly and unlawfully videotaping me; attempting numerous times to have me prosecuted on false criminal charges based on fabricated evidence, including with the Los Angeles District Attorney, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Prosecutor of Ekaterinburg, Russia; suing me six times; forcing me into bankruptcy; driving me from my home; obtaining unconscionable jail sentences against me and warrants for my arrest in California; forging hundreds of Internet postings over my name, including nonsense and racist messages; running endless intelligence operations against me and my family; and carrying out a global “Black Propaganda” campaign against me that extends to U.S. Federal Government departments, Members of Congress, U.S. diplomatic missions and staff, U.S. state and local government officials, foreign government officials, judges, law enforcement agencies and officers internationally, clergy internationally, media internationally, and the broad international wog and Scientologist populations.

Note the common dictionary meaning of Fair Game: “legitimately open to attack or pursuit.” The people that Scientology sics its personnel, agents, PIs and attorneys on to pursue and attack are all SPs, formally declared or not. Pursuit and attack, of course, is limited by the Scientologist Fair Gamers’ fear of being exposed, prosecuted, etc. and by other factors.

Hubbard’s scriptural statement quoted above, which, as you know, many people call the “Fair Game Policy,” shows the range of acceptable pursuits and attacks, or treatments and handlings, he stated were legitimate. All of the Fair Game actions against SPs that he listed and specifically authorized or permitted are immoral or antisocial, and three are patently criminal – depriving SPs of property, injuring them by any means, and destroying them.

Your falsehoods in your declaration, Mark, were in fact Fair Game, being attacks on me that you considered legitimate; or at least you acted as if you considered your attacks on me legitimate. You pursued me and had me pursued through the courts and beyond. You Fair Gamed many people because you handled many SPs, and you treated them as if your handling was legitimate. If you’re still using Hubbard’s SP doctrine in your life, you are still fair gaming people, because the SP doctrine allows no other handling or treatment. You must jettison the doctrine in order to be able to view, handle or treat SPs as anything other than Fair Game. Fortunately, the SP doctrine is eminently jettisonable.

Oh, now that I’ve mentioned it in the above list of Fair Game attacks on me, I’ll also ask you about the theft of my original manuscript, artwork and other materials from my car. I know from both Vicki Aznaran and Jesse Prince that Miscavige actually claimed to them that he had these things in his possession after they were stolen my car, which was during the Armstrong videotape operation in the fall of 1984, so I trust you won’t pretend the theft didn’t happen. Just help me get my things back from Miscavige, okay?

6. As used for this brief time within the Church, “fair game” had not even the slightest resemblance to the wild accusations made by Armstrong. It meant simply that an individual so labelled was not entitled to the protection of the Scientology system of justice. In this regard it is similar to the Old English concept of “outlaw” which was “one who is put out of the protection or aid of the law.” (Black’s Law Dictionary, Rev. Fourth Edition, pg. 1255).

As you know, this is a shore story, a false cover for the unsavory, indeed criminal, reality. Certainly Scientology wouldn’t give any protection to its Fair Game targets. That takes no time or personnel, and uses no resources. What takes time, personnel and other resources is Scientology’s and Scientologists’ pursuing and attacking their Fair Game targets. Not one penny in Scientology’s budget has ever been allocated for denying SPs Scientology’s ethics protection. Everything in the budget for handling SPs is for their pursuit and attack, that is, Fair Game. That is every penny ever paid to in any way make any SP’s environment dangerous to him or her.

You’re not the only Scientology representative or witness to justify the organization’s acknowledgement and use of Fair Game, for, of course, that short while in the 1960’s, by equating the policy’s targets or victims with “outlaws.” Outlaws, however, were not merely put out of the protection or aid of the law, which, again, took no time or resources. Far more importantly, as every North American certainly knows, outlaws were legitimately open to pursuit and attack from law enforcement, or deputized citizens, or even undeputized citizens. And attack and pursuit take time and resources.

Although, as you know, Scientology also uses wog law and wog law enforcement to have its targets pursued and attacked, the organization teaches and acts as if it is itself a law enforcement agency “putting in ethics on the planet.” Scientologists and their agents treat SPs as outlaws and treat themselves as the posse, thereby “legitimizing” the Scientologists’ pursuit and attack of their targets. In truth, as you’re finding out, Scientology’s stand in the outlaw-posse paradigm is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own claims and positioning. Scientologists and their agents are not what are considered by thinking people as the law-enforcing posse, but the outlaws — the crooks, the fraudsters, the extortionists, the Fair Gamers. The “protection” of the Scientology system of justice that the organization’s declaration of Fair Game disentitled a person to is a slick “religious” version of the “protection” given to victims of the mob’s protection rackets. The racket operators don’t merely put their Fair Game victims into the dangerous wog environment and out of Scientology’s protection or aid, but make their victims’ environments as dangerous for them as the cultists can get away with.

7. The Scientology ethics and justice system is a privilege and benefit for Scientologists. Scientologists can and do avail themselves of the Scientology ethics and justice system as it is inexpensive, swift, sane, accurate and based solely on getting to the truth. One is judged by a committee of his peers whose only task is to get to the truth of disputes between Scientologists. Scientology justice committees do not punish, they only get to the truth and attempt to rectify injustices. The system is based on trust, and because Scientology is predicated on truth and honesty, no Scientologist in good standing would even think of lying in such a proceeding or attempt to derail and misdirect a proceeding through false and inflammatory testimony such as one sees in civil cases in every courthouse.

The organization’s ethics and justice system is actually, as you appear to have now cognited, or perhaps have always known, one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to being a privilege and benefit for Scientologists. Scientology’s justice system cannot get to the truth, because what is sought by the organization’s leader, who dominates the system and orders and directs its “justice” procedures, is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the truth. The Scientology system is arbitrary and is so dominated by the system’s supreme ruler that all its privileges and benefits are his.

The Scientology justice system is based on mistrust, distrust, suspicion, fear and paranoia because, again as you’ve now discovered, the organization is actually predicated on what is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to truth and honesty. Scientologists in good standing not only think of lying in “justice” proceedings, they are compelled to lie. If anyone told the truth during a Scientology justice proceeding, about, for example, Scientology’s stand being one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental tenets, that Scientologist would be suppressed into silence, suppressed into the RPF, and, if he or she persisted in sticking to that truth, suppressed into becoming a declared SP. How about this Scientology justice proceeding?

That Michelle Miscavige wouldn’t even think of lying in Scientology justice proceedings is a ridiculous idea, one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to reality. She’d lie like a sidewalk. And how about the example of your declaration in the wog justice proceeding in which you filed it, Scientology v. Armstrong? Did you even think of lying in this proceeding, before you wrote 26 pages of sworn statements that were one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the truth?

8. One of the fundamental discoveries of L. Ron Hubbard is that man is basically good. As an individual becomes more aware and able through the application of Scientology religious technology, he becomes more honest, ethical, and interested in helping others. This is why Scientologists become the most valued members of society as they advance in Scientology. L. Ron Hubbard developed a system of ethics and justice which is based on this bedrock principle. The Scientology ethics and justice system is built on the premise that honesty and integrity are essential to happiness and survival.

That man is basically good is no discovery because it’s untrue, and meaningless. It is banal BS that Scientologists universally use to make themselves right, and to make wogs, who haven’t been privileged or programmed with this “fundamental discovery,” wrong. The man-is-basically-good twaddle or taradiddle is used to “prove” Scientology’s public claim of Scientologists becoming more honest, more ethical, and more interested in helping others as they “advance” in Scientology, and to justify behavior that is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to honesty, ethical action and humanitarianism.

If it’s of interest, and it should be, I believe that man is basically holy. And that no matter what is done to try to make him unholy, as Scientology does, overtly and covertly, physically, mentally and spiritually, he remains basically holy. It would have been heresy, indeed blasphemy in Scientology, certainly in the SO, to espouse the idea that man is basically holy.

Scientologists becoming the most valued members of society as they “advance” in Scientology is a complete crock. As Scientologists “advance” in Scientology they become one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to wog society’s most valued members, and indeed become more and more in conflict with our society. Who has advanced in Scientology further than David Miscavige? And is a bully or sociopath, except in a bully’s or sociopath’s mind, society’s most valued member?

You appear to now be claiming that you’ve stopped “advancing” in Scientology because you’ve realized that the organization or religion in which you’d been “advancing” for almost three decades stands, as its critics or opponents were saying during all those years, one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to Scientologists becoming valued members of wog society, or even members of wog society at all. Scientology and Scientologists in fact commit all sorts of antisocial or even criminal acts to prevent well-advanced Scientologists from becoming members of wog society.

It is true that Scientology agents pretend to be members of wog society in order to penetrate our institutions and subvert our society, but these organization moles and other ops are not actual wog society members. To wogs, they certainly are not wog society’s most valuable members, although to Scientology and Scientologists the organization’s covert agents who seek to subvert our society are very valuable. This is because what Scientology and Scientologists, certainly the most advanced ones such as Miscavige, actually find most valuable is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the fundamental tenets of honesty and integrity that most wogs find most valuable.

I’m sure every ethics and justice system in the world is built on the premise that honesty and integrity are essential to happiness and survival. There is no ethics and justice system that is claiming it is built on the premise that dishonesty and out-integrity are what are essential to happiness and survival. Whether or not these systems in reality stand, as Scientology stands, one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the fundamental tenets of honesty and integrity, is irrelevant to the acknowledgement and confront of Scientology’s clear hypocrisy, which your 1991 declaration evidences in spades.

9. Scientologists consider this ethics and justice system a major benefit derived from membership in the Church. To expel a person from Church membership and thereby withdraw the protection and availability of the Church’s ethics and justice system is the harshest penalty in the Scientology religion. Even then, however, because Scientologists believe that man is basically good, the door is always left open for that person to return to Church membership.

Expulsion is not the harshest penalty Scientology and Scientologists mete out by any stretch of any honest imagination. The source of this load, of course, is Hubbard in, e.g., HCO PL 29 April 1965 “Ethics Review.” Hubbard’s and Scientology’s penalties harsher than expulsion don’t appear in the PL because they’re, as I commented above, immoral, antisocial or criminal. These “penalties” involve pursuit or attack, and constitute Fair Game.

Note where Hubbard states in the PL: “Note that none of [the listed “levels of ethics actions”] carries any physical punishment or detention.” This is typical hubbardian weasel wording, since he put physical treatment and detention in other places in Scientology scripture; e.g., “may be injured by any means…may be…destroyed;” “confinement to org premises;” “use Auditing Process R2-45.”
I’m sure you’ve known of Scientology’s and Scientologists’ physical detention of many people, and undoubtedly participated yourself in such detentions. Miscavige, as I’m sure you know, has for many years been doing all sorts of dishonest, sociopathic things to have me detained or jailed.

It was known by virtually everyone who had “advanced” any distance in Scientology that the organization detained people, and that the actual stand on detentions was one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to Hubbard’s weasel worded claim that detention was not a part of any org ethics actions. This is similar to what he wrote in HCO PL 16 February 1969, “Battle Tactics,” which Miscavige had reissued 24 September 1987, when you were one of DM’s head henchmen: “Nothing in this paper advocates physical violence or invites the physical destruction of persons.” This denial is shown to be one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to reality, however, by Hubbard’s order in the same PL that Scientologists “just go all the way in and obliterate” the enemy. It is impossible to go all the way in and obliterate Scientology’s “enemy,” who are all, of course, SP class members, without physical violence or physical destruction.

None of the other actions Hubbard orders in “Battle Tactics” are included in the list of ethics action levels or “ethics gradients” in Scientology’s non-confidential scripture. All of these actions are harsher than expulsion from Scientology, all are immoral, antisocial or criminal, and all constitute Fair Game. For example: waging a war of total attrition on SPs; expending the maximum of SPs; making the war costly to the SPs; cutting off SPs’ communications; cutting off SPs’ funds; cutting off SPs’ connections; depriving SPs of political advantages; depriving SPs of connections; depriving SPs of power; taking over SPs’ territory; raiding SPs; harassing SPs; making SPs attack wrong targets or persons; bringing public opinion to a frenzy of hate against SPs; using standard wartime propaganda against SPs; degrading the image of SPs to beast level; capturing and using SPs’ comm lines; treating all skirmishes with SPs like war.

Even the issuance of SP Declares as expulsion orders was harsher than expulsion, because Declares standardly Black PRed the person being expelled. Black PR, of course, is a key weapon in Scientology’s and Scientologists’ Fair Game arsenal. “Talking to someone derogatorily about another,” is listed on the “Ethics Review” PL as ethics action level no. 5, so I suppose that’s used to justify Black PR as an ethics gradient less harsh than expulsion. But Fair Game is what happens after expulsion, or exit. It’s what Scientology staffers do to the enemy, and particularly to enemy traitors, as you viewed me. What Scientology staffers do to themselves are ethics gradients 1 through 36, with a few additions; e.g., RPF, sec checks, pc folder culling, signing crimes lists, gangbangs, detention of course.

Regarding their own organization, Scientologists never get past ethics action level no. 1: “Noticing something nonoptimum without mentioning it but only inspecting it silently.” A Sea Org member, staff member, or really any Scientologist who silently inspected nonoptimum things in Scientology would be targeted as fast as you can say Mutiny. Commenting to Miscavige, even ever so truthfully, about his nonoptimumnesses, which would be ethics action level no. 2, could get the commenter hammered like a nail.

10. The reference to a person being “fair game” is a direct reference to what individuals who cannot have access to the Scientology justice system are likely to receive at the hands of the justice systems extant in society. Compared to Scientology ethics and justice procedures, lay justice proceedings are, in fact, barbaric.

This is another incredible crock, and quite an admission about Scientology’s protection racket. The organization’s “justice system” doesn’t protect anyone from the wog justice systems. In fact Scientology and Scientologists have a well deserved reputation for litigiousness, which was obtained, not because of their use of their religion’s system, but for using the wog system, particularly for such unlawful purposes as harassing and ruining their targets, both wogs and “independent” Scientologists. It’s true that Scientology’s and Scientologists’ organized Fair Game philosophy, policy and practice certainly give them protections that wogs who don’t willfully Fair Game people don’t possess. Scientology and Scientologists, moreover, enjoy a huge advantage using the wog justice system because they are so willing to testify falsely against their SP targets. This hardly means, however, that the billions of wogs in the wog world under every wog justice system are all likely to be Fair Gamed by their systems.

Scientology and Scientologists will, as I mentioned above, work assiduously, and even unlawfully, to get the wog justice systems and their law enforcement arms to pursue and attack their cult’s SP targets. I’m sure you’re aware of Ken Hoden’s and other Scientologists’ sworn false testimony to get the wog justice system to Fair Game Keith Henson. I’m sure you’re aware too of your own sworn averments in your 1991 declaration, which are one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the truth, and which you wrote to get the courts to Fair Game me. Through false testimony, litigation jiggery-pokery, and an array of other dishonest, antisocial actions in the wog legal arena, including the Fair Gaming of wog judges, Scientology and Scientologists seek to make our justice system as barbaric as possible for their SP targets.

It is true that wog society and justice systems do declare some people Fair Game; that is, declare them legitimately open to pursuit and attack. The US Government and military have declared al Qaeda members Fair Game, although the term might not appear on any pursuit and attack orders. Policies on the treatment or handling of al Qaeda targets are the same, of course, whether or not it’s called by what it is, Fair Game. See, e.g., “Fair Game: Al Qaeda’s new soldiers” at:
Citizens who, for example, are wanted by wog law enforcement on criminal charges, or who have escaped from prison, are Fair Game, meaning that they are legitimately open to pursuit and attack. The attack orders rarely would include destruction or obliteration, and it would probably be unlawful unless it occurs as self defense.

The media currently uses the term, in most cases anyway, in connection with an issue; e.g., Is McCain’s War Record Fair Game?
Or, “Now that he’s a hooplaed hoopster Obama’s footwork is fair game.” Usually too the media uses the term, when commenting about non-criminal citizens – politicians, celebs, media people themselves – to mean investigation and criticism of or on an issue. Wog media does not mean by Fair Game, as Scientology means, willful lies and Black PR. Scientology and Scientologists do not make issues Fair Game, but “terminals” or human beings. Scientologists are actually forbidden to even discuss relevant issues, but are commanded only to attack the people who seek to make issues the issue.

What Scientology does in its pursuit and attack of its targets, in fact, is actually not even Fair Game, but something much worse, because Scientologists religiously “wrong-target” their targets. From the viewpoint of the Scientologists, who all live under the Suppressive Person doctrine, it’s clearly Fair Game, because, to justify it, Scientology claims that its targets are legitimately open to pursuit and attack. From wogs’ viewpoint, however, Scientology pursues and attacks its targets illegitimately, which is immoral and criminal. Al Qaeda’s viewpoint is that its people’s pursuit and attack of its targets is legitimate, and its targets are Fair Game. But again, in the cops&criminals paradigm, Scientology’s and al Qaeda’s stands are one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to their own claims and positioning. They are the criminals.

I have been in the wog world constantly since leaving the Sea Org and Scientology over 27 years ago. I cannot have access to the Scientology justice system, and have never had access nor sought access during all these years. Yet, with some extraordinary exceptions, the justice systems extant in society have never pursued or attacked me. I have never received Fair Game from their hands. The exceptions are when Scientology and Scientologists, you included, sought to use the wog justice system to Fair Game me. What you all did, moreover, to get our justice system to pursue and attack me, was itself unlawful, and done for an unlawful purpose. Aside from Scientology’s and Scientologists’ unlawful use of wog law, however, the justice systems of any country I have lived in or visited have never Fair Gamed me. The organization’s failure to get these countries’ justice systems to pursue or attack me, in fact, supports the conclusion that the courts where Scientology was successful were in violation of the law and basic human rights charters.

11. Contrary to the allegations made by Armstrong throughout the trial of this case and repeated unquestioningly by Judge Breckenridge, the basic values of honesty and integrity are the bedrock upon which Scientologists build their lives and upon which any individual must so build if he is to live happily and in harmony with his fellows.

The last bit of this paragraph is a nice thought with which nobody half sane or half honest would disagree. But again, nobody is insisting that the basic values of dishonesty and corruption are the bedrock upon which individuals must so build if they are to live happily and in harmony with their fellows. Throughout your declaration, you were using, as you did in this paragraph, “implied straw man tech,” apparently in an effort to make Scientology’s and your claim to the basic values of honesty and integrity seem unique and exceptional. What is truly exceptional is the continuing willful falseness of that continuing claim.

In their SP victims’ observation, Scientology and Scientologists, standing one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to honesty and integrity, clearly act as if dishonesty and corruption are their bedrock. Building as they do upon this bedrock of dishonesty and corruption, of course, Scientologists don’t publicly claim they build their lives on these evils, but claim and proclaim, as you did, that they build their lives on the virtues of honesty and integrity. What you are now acknowledging with your admission that Scientology stands one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own fundamental tenets is exactly what I alleged in my 1984 trial and demonstrated with ample evidence, and what Judge Breckenridge unquestionably found as the trier of fact.

Far from living in harmony with their fellows, Scientologists are not even permitted to live in such harmony, but must live at war against SPs, treating mere skirmishes with SPs like wars. If a Scientologist so much as granted credence to an SP, which credence granting is fairly essential for living in harmony with anyone, Scientology and other Scientologists could make that Scientologist an SP target and victim in their war.

12. The scriptures of Scientology are replete with admonitions to its adherents to build their lives on the foundations of honesty and integrity. As Mr. Hubbard stated in a technical bulletin titled ” Auditor’s 1/ Rights Modified,” written in 1972: “The road to truth is begun with honesty.” 2/ This is a road that all Scientologists, by definition, consider that they are following.

Again, no sane and honest person is proclaiming that the road to truth is begun with dishonesty. Scientology’s road, however, that Scientologists actually follow is, as you’re now essentially saying, heading one hundred eighty degrees away from the truth, and, astonishingly, really is begun with dishonesty. Some extremely occluded or deluded Scientologists might consider they’re following a “road to truth,” but you, and all the SO members I ever encountered, knew you were not being honest and not on that road. Far more urgent and important than the road to truth to Scientology and its knowing troops was the road to DM’s duck shoot, the road to obliteration of the SP class.

Because of the SP doctrine, to which Scientologists necessarily grant credence to follow the obliteration road, all the lying, Black PR and false testimony was justified. Scientology teaches, as you know, that the only thing preventing Scientologists from following the road to truth and building their lives on a bedrock of honesty and integrity is SPs. The SPs have to be obliterated, and then Scientologists, so they say, can stop all the lying, and all the other forms of Fair Game.

Scientology’s and Scientologists’ lying, Black PR and false testimony, moreover, were “evidence” to them of their integrity and ethics. They lied so much about so many things to so many people that they could state about themselves in sworn testimony, and with an apparently straight face, things like: “Scientologists, as a group, comprise the most ethical people, following the highest ethical standards, of any group in the world today.” Accepting that Scientology scripture is indeed replete with admonitions to its adherents to build their lives on the foundations of honesty and integrity, what also must be true is that Scientology scripture is replete with hypocrisy.

13. Mr. Hubbard’s injunction to be truthful covers all aspects of an individual’s and organization’s activities. For example, he laid down a firm rule for Church of Scientology staff in official dealings: “Never use lies.” (”The Missing Ingredient”, [August 13, 1970]). In a policy directive entitled, “Safe Ground” (October 27, 1974), Mr. Hubbard reiterated this point: “1. NEVER SAY OR PUBLISH ANYTHING YOU CANNOT PROVE OR DOCUMENT; 2. ALWAYS DOCUMENT THE TRUTH TO OPPOSE LIES.”

Naturally, no organization you can point to, and no founder of any religion, laid down a rule like “Always use lies,” or “Lie your heads off.” No semi-sane person in the publishing industry, or in any other place in life, is proclaiming and ordering: “Always say or publish things you cannot prove or document. Never document the truth. Just keep lying.” It is true that intelligence personnel must tell lies and live lives built on a bedrock of deception. It is also true that Scientology operates as an intelligence organization, and, of course, its personnel are in a war with SPs that is mostly covert. But I don’t believe you were contrasting Scientology with an implied straw CIA here.

It must have been a bit weird, or at least ironic, at the time you were writing this, that the judgment in the case in which you would file your dec, had declared Hubbard “virtually a pathological liar when it comes to his history, background, and achievements.” You could not but have known that he lied about these things, and that he used his lies to sell Scientology, make a pile of money, and dominate, in fact enslave, thousands of his fellow beings. He published countless willfully false statements he could not prove or document, including false claims for results for his “science.” Documenting the truth in Scientology, for Scientologists in positions like yours, where the truth should have been documented, was strictly forbidden, and would have been severely punished as “treason” if ever discovered. People like me, outside of Scientology, who documented the truth to oppose Scientology’s or Scientologists’ lies were, as you know, not rewarded for their documentation efforts and compliance with Hubbard’s claimed command intention, but Fair Gamed pursuant to his actual command intention.

14. The value of truth and honesty in one’s dealing with others goes much deeper than mere pragmatism. Honest and ethical behavior enhance the well-being of an individual and a group; dishonesty and unethical acts degrade a person and an organization. In a book originally published in 1951, Mr. Hubbard explained why maintaining high ethical standards is so important, not just to Scientologists, but to everyone:

Thus, dishonest conduct is nonsurvival …. The keeping of one’s word, when it has been sacredly pledged, is an act of survival, since one is then trusted, but only so long as one keep’s one’s word.
To the weak, to the cowardly, to the reprehensibly irrational, dishonesty and underhanded dealings, the harming of others and the blighting of their hopes seem to be the only way of conducting life. Unethical conduct is actually the conduct of destruction and fear; lies are told because one is afraid of the consequences should one tell the truth; thus, the liar is inevitably a coward, the coward is inevitably a liar.
L. Ron Hubbard, Science of Survival, at 142-143 (1989 Ed.).

First, handling your implied straw people, nobody is claiming, at least seriously and publicly, that dishonest and unethical behavior enhance the well-being of individuals and groups, or that honesty and ethical acts degrade people and organizations. Nobody is claiming, or explaining, why maintaining low ethical standards is so important or so pro-survival to everyone. And really, many people, almost all of them wogs, have explained why maintaining high ethical standards is so important. Hubbard’s published fundamental tenets or standards of honesty and high ethical conduct are not new or revolutionary. But his and his Scientology religious troops’ willful, unyielding, utter disregard for those tenets or standards is a new, and alarming, phenomenon.

Hubbard is not the first person to link lying, fear, cowardice, harm and destruction. He might be the first judicially declared pathological liar to link all those contra-survival traits and actions, but people have known and written about this linkage for thousands of years. Lying is so pervasive in Scientology, I’m sure you’re aware, that it is almost universally known as the religion’s central sacrament. Cowardice is such a ubiquitous and vital quality among Scientologists that it is known as Scientology’s valuable final product.

Hubbard, by his own definitions and understanding, was, on his cowardice-courage scale, a gargantuan coward. This conclusion is also supported by his years in hiding from people who simply wanted from him the truth. He could not, his life proves, confront telling the truth – about all or any of the things he had lied about. Scientologists are programmed into cowardice to ensure that they never stand up to or even question their leaders, who are virtually pathological cowards.

Because Scientology’s leaders are liars and cowards, and its members must be liars and cowards or risk being Fair Game, it is reasonable and responsible to acknowledge that they will dramatize all the evils Hubbard says in scripture liars and cowards will dramatize. Scientologists must be expected to understand their scripture at least this well. Until they leave Scientology, Scientologists will support harming others and blighting their hopes, and will engage in the conduct of destruction. On God’s Scale, thank Him, gargantuan liars and cowards are equal to everyone else; so why opt for cowardice or gargantuan lies when they make no difference? The fact that lies are needed to keep Scientology working doesn’t mean that the truth is unavailable.

15. The subject of honesty and ethical behavior permeated Mr. Hubbard’s writings throughout the years. In a 1960 issue entitled “Honest People Have Rights, Too,” Mr. Hubbard stated:

Individual rights were not originated to protect criminals but to bring freedom to honest men. Into this area of protection then dived those who needed “freedom” and “individual liberty” to cover their own questionable activities.
Freedom is for honest people. No man who is not himself honest can be free–he is his own trap. When his own deeds cannot be disclosed then he is a prisoner; he must withhold himself from his fellows and is a slave to his own conscience. Freedom must be deserved before any freedom is possible.

* * *
Freedom for Man does not mean freedom to injure Man. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom to harm by lies. To preserve that freedom one must not permit men to hide their evil intentions under the protection of that freedom. To be free a man must be honest with himself and with his fellows. If a man uses his own honesty to protest the unmasking of dishonesty, then that man is an enemy of his own freedom.

Mr. Hubbard ended this bulletin with the reminder that:

“On the day when we can fully trust each other, there will be peace on Earth. Don’t stand in the road of that freedom. Be free, yourself.”

It is phenomenal, I’ll freely admit, that the subject of honesty and ethical behavior permeated Mr. Hubbard’s writings throughout the years, because the man was such an inveterate liar and so flagrantly unethical. The road he followed personally was one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the honesty and ethical behavior he wrote about and claimed to possess. He was the one who dove into the area of “individual rights” to cover his own questionable activities: lies, fraud and Fair Game for the thinking people who would try to correct or end the lies and fraud. He got his Scientology troops to dive in to cover their activities of lying, fraud and Fair Game, which he’d also had them dive into. You did just that in your 1991 declaration, pouring out your own river of ink on rights, honesty and ethics and diving into it to try to cover Hubbard’s, Miscavige’s, Scientology’s and your own questionable activities.

Hubbard’s writings on truth, honesty and ethics definitely permeated all the bait he had me swallow to be hooked and reeled into Scientology and brought under his control. He worked like hell to prevent us from penetrating this cover of claims, about himself and about his organization, which he and all his troops asserted is the most ethical on the planet. Anyone who questioned the questionable activities his claims of honesty and ethical behavior covered was targeted for “ethics handling,” which ran the range from reality adjustment to Fair Game. I am hoping with this letter that you are now willing to see through the Hubbard, Miscavige, Scientology and Scientologist covers and to tell the victims of those questionable activities what you know. Actually, I believe that you do see through, and had seen through years before you signed your 1991 dec, but you embraced and participated in these activities. The declaration is in fact irrefutable evidence of your participation.

Hubbard had his own stook of implied straw men, some of whom were insisting, he seemed to say, that freedom is for dishonest people. Elronically, because of his and Scientology’s one-hundred-eighty-degrees-diametrically-opposed rule for happy living, this sociopathic law was actually true for them. Because of the same rule, they covered their sociopathy by permeating Scientology scripture with the subject of honesty and ethical behavior. Hubbard actually believed, and acted as if, his freedom lay in his willful dishonesty. Miscavige acts as if his freedom depends on his dishonesty and consciencelessness. And Scientology’s spokespeople, you included, have always acted as if their religion’s freedom depended on keeping their dishonesty working. In fact, the freedom to lie, and even to defraud people with lies, is what Scientology and Scientologists universally seek, and universally seek to cover with claims of honesty and integrity.

In his “Admissions,” Hubbard produced his postulates to prevent or eliminate the self-deleterious effects of lying, which he says in published Scientology scripture would always happen to liars.

No matter what lies you may tell others they have no physical effect on you of any kind
You can tell all the romantic tales you wish. You will remember them,
you do remember them. But you know which ones were lies. You are so
logical you will tell nothing which cannot be believed.
Or if you wish, as you will, tell adventures which happened to others. People accept them better. You can recall in detail tales of adventure from all you ever heard or read.
You can believe or disbelieve whatever you read at will. You cannot be hypnotized by any but yourself.
Lies are not necessary. You have no need of lies for you are brave and can take any consequences.
You are courageous. You fear nothing.

Hubbard must have considered lies completely necessary, however, or he would never have lied his whole life, especially after his Admissions. Someone who didn’t value and need lies would never have lied so much he would be declared judicially virtually a pathological liar, which Hubbard was. He was a coward his whole life, who lied like a coward to make himself sound courageous. He did tell other people’s adventures as his own. Other people really were engineers and nuclear physicists, really were students of Sigmund Freud, really were crippled and blinded in a war, really were pronounced dead, and perhaps even really were Mankind’s best friend.

It’s uncertain if he actually remembered, as he postulated he would, all the lies he told. He doubtlessly didn’t postulate that people all over the world would discover or uncover his lies, which people did. He wasn’t, as history has shown, so logical that everything he said would be believed. In fact, his illogic in his scripture and other writings would greatly contribute to his becoming known as a pythonic prevaricator and almost universally disbelieved.

Hubbard didn’t postulate that his own undisclosed and questionable deeds would make him a prisoner, as he postulated would happen to everyone else. It’s true that he successfully avoided prison, and even avoided having to confront the myriad people he’d told endless lies to over his lifetime. So from a criminal’s perspective, he stayed out of the trap into which inveterate liars often fall. But his successful avoidance of prison trapped him in a series of hiding places withholding himself from his fellows, and in yet more lies he’d tell and have his Scientologist followers tell to keep his hideouts and withholds working.

In your post to ESMB, you write that having studied deeply the causes of Scientology’s conflicts, you can see how Hubbard fell into the trap of an “us vs. them” attitude. I don’t believe he fell into such a trap, but consciously built the trap himself to get everyone else to fall into. But don’t you now think he was also in the trap he wrote about in his HCOB “Honest People Have Rights, Too?” And don’t you also now think that if you cannot disclose your deeds, or misdeeds, and questionable activities you are a prisoner, in your own trap?

And if he was at all right in “Honest People,” that to protect dishonest people is to condemn them to their own hells, since he was consummately dishonest, weren’t you, by protecting him, doing exactly that, condemning him to his own hell? Weren’t you, by protecting Scientology, which stood one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own fundamental tenets of honesty and integrity, also condemning the religion to its own hell? And wasn’t I, by not protecting him, Scientology or Scientologists, but indicating their dishonesty and lies, actually rescuing them, according Scientology’s own scripture, from their own hells? Isn’t it now time for you to do your part in rescuing all of them, and yourself, from these hells?

Hubbard’s solution to the conscience problem he identified in “Honest People” was neither to disclose his misdeeds and be honest, nor to be his conscience’s slave. His intention and action was to erase or suppress his conscience and keep right on lying and committing his misdeeds. Caroline has a section on her Refund and Reparation site called “Hubbard on the Conscience” that you might find instructive:

By writing that freedom must be deserved before any freedom is possible, Hubbard implied that he, being honest, deserved it whereas the dishonest do not. He certainly was not acknowledging that he didn’t deserve freedom. Yet he was a pathological liar. By writing that freedom does not mean freedom to injure, he implied that he wouldn’t injure anyone. Yet with his lies, his SP doctrine and its Fair Game and Disconnection implementations, his greed, and his malignant narcissism he hurt many people, and had his organization and his followers hurt many more. By writing that freedom of speech does not mean freedom to harm by lies, he clearly implied that he was telling the truth. Yet he Black PRed and had Scientologists Black PR thousands of individuals, and whole groups, whole professions, whole fields of study, whole countries, whole races, indeed the whole wog race for the express purpose of harming them. Your declaration Black PRs me.

Wasn’t I though, by Scientology scripture, acting to preserve freedom of speech by not permitting Hubbard to hide his evil intentions, or permitting Miscavige to hide his, or you to hide yours, behind any freedom – thought, speech or religion? Hubbard never got honest with himself and with his fellows, Miscavige has never gotten honest with himself and with his fellows, and both of them prevented their Scientologist followers from being honest with themselves and with their fellows. Instead, Hubbard required, and DM still requires, that their followers be one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to being honest with themselves and their fellows. Hubbard punished, and DM punishes Scientologists who actually dare to be honest with themselves and their fellows. And Hubbard had, and DM has, their followers, like yourself, punish or Fair Game wogs who dared to be honest with themselves and their fellows about Scientology and its lying, aggression, criminality and sociopathy.

In your declaration, you not only implied that Hubbard was honest, as he implied throughout Scientology scripture, you also implied that you were honest. You now appear to be implying that you were actually being one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to honest, and you imply that you’re now being honest. You used your implied honesty to protest, indeed punish, my unmasking of Hubbard’s and Scientology’s dishonesty. Even worse, you used your not implied but sworn averment that you were being honest, by declaring under penalty of perjury that your 1991 declaration was true and correct, to try to stop and punish my unmasking of dishonesty. And in doing so, you did in fact become an enemy of your own freedom, sentencing yourself to another fifteen or so more years in a cult that was one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the fundamental tenet of real and honest freedom.

As you know, Hubbard’s pronouncement that “On the day when we can fully trust each other, there will be peace on Earth,” is known verbatim by virtually every Scientologist. It’s in Scientology scripture, of course, and also gets used in promo, on posters, letterhead, web pages, and you name it. Scientology feeder groups use Hubbard’s trust aphorism to introduce their raw meat to Ron the Supermanitarian. I just found Youth for Human Rights International had gotten it into Europe’s November 2008 Parliament Magazine:

Hubbard’s clear implication is that although there isn’t peace on earth, at least he could be fully trusted. His whole HCOB leading to his aphorism implied that he was an honest person, that his head wasn’t lying uneasily from wearing any guilty conscience, and that consequently freedom was for him. He implied that, being so honest, so ready to investigate people and their pasts, and so willing to not protect the dishonest or the criminals, he would never stand in the road of freedom. He exhorted Scientologists to be free themselves so they would be honest in their reports or confessions to him, not have withholds from him, and face up to the responsibilities he imposed on them in the Scientology society. He never meant, although he implied it, that he was going to tell the truth, or that Scientologists should tell the truth, if that truth was different from what he said in his lies.

Fascinatingly, while hiding out in Creston, California and within three years of his death, Hubbard wrote HCOPL 31 January 1983 “The Reason for Orgs,” in which, rather than implying, as he’d done throughout three decades of Scientology scripture up to then, that he was telling the truth, he categorically denied ever lying, and even denied ever conning Scientologists. You cannot but have known about this policy letter, but I can understand why you would not have quoted Hubbard’s categorical denial, or why Miscavige would have ordered you not to quote it. By the time you signed your 1991 declaration, several of Hubbard’s willful lies had been exposed in unrebutted sworn testimony and he had been adjudged a pathological liar. You knew, I’m sure, that his 1983 assertion in Scientology scripture that he had never lied to or conned Scientologists was an out-and-out lie that would be laughed at, as it will be now.

I’ll quote the entirety of this scriptural text as it appeared in Organization Executive Course, Basic Staff Volume 0, © 1986 Bridge Publications, at pages 66 and 67 so that this letter’s readers have sufficient context to understand Hubbard’s denial of his lying.

Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

(Corrects typo in paragraph 12)


The first and all subsequent organizations of the Church were founded for this purpose only.
It was manifestly impossible for one being to individually train and audit 2.5 billion people. Time alone would have prevented it.
Thus help was needed.
Every post in every org exists to keep the org there and accomplish this.
You see, we are not dealing with “just another self-help subject” or a “make people feel better.”
This universe has been going downhill for just one reason — lack of tech to resolve the problems of the mind and beings.
Recent research has confirmed this: There is nothing whatever the matter with the universe itself. But suppressive persons and groups have specialized in caving people in. And they had no tech whatever to undo their vicious actions.
So what emerged was a universal population stuffed with lies and artificial disabilities who have been brought almost to the point of obliteration.
For the first time ever — and this is confirmed with careful historical research — the tech exists to reverse this chaos.
An org and every staff member is there to get it applied.
Where we are this instant in time is at the reverse point of the universe. You are the one who will make it happen.
And you will do it by selling and delivering materials and service to the public you get in and keeping the orgs there so they can and will do it.
You have the tech now; you have the policy. It is you who are applying it.
And by applying it, you have it in your power to reverse the dwindling spiral that has gone on without pause for more years than you can get into an Earth calculator.
For the first time ever you have this chance. And it is you who, just by knowing and using relentlessly the policy and tech, will make it happen.
I have never lied to you or conned you and what I tell you now is true. I would be falsifying if I told you other than the facts in this policy letter. So there it is! It may seem large and awesome but it is a fact. You are not engaged in anything superficial.
And that is the reason posts and orgs exist: to change the course of all things past and send the whole of existence back upward from its long plunge.
Oh, of course the unholy will beg you not to do it, will try to pervert policy and corrupt tech, will cause trouble and mock and lie and try to discourage or stop you. But that’s the reason things went bad — and those were the creatures that did it. And no objective worth obtaining was ever achieved without some barriers arising or industrious dedication.
So: Make it happen!
The stars wait!

In the same HCOPL in Organization Executive Course, Basic Staff Hat Vol. 0, Bridge Publications ©1991, at page 91, “FREED CUSTOMERS!” has been changed to “FREED BEINGS!” It’s understandable that Miscavige in Religious Technology Center would change Hubbard’s “only reason orgs exist” in scripture, because the only reason orgs exist is so utterly commercial and irreligious. Hubbard’s “object” is, as you’ve implied, false, being one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to freeing customers. Hubbard didn’t want, and Miscavige doesn’t want, freed customers or beings, but customers under their control, enslaved elementals who would comply with their every order, beings trapped in their webs of lies. If a Scientology customer or being actually sought to be free of Hubbard’s or Miscavige’s orders, control and slavery, that person would be targeted, and could be Fair Gamed, as I’ve been Fair Gamed for breaking free and thinking and speaking freely. Surely you didn’t leave the Sea Org because it was making you such a free being you couldn’t stand it. Would you be more free than you now are if you’d stayed in the Sea Org and under Miscavige’s “authority”?

Hubbard’s assertion that Scientologists are not engaged in anything superficial, which he wrote in the same paragraph in the same piece of Scientology scripture in which he wrote that he had never lied to or conned the Scientologists, is simply another lie. Scientologists doing Scientology are engaged in something extremely superficial. In addition to being a pathological liar, Hubbard was glib, irresponsible, manipulative and superficial, and so is his scripture, both written and spoken. Real analysis and critical thinking, as you know, were not permitted, much less encouraged, among org Scientologists. In mental, spiritual, philosophic, human or even business matters, any study or effort deeper than Hubbard’s or Miscavige’s superficiality was suppressed and punished as “off-sourceness,” “other practice,” or “squirreling.” Scientology calls itself an “applied philosophy,” yet with all those “millions” of Scientologists studying and applying that philosophy, it has produced no philosophers. Only by leaving Scientology did people become free enough to study anything deeper than its superficial, and articial, philosophy and “tech.” Scientology’s superficiality, because it is willful and enforced, is a significant contributing factor in the threat the cult is in lives and areas it touches.

I’m sure you realized, because you were involved with the Armstrong I lawsuit against me at the time, that Hubbard wrote “The Reason for Orgs,” which included the whopper that he had never lied to or conned people, while his own documents were exposing him in that litigation as a monumental liar and con man. On February 3, 1983, three days after he wrote that policy letter, Hubbard wrote a letter to the “The Presiding Judge
Los Angeles County Superior Court” requesting that his materials, which were then held by the Clerk of the Court, be released to the church.
Hubbard’s attorneys, then Lenske, Lenske (oops) and Heller, who sent him a special pen with “a unique formulation of ink” to handwrite the letter, had a duty to advise him of the court proceedings and what was being stated and filed in the case about his lying and conning. See also Scientology’s February 10, 1983 press release concerning Hubbard’s letter and the Armstrong I case.
It is abundantly clear to me that he lied in “Reason for Orgs” about not lying or conning people just because he did lie to and con countless people, and because he feared that all the people he’d lied to and conned would find out what he’d been doing.

Hubbard’s claim that, by selling and delivering materials and service to the public they get in, Scientologists can “reverse the dwindling spiral that has gone on without pause for more years than you can get into an Earth calculator” is another colossal crock. What Scientologists actually accomplished by selling and delivering materials and service to their customers was to rip them off, and to make a pile of money for Hubbard, and for Scientology’s attorneys and PIs who would Fair Game the ripped-off customers if they sought to get back the money for the useless or damaging services they’d been sold. Scientologists under Miscavige have done the same. You can’t get even one year into an earth calculator any more than you can get an aeon into an abacus, or time in a bottle. Hubbard obviously misspoke, and meant that the number of years his dwindling spiral had gone on was a larger number than any calculator on earth could calculate. Which is also pure bullshit.

Hubbard used the meme “dwindling spiral” repeatedly throughout Scientology scripture, probably hundreds of times, from 1950 until, as this HCOPL shows, his final years. The term is in the Tech and Admin Dictionaries, bulletins, policy letters, other scriptural issue types, and dozens of lectures. The dwindling spiral, you possible haven’t realized, is the essence of the hyposcope×240/2040081.jpg
what Hubbard called in very early scripture a “Hindu hypnoscope:”

And look very closely at Ron the Doctor

Ron the Doctor

Everybody in Scientology sees dwindling spirals on command, and in fact sees all life on a dwindling spiral. You always had to see one when Hubbard or DM said there was one. It was so dominant a “reality” you couldn’t argue with it. You couldn’t say, “Nope, Hubbard’s wrong, there is no dwindling spiral that selling and delivering Scientology materials and services to customers will reverse. In fact there’s no dwindling spiral to reverse because there’s no dwindling spiral.” You had to see and obey Hubbard’s dwindling spiral, his mocked-up and projected Hindu hypnoscope.

You used the term yourself in describing Hubbard’s “overt-motivator sequence” in your 1991 dec at paragraph 26 below:

“The individual, having descended away from personal honesty and integrity, down the dwindling spiral of the overt-motivator sequence, to the depths of criminality described by Mr. Hubbard in [HCOB 15 September 1981 “The Criminal Mind”] arrives at a point, where they are totally consumed by their criminality.”

You were trying to get the Court of Appeal tribunal, which, earlier in 1991, had ruled against Scientology in its appeal from the 1984 Breckenridge Decision, to see, and accept, Hubbard’s, and your, hypnoscopic image for the “reality” that would lead to the view, and acceptance, of me as the image of the individual totally consumed by their (sic) criminality.

You also used the term in your post to ESMB:

A lot of folks seem to be suffering from the inculcated idea that once they depart or cease to slavishly follow every arbitrary dictate they automatically forfeit any spiritual gains they may have attained along the road. Natively conscientious as most beings are, such an evaluation can begin a pernicious dwindling spiral of self-invalidation and unhappiness.

The folks who seem to be suffering from the idea that once they depart or cease to slavishly follow Scientology’s every arbitrary dictate they will lose their “spiritual gains” are not the people who have left the cult, but Scientologists under Miscavige still in the cult. If you’ve left Miscavige’s organization and control, you don’t have much authority to enlighten or even contact those folks. If you mean people who have actually departed Miscavige’s and Scientology’s control and truly ceased to follow the little dictator’s dictates, you’re mocking up straw folks. Such folks, if they’re real, don’t suffer from the idea, which they know to be utter BS, that by leaving they’ve forfeited any spiritual gains. Except to the straw departers or straw ceasers, or to Miscavige’s in-good-standing Scientologists, you’ve mocked up a straw dwindling spiral.

Should it be relevant, or of interest, my present thought is that spiritual gains don’t exist. Nor do spiritual losses. Spirit does exist, but can’t be increased or decreased, despite its increase or decrease being what’s true for all the Scientologists in the world. What Scientology sells as “spiritual gains” are ego gains, or “gains” in one illusion or another. Beyond that, what Scientologists call “spiritual gains,” or “spiritual abilities” regained, are mental exercises. The actual mental exercises Scientologists are permitted to practice are very limited, and the time in which they can actually practice their few mental exercises is also very limited – like “in session.” The one mental exercise that is the exception is projection that Scientologists under Miscavige must practice virtually constantly, even when practicing, for example, OT mental tricks.
Scientology doesn’t call its organization-wide enforced mental exercise “projection,” but “knowing.” It isn’t knowing, of course, because in truth it’s lying, and a lie can’t be known, except as a lie. Knowing is possible, but isn’t possible in Scientology where constant projection prevents it.

16. An entire book was compiled from Mr. Hubbard’s writings dedicated to the subject of ethics, entitled Introduction to Scientology Ethics. The book is replete with basic truths on this subject which cannot be fully discussed in this limited space. The following statements are representative of the concepts which it contains:

The man who lies, the woman who cheats on her husband, the teenager who takes drugs, the politician who is involved in dishonest dealings, all are cutting their own throats.

* * *
It may come as a surprise to you, but a clean heart and clean hands are the only way to achieve happiness and survival. The criminal will never make it unless he reforms; the liar will never be happy or satisfied with himself until he begins dealing in truth.
L. Ron Hubbard, Introduction to Scientology Ethics, at 29 (1989 Ed.).

That an entire Scientology book was created on the subject of ethics evidences the depth of Hubbard’s and the religion’s hypocrisy and duplicity, or duplicitous hypocrisy, since their “ethics” have always been one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to their own most fundamental ethical tenets. There is no evidence that throughout his life Hubbard ever began dealing with the truth, unless dealing with it means something like being at the cause point of lying about it. Yet he was extraordinarily self-satisfied, and more than implied that he’d taped the way to total happiness. There is no evidence that he ever wanted to reform, but there’s a lifetime of evidence of his lying and bullying, including his “Ethics” book, his “ethics” policies, the “ethics orders he issued” and the perhaps millions he got other people to issue, and the application of all these “ethics” issues, orders, policies, books, etc. since the word “ethics” first appeared in Hubbard’s vocabulary. And Miscavige’s “ethics” are similarly unethical.

Scientologists deal with the obvious disconnect between Hubbard’s, Miscavige’s, and their own pervasive lying and bullying and their claim of being the most ethical people, following the highest ethical standards of any group in the world today, by relating “ethics” solely to their own group, and “taking responsibility” for their actions. Being “at cause,” their lying and bullying is postulated, or willful, and not, they would claim, reactive. Their lying and bullying are different from, or differentiatable from, the lying and bullying of liars and bullies who are not at cause, but “at effect.” What Hubbard, Miscavige and Scientology do, the Scientologists reason, is therefore not really lying and bullying at all but the demonstration of their being the most ethical people, following the highest ethical standards of any group in the world today. It’s the kind of Scientology “reason” that concludes that by being willing to hurt others as a point of honor the cause is just.

The “reason” that transforms Hubbard’s, Miscavige’s and Scientology’s lying and bullying into the highest ethical standards, which requires and justifies more lying and bullying, is indistinguishable from the “reason” unscientological sociopaths use to keep their lying and bullying working. Just like garden variety wog sociopaths, the Scientologists still know deep down that their lying and bullying and their leaders’ and organization’s lying and bullying are indeed lying and bullying because much of it is done in secret and withheld from public view, and, of course, lied about.

Hubbard, as you know, stated in scripture that “ethics are reason.” He could not but be implying that he was not only highly ethical but possessed a towering power of reason. He also stated in scripture that “theta could be said to be pure reason.” And elsewhere in scripture he said that “theta is thought, life force, élan vital, the spirit, the soul, or any other of the numerous definitions it has had for some thousands of years.” Being the most ethical people, following the highest ethical standards of any group in the world today, “proves” that Scientologists’ reason is superior to any other group’s reason, and of course “proves” that Scientologists are also the most theta people or spiritual people, following the highest spiritual standards of any group in the world today. The “reason” and “spirituality” of thousands of good people, as Scientology proves, can equate with a lot of lying, bullying, evil intentions, and other unethical and even criminal actions.

If you really have discovered that Scientology stands one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental claimed ethical tenets, it must be a bit embarrassing that when you wrote your dec in 1991, and for more years, you were the Inspector General for Ethics. If you really did your job, really spent time ensuring the standard application of the ethics technology of the Scientology religion, and really did ensure that the ethical standards of Scientology were observed to the letter, it proves that the ethics tech and ethical standards were not what were publicly claimed, but something different, perhaps one hundred eighty degrees diametrically different from the claimed tech and standards. That is, you knew that what you were swearing to about Hubbard’s and Scientology’s ethics and standards was false when you signed your declaration.

17. What Scientologists hope to achieve through living ethical, honest lives and showing respect for their fellow man is quite simple: happiness. Albeit simple and indeed a basic desire amongst all men, few know the requisites to true happiness as well as a Scientologist.

As for ideals, as for honesty, as for one’s love of one’s fellow man, one cannot find good survival for one or for many where these things are absent.
* * *
A man who is known to be honest is awarded survival– good jobs, good friends. And the man who has ideals– no matter how thoroughly he may be persuaded to desert them, survives well only so long as he is true to those ideals.
(Introduction to Scientology Ethics, at 23)

Much of the rest of these paragraphs will say much the same thing, forming up a herculean effort on your part, and, I suppose, on the parts of quite a bunch of Scientologists and Scientology lawyers and paralegals, to project a picture of Hubbard and Scientology, to the Court of Appeal and your other readers, as honest and ethical, and happy as a result, and a corresponding image of me as dishonest and unethical, and discredited. Possibly you’d now agree that the effort, along with all similar Scientology efforts over decades, have been a total failure. Hubbard, Miscavige and Scientology are being known by more and more people, perhaps yourself included, as dishonest and unethical, and their scriptural pronouncements on honesty and ethics are being known by more and more people as consummate hypocrisy. I still haven’t been shuddered into silence, and Miscavige, Scientologists and Scientologists still must face the music for their years of dishonest, unethical and in fact criminal efforts to silence or otherwise Fair Game me.

18. In a bulletin from 1961 entitled, “Clean Hands Make a Happy Life”, Mr. Hubbard underscored the basic problem behind the lack of human happiness:

For the first time in the soggy stream that’s history to the human race, its possible that happiness exists ….
What has made all Man a pauper in his happiness?
Transgressions against the mores of his race, his group, his family! …
And as we wander on, transgressing more, agreeing to new mores and then transgressing those, we come into that sunless place, the prison of our tears and sighs and might-have-beens, unhappiness.
* * *
All Mankind lives and each man strives by codes of conduct mutually agreed . …
But now against that codes there is transgression. And so because the code was held, whatever code it was, and Man sought comfort in Man’s company, he held back his deed and so entered then the bourne in which no being laughs or has a freedom in his heart.
So down the curtains come across the brightness of the day and dull-faced clouds enmist all pleasant circumstances. For one has evilly transgressed and may not speak of it for fear all happiness will die.

Ah, pathological liar as poet. Does it now provide pause?

19. With direct regard to the subject of spiritual progress in the Scientology religion, also referred to as “case gain,” Mr. Hubbard wrote a bulletin in 1985 called “Honesty and Case Gain.” In that Bulletin, he stated:

Thus, one can bar his own way up the Bridge by dishonesty.
I always feel a bit sad when I see somebody doing himself in this way. It is so pointless.

I think it’s reasonable, in order to provide inarguably adequate context for this statement, to quote the entirety of HCOB 1 May 1985, “Honesty and Case Gain.” Within a year of his death, and less than a year after being declared a pathological liar, he was still writing about honesty as if he possessed the lion’s share, and was still implying like mad that he’d reaped the supremely honest life’s bounty: “case gain;” a happier, more comfortable existence; sanity; real freedom; OT; way up the Bridge; and certainly not imprisoned or pinned like poor miserable Homo sapiens, us wogs.


Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

Ethics Courses
Hubbard Senior
Sec Checker Course
C/S Series 120
HCOB 13 Oct. 82 C/S Series 116
Booklet: The Way To Happiness
Booklet: Axioms and Logics

Case gain depends entirely upon the person’s ability to view the truth of something in order to bring about an as-isness. (Ref: The Axioms of Scientology, Booklet: Axioms and Logics)
This ability is gained or regained on a gradient scale. The Grade Chart is designed to assist one to view gradiently larger areas of truth at each level. As one progresses up the Chart his ability to view the truth of things improves and expands. The accumulated masses and burdens and problems and falsities of a lifetime or lifetimes are dissolved and vanished, leaving the being free and clean and in control of his life and environment.
But to receive help as a pc or pre-OT, one has to be honest with his auditor.
Dishonest people have withholds, and withholds stack up mass and bring about stupidity. They cut the person’s reach and his ability to perceive. They hold in place the masses that imprison and pin the being at the level of Homo sapiens – and a miserable Homo sapiens, at that! Who is such a person really fooling?
Thus, one can bar his own way up the Bridge by dishonesty.

I always feel a bit sad when I see somebody doing himself in this way. It is so pointless.
One sees this in those who, for whatever irrational reason, cling knowingly to withholds and wind up critical, nattery and generating hostility. If one finds himself feeling hounded or persecuted, he should ask himself what his condition is on the first dynamic instead of going around persuading others to do him in.
How precious, after all, are one’s dishonesties, withholds and falsities in the face of the real freedom there is to be gained?
One CAN be honest. He will find it a happier, more comfortable existence when he is.
And more important-he’ll find the route to stable case gain is now open to him.
That is the route to sanity. It is the route up the Bridge to OT and real freedom. With honesty, one can make it and make it all the way!
Why settle for anything less?

As I mentioned above, I don’t buy the “spiritual progress” Scientology is selling any more than I buy Hubbard’s lies about his honesty, ethics and case gain.

Another of his writings on this subject matter is a book entitled, The Way to Happiness. This book has been the source of a grass roots movement to improve life in the world by providing non-denominational, common sense, moral principles for this modern time. The book is divided into different precepts, with titles such as “Be Worthy of Trust,” “Fulfill Your Obligations,” “Do Not Steal,” “Respect the Religious Beliefs of Others,” “Don’t Do Anything Illegal,” and “Seek to Live With the Truth.” A few brief excerpts will show its teachings:

Be Worthy of Trust.
Unless one can have confidence in the reliability of those about one, he, himself, is at risk. When those he counts upon let him down, his own life can become disordered and even his own survival can be put at risk.
Mutual trust is the firmest building block in human relationships. Without it, the whole structure comes down.
* * *
When one gives an assurance or promise or makes a sworn intention, one must make it come true. If one says he is going to do something, he should do it.
If he says he is not going to do something, he should not do it. …
People who keep their word are trusted and admired. People who do not are regarded like garbage. Those who break their word often never get another chance.
A person who does not keep his word can soon find himself entangled and trapped in all manner of “guarantees” and “restrictions” and can even find himself shut off from normal relations with others.
There is no more thorough self-exile from one’s fellows than to fail to keep one’s promises once made.
(The Way To Happiness, at 191-192; 198-200.)

The honesty of an individual is something that affects those with whom a person lives and works. As Mr. Hubbard said in a writing titled “Ethics and Executives,” 3 May 1972R,

“Dishonesty, false reports, an out-ethics [i.e., unethical] personal life, should all be looked for and, by persuasion, should be corrected.”

Again and again Mr. Hubbard has stressed that dishonesty in one’s dealing with others is harmful not only to the other individual, but to one’s self:

The ruin of another’s life can wreck one’s own. Society reacts — the prisons and the insane asylums are stuffed with people who harmed their fellows. But there are other penalties: whether one is caught or not, committing harmful acts against others, particularly when hidden, can cause one to suffer severe changes in his attitudes toward others and himself, all of them unhappy ones. The happiness and joy of life depart.
(The Way To Happiness, at 322 – 324.)

I won’t analyze The Way To Happiness in any depth here because I’m preparing its analysis for a separate publication. It’s enough to know that, in the book’s areas of actual morality, the behavior of Hubbard, its author, the behavior of Miscavige, the person who now controls the book, and the behavior of the Scientologists he uses to promote and distribute the book, are one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the moral precepts and moral behavior the book spells out. TWTH, which Scientology painstakingly defines as a “non-religious moral code,” and you say in your dec provides “non-denominational [ ] moral principles,” serves the same purposes as Hubbard’s “religious” pronouncements on honesty and ethical behavior that, as you said, permeated his scripture throughout the years.

TWTH urges honesty and ethical behavior on the wogs or raw meat who would read the booklet, and implies that its author and the Scientologists distributing it possess these qualities or virtues. But Hubbard was a pathological liar, Miscavige is a monstrous liar in his mold, and Scientology and Scientologists under his control will never themselves be honest and never stop their unequivocally unethical behavior as long as they are Scientologists under his control. These realities make The Way To Happiness, whether non-religious or religious, a most subversive publication. The way to happiness for sociopaths is a world in which everyone else is honest and ethical and think the sociopaths are too.

20. This standard is not limited to simply those with whom a person works with directly but in fact all those with whom one may come in contact in the community and within society:

A country has laws and regulations to coordinate its activities.
One does NOT seek to get around these or avoid these or find loopholes in them. This is COMPLICATED AND DISHONEST.
It is MUCH simpler just to know and obey them.
“Regulations and Laws, Obedience To,” 27 October 1973.

Seriously, you were a beneficiary in the Scientology v. Armstrong “contract,”
a beneficiary in the judicial enforcement effort, which had started by the time you signed your 1991 Declaration,
and a beneficiary in Scientology’s injunction, judgment, contempt orders and other judicial rulings against me.
You were moreover a knowing beneficiary in all these matters.

Miscavige has undoubtedly had many Scientologists under him kept in the dark about the evil they support and receive an unlawful “benefit” from. Because it’s a willful, and frankly scary crime, the effort to hide it, even from many of its beneficiaries is understandable. Even DM wouldn’t announce this crime as a big win at a Scientology rally, despite the fact that virtually everyone in attendance at these rallies for the past twenty-two plus years has been a beneficiary.

As Inspector General for Ethics, who, on paper, was responsible for ensuring that the ethical standards of Scientology were observed to the letter, you were responsible for the ethics of virtually every Scientology beneficiary as a beneficiary, including the organization’s litigation and intelligence units. It almost certainly didn’t work exactly like that because litigation and intel, for many of their functions and operations, would have been directly under DM, and his personnel’s “ethics” would have been his to handle, or not handle. Nevertheless, you would have had to police the organization internationally to make sure that the beneficiaries, like you, were in agreement or conspiracy with the crime and wanted to continue as beneficiaries.

As such beneficiaries, you and virtually every other Scientologist under Miscavige were specifically disobeying 18 U.S.C. §241 “Conspiracy Against Rights,” which states:

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same;…
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

I am, of course, aware that the Scientology beneficiaries’ claimed defense for their manifold and continuing violations of 18 U.S.C. §241 is that they had gotten around that U.S. Federal statute, or avoided it, or found a loophole in it, and a California State Court Judge had gone along with them. Scientology’s and Scientologists’ avoidance of 18 U.S.C. §241, with the collaboration of that corrupt judge and other members of the judiciary or officers of the court, however, has been, just as Hubbard warned, dishonest, and has greatly complicated the beneficiaries’ legal situations. The Scientology beneficiaries’ “successful” disobedience of 18 U.S.C. §241, and thus far “successful” avoidance of that statute’s penalties, actually comprise more crimes, specifically violations of 18 U.S.C. §242, “Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law,” which says in pertinent part:

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

I do not believe that anyone on Scientology’s side who was involved in the Scientology v. Armstrong war, or even knew about it, actually believed that silencing a person about his religious experiences in Scientology, or any religion, was, by U.S. law, lawful. Miscavige may have had some conscienceless attorney “advise” him that what you all were doing was legal, but Miscavige and any beneficiaries who obtained such advice did so because they knew what they were doing was not legal. Scientology, of course, was and is a religion that has insisted incessantly that it is a religion, and organized solely for religious purposes. Even I have been forced by crushing reality to acknowledge that Scientology, no matter how irreligious it is, is religion.

Another way of saying this is that Scientology, no matter if it’s actually one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to what non-sociopathic wogs sincerely understand is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to irreligiousness, is a religion. The U.S. Government has decided this issue, and there is no sense at this time in doing anything but accept the U.S. Government’s decision and deal with Scientology as a religion, even if such dealing precipitates the U.S.’s changing of that decision. Obviously the U.S. Government’s willingness is necessary to get 18 U.S.C. §§241 and 242 enforced against the Scientology beneficiaries in order to get the beneficiaries to cease their willful disobedience of those statutes.

I don’t believe that any Scientology beneficiary really believes that what Scientology and Scientologists have done to try to silence me about my Scientology experiences has been in obedience to the U.S.’s or any other country’s laws and regulations. The same beneficiaries all know that Scientology’s stand is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its claimed “obey-the-laws-of-the-land” tenet. The actual obedience tenet is “obey Scientology,” “or obey the leader.” The actual litigation tenet, regarding those pesky laws of the land such as 18 U.S.C. §§241 and 242, which might stop or slow Scientology’s progress or thwart DM’s command intention, is get around the laws, avoid them, find loopholes in them, or even use them, and very easily, to harass.

It is no more lawful to try to silence me about Hubbard, Scientology and Scientologists than it is to try to silence someone about Christ, Christianity and Christians. The horrendous judicial and extra-judicial campaign to silence me about Scientology is just as evil as a campaign to silence someone about Christianity or any religion. And just as impossible. It is also, I believe, impossible that any of the beneficiaries did not know that what they were beneficiaries in was evil, and impossible. I believe that all the involved beneficiaries conspired to do what has been done to silence me just because it is an evil they could very easily do, even if in disobedience to the laws of the land.

I believe that virtually every beneficiary knows that penalizing me $50,000 per expression of my religious experiences, knowledge or belief is unlawful, and just as evil as penalizing a person $50,000 per expression of his Christian, or Jewish, or Buddhist, of Muslim experiences, knowledge or belief. All the beneficiaries, moreover, do all this obscene penalizing, which they know to be both evil and illegal, while generating their own millions of expressions of their experiences, knowledge or belief about me, my family, friends, and members of my class, the “Suppressive Persons.”

21. In a writing issued in 1980 entitled, “Ethics, Justice, and the Dynamics,”4/, L. Ron Hubbard wrote:

Years ago I discovered and proved that man is basically good. This means that the basic personality and the basic intentions of the individual, toward himself and others are good.

When a person finds himself committing too many harmful acts against the dynamics, he becomes his own executioner. This gives us the proof that man is basically good. When he finds himself committing too many evils, then, causatively, unconsciously or unwittingly, man puts ethics in on himself by destroying himself; and he does himself in without assistance from anybody else.

This is why the criminal leaves clues on the scene, why people develop strange incapacitating illnesses and why they cause themselves accidents and even decide to have an accident. When they violate their own ethics, they begin to decay. They do this all on their own, without anybody else doing anything.

Enchantingly, Hubbard also hauled out his trusty old Hindu hypnoscope right at the beginning of this scriptural policy letter from which you’ve quoted:


Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex


All Hats


Every being has an infinite ability to survive. How well he accomplishes this is dependent on how well he uses ethics on his dynamics.

Ethics tech exists for the individual.

It exists to give the individual a way to increase his survival and thus free himself from the dwindling spiral of the current culture.

Check out (or any other source if you want):

Main Entry:dwin•dle
Inflected Form(s):dwin•dled; dwin•dling \-(d)li?, -d?l-i?\
Etymology:probably frequentative of dwine to waste away, from Middle English, from Old English dwinan; akin to Old Norse dvina to pine away, deyja to die – more at die
intransitive verb
: to become steadily less : shrink
transitive verb
: to make steadily less
synonyms see decrease

This will probably help too:

It’s very easy to draw a spiral, because, of course, it’s a common, simple two-dimensional figure. But can you draw a spiral that doesn’t dwindle? All spirals dwindle, and all spirals expand. To call a spiral a “dwindling spiral” is a befuddling redundancy. But Hubbard, both wordsmith and sociopath, I believe knew what he was doing. His grammar errors, apparent carelessness, contradictions, and even his shallowness and banalities were, like his outright lies, to control us. Accepting for the purpose of the discussion of ethics that current society possesses a spiral, what if the current culture’s spiral is one hundred eighty degrees opposed to dwindling and is an expanding spiral? And what if it takes no time, and costs nothing, for that to be true for you?

In the contexts you’ve used Hubbard’s hypnoscopic image and for the items you’ve got spiraling, a social being would actually want your spirals to dwindle until they disappeared, taking their items or content or perniciousnesses with them. An ethical person would cause the dwindling spirals to dwindle even more rapidly than they were dwindling before he made himself responsible for their dwindlingness. In your 1991 dec you form Hubbard’s overt-motivator sequence into a dwindling spiral, and in your ESMB post you have a dwindling spiral of self-invalidation and unhappiness, which, you also say, is pernicious. Surely if self-invalidation and unhappiness dwindled right out of existence everyone would be totally happy and feel fully validated. And if the overt-motivator sequence dwindled all over the place into nothingness, well that would be one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the overt-motivator sequence expanding everywhere, so dwindling the sequence, if expanding it is the only other option (and of course if the sequence is what’s true for you) has to be a good thing.

When Hubbard says that he discovered that man is basically good, he really means that he had a thought one day that man is basically good, not that he was the first person to think such a thought. If man is basically good, I think you’d have to agree, Hubbard couldn’t have been the first person who from the beginning of time had discovered it. If that claimed truth was so undiscoverable that it remained undiscovered until Hubbard discovered it, it’s quite likely not true. And indeed it is untrue, because truth shows that man, as I said above, is basically holy.

In any significant way, Hubbard only contrasted his “discovery” of what man basically is with one other idea of what man basically is: the “old religious beliefs that man is basically evil.” See, HCOB 21 January 1960 “Justification,” or even this squirreled version in the cult’s online Scientology Handbook Man-is-basically-evil is one of Hubbard’s straw facts, or straw theses, or straw discoveries, that a child could debunk. Scientology scripture doesn’t address, or even dare to address, the man-is-basically-holy fact, thesis or discovery, because it threatens the man-is-basically-good BS that keeps the cult’s unethical ethics system and the rest of the racket working. Spellbindingly, Hubbard also used his hypnoscope on us in his “Justification” bulletin: “Here we have the source of the dwindling spiral.” That’s a fine outpoint, because he was its source.

Hubbard’s “proof” that man-is-basically-good, which you quoted above, and which is repeated in different ways throughout Scientology tech, ethics and admin scripture, is that “when a person finds himself committing too many harmful acts…he becomes his own executioner.” Hubbard gets a bit more specific in HCOB 5 June 1984 “False Purpose Rundown,” dated, interestingly, right at the end of the Armstrong I trial:

That beings are basically good and are seeking to survive are two fundamental principles of Scientology.

A being’s basic goodness can be made brightly evident or be heavily obscured, the quality of his life and survival potential can be enhanced or reduced, all through a factor fundamental to the thetan himself: PURPOSES

Where a being has accumulated nonsurvival purposes and intentions, he will be found to be having, doing and being far below his potential. Having committed overt acts (prompted by false, nonsurvival intentions and purposes), he then restrains himself from action. Achievement, stability, certainty, respect for self, and even the thetan’s innate power can seem to deteriorate or disappear altogether.

And it can be found that many of these contrasurvival purposes have been fettering the being for a VERY long time. Recent upper-level research breakthroughs have led to the development of a new rundown designed to slash straight through to the root of such false purposes and unwanted intentions and BLOW them.

The name of this new rundown is the FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN.

Hubbard’s statement of this principle in a contemporaneous piece of scripture, HCOB 2 March 1984R “O/W Write-Ups” is also instructive:

It has been longstanding knowledge in Scientology that in the presence of overts and withholds no gains occur.

An overt act is an act of omission or commission which does the least good for the least number of dynamics or the most harm to the greatest number of dynamics. Overts are the biggest reason a person restrains and withholds himself from action.

Man is basically good. When people commit overts and then withhold them it is because they conceive that telling them would be another overt act. By withholding overt acts, these are kept afloat in the universe and are themselves, as withholds, entirely the cause of continued evil.

A person who has overts and withholds becomes less able to influence his dynamics and falls out of communication with those people and things he has committed overts against.

Writing up one’s overts and withholds offers a road out. By confronting the truth an individual can experience relief and a return of responsibility.

Clearly Hubbard never wrote up his O/Ws, not, at least, as he had us write up our O/Ws. He admitted some of his O/Ws in his Admissions, but that was in the context of willing himself to never be affected by his O/Ws. (The overt-motivator sequence is for Homo saps, not Homo sorcerers.) In his PL “The Reason for Orgs,” quoted above, and written just a year before he wrote “O/W Write-Ups,” Hubbard does submit what he would say is his O/W write-up: “I have never lied to you or conned you and what I tell you now is true. I would be falsifying if I told you other than the facts in this policy letter. So there it is!”

Since Hubbard had “proved” that, because man restrains himself if he does bad, i.e., commits overts, man is basically good, Hubbard also “proved,” by not restraining himself that he had committed no overts. By not restraining himself his whole life from lying his head off, Hubbard “proved” that he was honest and ethical. By not withholding himself from action his whole life, he “proved” he hadn’t committed overts. By being a “no overts” case (Ref HCOB 22 October 1970, “”No Overts” Cases”) he “proved” that there was no reason to restrain or withhold himself in any way.

Hubbard never admitted, nor could a Scientologist ever admit, that his havingness, doingness and beingness were even minutely below his potential, a clear “proof” that he was O/W free. He presented himself, and had his Scientology staff promote him, as the very paragon of achievement, stability, certainty, self-respect and innate power, which had never deteriorated an iota throughout his whole life, also “proving” how awesomely honest, ethical, responsible, uncriminal, great-case-gain-making, and basically good he was. Hubbard never became his own executioner, “proof” he hadn’t committed too many harmful acts. His “proof,” however, was a sociopath’s “proof,” which permitted him to commit continuous harmful acts and even use those harmful acts to demonstrate his honesty and ethics.

After Hubbard committed suicide, or I suppose could have been foully played with, Miscavige became the most unrestrained Scientologist, also “proving” thereby, as Hubbard had “proved,” that he too had no O/Ws. Everyone knows Miscavige isn’t his own executioner, which “proves” he hasn’t yet committed too many harmful acts. He is so unrestrained that he is reported, as you know, to have not restrained himself from physically assaulting a number of people, “proving” how abnormally, or uniquely, ethical he is.

Almost all wogs restrain themselves from physically assaulting others, “proving” that they have overts. Wogs restrain themselves specifically, in fact, from physically assaulting their juniors in their organizations, groups, churches, militaries, etc. I think a great number of Scientologists also restrain themselves from physically assaulting others, and even restrain themselves from physically assaulting their juniors in their own organization. These Scientologists, their behavior “proves,” are just like wogs: their overts make them restrain and withhold themselves from action, in this case the action of physically assaulting people.

There is, however, a number of Scientologists who are unrestrained about being as unrestrained as DM, and like him “prove” how ethical they are by physically assaulting people. Scientologists or Scientology agents, as you know, have physically assaulted me on several occasions. DM “proves” his honesty with his unrestrained lying, and there are obviously many Scientologists who “prove” their honesty by telling the same lies he tells. DM’s so unrestrained he’s boasted publicly of shooting down SPs like ducks in a pond, and so proud of his unrestrainedness he’d do it. That’s a level of unrestraint “proving” a level of ethics, that very few wogs ever reach. How many Scientologists will join him at that level, where their overtlessness doesn’t make them restrain or withhold themselves from the action of shooting us down, like ducks in a pond or not, is not yet known.

22. The teachings of Mr. Hubbard are unequivocal on this point. The commission of dishonesties, of harmful acts against another is the road to personal destruction, to the loss of awareness, the loss of abilities, to personal unhappiness and the destruction of positive interpersonal relationships. Only the litigants who, due to their own harmful acts, have already travelled down this route or those who, through misinformation or ignorance know no better, would advance or believe that the scriptures of the Church could support the commission of harmful acts against one’s fellow man.

Yet, albeit after many years, you have yourself now noticeably advanced the idea that Scientology’s scripture supports the commission of harmful acts against one’s fellow man with your acknowledgment of the reality that, essentially, Scientology – the cult, church or religion under Miscavige – stands one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental scriptural tenets. I have additionally advanced herein the idea that Hubbard’s and Scientology’s man-is-basically-good “discovery” and the discovery’s “proof,” their “overt-motivator sequence,” their “Suppressive Person” doctrine, their “ethics” system, and all their other systems – tech, admin, money – stand one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to what for man is actually honest, ethical, courteous, safe and wise, and works.

23. In fact, the precise opposite is true. Scientology scriptures detail how it is that harmful acts against one’s fellows bring about the loss of integrity and decrease one’s ability to handle life successfully. The mechanism at work here was presented by Mr. Hubbard in 1968:

There was an important discovery made in 1952 . . . which did not get included in “Book One,” Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health.

This was the “overt-motivator sequence. . .”

AN OVERT, in Dianetics and Scientology, is an aggressive or destructive ACT by the individual against one or another of the eight dynamics (self, family, group, mankind, animals or plants, mest, life or the infinite).

A MOTIVATOR is an aggressive or destructive act received by the person or one of the dynamics.

The viewpoint from which the act is viewed resolves whether the act is an overt or a motivator.

The reason it is called a “motivator” is because it tends to prompt that one pays it back — it “motivates” a new overt.

When one has done something bad to someone or something, one tends to believe it must have been “motivated.”

Bulletin of 20 May 1968, “Overt-Motivator Sequence.”
Thus, an individual who commits harmful acts against himself, another, the social order and so forth, grows invariably at odds with the person or institution whom he has attacked.

Hasn’t Scientology, under both Hubbard and Miscavige, mandated that Scientologists be invariably at odds with me, the person they have attacked? I’m quite certain you have relevant evidence concerning several of the attacks on me identified here: and I’m certain you have relevant evidence concerning other attacks on me that are not identified on that page.

24. Mr. Hubbard explained this phenomena further in a lecture given to Scientology ministerial students:

[M]an is basically good, despite his reactive bank.The reactive bank is only composed to make a man commit overts, which is against his better nature. If he commits these overts, therefore, he’ll trap himself because he won’t go on communicating, having committed them. So it’s the perfect trap. You do not want to talk to people you have wronged . … They commit an overt act, don’t you see, and then they will try to withhold and sever the communication line for fear that they will commit another overt act. That actually is the fundamental think of man.
Tape Lecture of July 2, 1964, “0/W Modernized and Reviewed.”

25. The path one trods when he commits harmful acts is the road to oblivion. It is the descent not only into despair and destroyed relationships; it is also the way to personal degradation and criminality. “A criminal is one who is motivated by evil intentions and who has committed so many harmful overt acts that he considers such activities ordinary.” (Bulletin of 15 September 1981, “The Criminal Mind,”) The desperate straits to which the criminal has descended have been clearly described by Mr. Hubbard:

It is a mind like any other mind but it has gone wrong. It is motivated by evil intentions which, even if idiotic, are greater than the possessor’s ability to reason. The criminal, even when he seems most clever, is really very, very stupid. The evil intentions get dramatized by senseless overt acts which are then withheld, and the final result is a person who is more dead than alive and who faces a future so agonizing that any person would shudder at it. The criminal, in fact, has forfeited his life and any meaning to it even when he remains “uncaught” and “unpunished,” for in the long run, he has caught himself and punishes himself for all eternity. No common judge can give a sentence as stiff as that. They know down deep that this is true and that is why they scream with such ferocity that men have no souls. They can’t confront the smallest part of what awaits them.

When you understand what the criminal mind consists of, you can also understand how ghastly must be the feelings or lack of them with which the criminal has to live within himself and for all his days forever. He is more to be pitied than punished ….



26. The individual, having descended away from personal honesty and integrity, down the dwindling spiral of the overt-motivator sequence, to the depths of criminality described by Mr. Hubbard in the attached bulletin arrives at a point, where they are totally consumed by their criminality. A person at this point sees all life as having the same sordid motives he does. Of such an individual, Mr. Hubbard wrote:

* * *
* * *


27. The entire thrust of the training, auditing, ethics and justice technologies of the Scientology religion is to improve the spiritual well-being of the individual and to make him more able so that he is able to assist others to attain greater spiritual awareness. Of all of the religions in the world, Scientology is unique in the degree it places emphasis upon the value of self-determined right conduct, honesty and personal integrity. The scriptures, however, do far more than simply warn of the consequences of evil ways. They also set forth techniques for the eradication of the harmful effects of past transgressions and the rehabilitation of an individual’s personal integrity and abilities. Confessional counseling sessions are standardly provided to Scientologists in order to help them unburden themselves of past transgressions. Through such counselling the individual Scientologist is made more able and is brought to levels of increased affinity and responsibility.

28. The ethics and justice system of Scientology, then, has honesty and integrity as its underpinnings. As a subject, ethics consists simply of the actions taken by an individual on himself to improve his survival. Through Scientology ethics a person is taught not a rote series of do’s and don’t’s, but tools which he can use to make ethical and moral choices and decisions.

29. In a policy letter of 12 July 1980 later revised on 5 November 1982, entitled “The Basics of Ethics,” Mr. Hubbard wrote of the unfortunate state a person finds himself in when he is unable to ethically deal with his daily life:

The individual who lacks any ethics technology is unable to put in ethics on himself and restrains himself from contrasurvival actions, so he caves himself in. And the individual is not going to come alive unless he gets hold of the basic tech of ethics and applies it to himself and others.

30. The basic ethics technology discovered by L. Ron Hubbard is found in the ethics conditions and their formulas.

These are described in the book, Introduction to Scientology Ethics.

The basic tools used to get and keep ethics in are the ethics conditions and their formulas.

An organization or its parts or an individual passes through various states of existence. These, if not handled properly, bring about shrinkage and misery and worry and death. If handled properly they bring about stability, expansion, influence and well-being.
* * *
The different conditions formulas make up a SCALE which shows the condition or state, which is to say the degree of success or survival of an individual…

(Introduction to Scientology Ethics, at 37-38.)

31. The ethics conditions are: Confusion, Treason, Enemy, Doubt, Liability, Non-Existence, Danger, Emergency, Normal Operation, Affluence, Power, Power Change. Each condition carries with it a series of steps to follow, called formulas, which result in improvement up the rising scale of conditions. The application of the specific formulas for each condition are a basic tool which Scientologists use to live happier, more successful lives. Each condition describes a level of survival in which an individual, business or other activity can be located at any given moment. Mr. Hubbard has laid out an exact formula, or set of steps, for each condition, which, if correctly followed, will result in the attainment of a higher condition. For example, both a new marriage and a new business start out in a condition of “non-existence” and to succeed, must follow the formula steps of getting in communication with one’s partner or potential customers, finding out what is needed from that person, and providing that. Whether one is doing well, poorly, or just getting by, there is a condition formula which applies. (For a full description of the various ethics conditions and their individual formulas, see Introduction to Scientology Ethics, pp. 56-104.) Through the use of the correct formula, one is able to improve how he or she is doing.

32. Condition formulas are used to handle all types of situations, favorable and unfavorable, alike. For example, if one made a bad error on one’s job, he could use an ethics condition, such as the Liability formula, as a guide to getting back on top of the situation — perhaps saving his job in the process. And if one were doing very well in some area in life, the Affluence formula would provide steps to help isolate the important points of one’s success and reinforce those.

33. Scientology also has an ecclesiastical justice system. Justice is applied in Scientology when an individual fails to apply the tools of ethics to correct his own unethical activities, and is causing problems for others.

34. The Scientology justice system has as its basic premise that justice is to be used only so long as it is necessary to restore the individual to self-determined ethical conduct. It does not have punishment as a goal; rather, the purpose is to rehabilitate the individual’s ability to use and apply the ethics technology. For this reason, the justice system is a gradient one, consisting of a whole series of actions which might be taken in an appropriate case to ensure that ethical conduct is restored.

35. These gradient steps are specified in a writing of Mr. Hubbard dated 29 April 1965, entitled “Ethics Review.” The various tools are laid out in a progression of lightest to most severe, ranging from actions such as “noticing something non-optimum and commenting on it to the person,” to the severest discipline in the Scientology religion: “expulsion from Scientology.” None of the gradients carries with it physical punishment of any kind.

36. L. Ron Hubbard has stressed that the lightest forms of these levels are to be used first, and only increased as necessary to help the person:

Scientology Ethics are so powerful in effect … that a little goes a very long ways.

Try to use the lightest form first.


37. The Scientology justice system also provides ecclesiastical fact-finding bodies and formal justice actions which help determine the appropriate way to deal with a Scientologist who has been causing difficulty for other Scientologists. The first of these is an “ethics hearing.” Such a hearing consists of a meeting of the accused with a “hearing officer.” This is a fact-finding body; the accused is presented with the written accusations, is given the opportunity to question the people who have made the accusations, if necessary, and is given the opportunity to explain fully his own side of the story. The hearing officer then makes a recommendation as to how the situation should be handled.

38. If it is established by verified evidence in an ethics hearing that the person has been involved in some violations of Scientology codes or procedures, a “Court of Ethics” may be convened. The purpose of the Court is to determine what discipline should be imposed for the wrong-doing. For example, if a staff member is continually late for or absent from his assigned duties, he might be called before such a court and might be assigned a short, special project to clean the slate for the problems he has caused. Such an action would bring home to him that he is expected to appear for work on time and should regulate his actions accordingly. (See, policy letter of 26 May 65, Issue III, “Courts of Ethics,”).

39. The most serious type of justice action is a Committee of Evidence. This is “a fact-finding body composed of impartial persons properly convened by a convening authority which hears evidence from persons it calls before it, arrives at a finding and makes a full report and recommendation to its convening authority for his or her action.” (Policy letter of 27 March 1965, “The Justice of Scientology — its Use and Purpose.) The individual or individuals who are the subject of the Committee of Evidence are present at all times when evidence is presented and are given the opportunity to examine all witnesses. Once the Committee has determined the facts of the matter, it makes its recommendation to the “convening authority” who then reviews all the evidence and recommendations and accepts, or modifies the Committee’s findings and recommendations. The protection which committees of evidence provide for Scientologists from possible arbitrary sanctions or sanctions arising out of momentary upset is substantial. Thus, for example, staff members may not be suspended, demoted, or improperly transferred to another job without a committee of evidence. (Id.)

40. Scientologists can and frequently do avail themselves of the Scientology justice system as it is free, swift, sane, accurate and based solely on getting to the truth.

41. The value of a committee of evidence was described by Mr. Hubbard in 1965 in a policy letter entitled “The Justice of Scientology — Its Use and Purpose; Being a Scientologist”:

Committees of Evidence work. I recall one Tech[nical] Director [Church executive in charge of administering the delivery of Church services according to the scriptures or “Tech”] accused of tampering with a student. I was told he was about to be disciplined and sacked. I stopped that action and had a Committee of Evidence convened. Accurate testimony revealed the story false and the Tech Director innocent. Without that committee he would have been ruined. I know of other instances where a committee found the facts completely contrary to rumor. Some are guilty, most are innocent. But thereby we have justice and our necks aren’t out. If a person is to keep the law, he or she must know what the law is. And must be protected from viciousness and caprice in the name of law. If a person doesn’t keep the law, knowing well what it is, he or she hurts all of us and should be handled. Our justice really rehabilitates in the long run. It only disciplines those who are hurting others and gives them a way to change so they can eventually win too — but not by hurting us.

42. As set forth above, the ultimate penalty under the justice codes of the Church of Scientology is expulsion from the Church. Mr. Hubbard wrote in a 1965 policy letter that to withdraw the protection and availability of the Scientology justice system is the harshest penalty in that system; and that is the effect of expulsion. Yet, even a person who has been declared to be a suppressive and has been expelled from the Church, however, is still afforded an opportunity to redeem himself and to return to good standing. To do so, the person must follow a simple, five step, procedure: (A) “cease all attacks and suppressions so he, she or they can get a case gain”; (B) make “a public announcement to the effect that they realize their actions were ignorant and unfounded”; (B-1) paying off all debts owed to any Scientology organizations; (B-2) complete an approved amends project; (C) training from the lowest level; (D) providing copies of the above steps to the ethics officer who is dealing with him; and (E) providing a similar copy to the International Justice Chief of the Church.

“Suppressive Acts, Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists”, 8 January 1981.

43. The writings of L. Ron Hubbard are very clear on the point that even an expelled person may turn around and re-enter the Church. In “Expansion Theory of Policy”, 4 December 1966 regarding expulsion from the Church, he wrote:

Further, one must leave at least a crack in the door and never close it with a crash on anyone because a demand factor may still develop there…. One must always leave a crack open. The suppressive can recant and apologize.

44. Finally, because of their adherence to a strict standard of ethics, Scientologists have a great respect for the law. As Mr. Hubbard wrote in The Way To Happiness:

“Adhere to the principal that all men are equal under law: a principal which, in its own time and place – the tyrannical days of aristocracy — was one of the greatest social advances in human history and should not be lost sight of.

“See the children and people become informed of what is ‘legal and ‘illegal’ and make it known, if by as little as a frown, that you do not approve of ‘illegal acts.’

“Those who commit them, even when they ‘get away with them,’ are yet weakened before the might of the state.”

(Id., pp. 100 – 101)

45. The selections presented above are but a small portion of the hundreds of pages which Mr. Hubbard has written on the subject of Ethics and Justice, all of which is in full use and application in Churches of Scientology around the globe. As the cited materials make clear, the undeviating emphasis throughout this vast literature is that one must maintain a very high standard of ethics, that one must treat one’s fellow man with dignity and respect and that one must obey the laws and act in harmony with the codes of the society. Moreover, the Scientology scriptures themselves are comprised of over 50 million words which L. Ron Hubbard wrote on the subject of the religion of Scientology. And throughout all of this material, whether dealing with techniques of counselling or with the ultimate abilities and nature of the spiritual being that is the individual, Mr. Hubbard has written from the premise that truth, integrity, honesty and fair dealing with one’s fellows, with groups and races and with each of the dynamics, is the road to survival. This is a standard which never waivers in the Church of Scientology. And this is the reason that Scientologists are the most ethical people you are likely to ever meet.

Hubbard wrote, as I’ve documented above, from a premise that was one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to what his claimed premise was, and what you’ve claimed his premise was. All the evidence shows him to be such a liar about so many things, including his own truthfulness, and his own ethics and integrity, that he is properly identified as a pathological liar. It’s true that Scientology’s standard has never wavered (you didn’t actually mean never waivers, right?), because its standard is its stand that is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to truth, integrity, honesty and fair dealing. That stand has never wavered because the wills and willfulness of the people that keep the stand working have never wavered. We who stand up to Scientology’s stand of willful dishonesty, hypocrisy and Fair Game will know when Scientology and Scientologists actually waver in that dishonest, integrityless, unfair and criminal stand and standard, and we wogs will all welcome that waver.

46. Seen in this context — a context which never could be presented to Judge Breckenridge in the underlying case — Armstrong’s assertions are patently absurd and unbelievable. Armstrong attempted to take one line from a 1965 issue and to assert that this cancelled issue, which he deliberately misinterpreted to suit his own purposes, carries more weight than the thousands upon thousands of pages by Mr. Hubbard which directly and unequivocably state the exact opposite of Armstrong’s interpretation. Armstrong knew that the “fair game” issue was cancelled by Mr. Hubbard in 1968, before Armstrong was first exposed to the religion of Scientology. When Mr. Hubbard learned that the line was open to misinterpretation by those not versed in Church scripture, he immediately cancelled it for that reason. The Church has always been ready to accept a reformed suppressive person back into the Church. Mr. Hubbard’s writings are clear on this. The expelled individual is simply denied recourse to the Church’s internal justice procedures for the resolution of his disputes with Scientologists in good standing. The door is always “left open a crack”, as anyone is capable of reform. It has always been and will remain the intention of the Church staff to bring increased well-being and spiritual awareness to all individuals on this planet. That is what the religion and the Church of Scientology are about.

Your assertion that your “context,” the pieces of scripture you cited, or anything you wrote in your 1991 declaration never could have been presented at my trial was pure sheepdip. You could have testified yourself, and Miscavige was all that was actually preventing you. Through my attorney, I would have been grateful to examine you on all the claims you make in your dec. I believe that by your testimony and by documents introduced through you, a picture would have emerged of Scientology’s claims to truth, integrity, honesty and fair dealing being one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the organization’s actual stand or actions when truth, integrity, honesty and fair dealing mattered. They mattered seriously at my trial, and still do now twenty-five years later.

Your testimony then would have generated, as your declaration does now, a picture of Scientologists being one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed, where it matters, to the most ethical people you are likely to ever meet. To oppose those who are one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the most ethical people you are likely to meet, it stands to reason., would be the most ethical thing to do. Your testimony then would have confirmed, and your dec years later, all your actions subsequently, Miscavige’s words and actions, and all Scientologists’ words and actions have confirmed that my assertions about Hubbard, Scientology and Scientologists were and remain one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to absurd and unbelievable.

Some might not understand my assertions, because, of course, I write so understandably it’s unbelievable. My assertions, moreover, include assertions concerning absurdities, since absurdities so saturate Scientology. My assertions themselves, however, are unabsurd, as this assertion shows. And, if they’re understood, which they can be accomplished through easy reading, my assertions are perfectly believable.

I never claimed that a policy letter, or any evidence, that showed directly Hubbard’s sociopathic character and intentions carried more weight than policy letters or other evidence that showed that his claimed essentially saintly character and intentions were one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to his in real life character and intentions. They all carry weight, all Scientology scripture carries weight, and all that weight adds up to the judgment that Hubbard was a sociopath and pathological liar, and that Scientology was his alter ego. Now, of course, Scientology is Miscavige’s alter ego. The same pieces of Scientology scripture, more publications since Hubbard’s death, and all sorts of other evidence, including even your leaving the SO and apparently getting away from DM’s control, all have weight that adds up to the reasoned judgment that Miscavige too is a sociopath and an incorrigible liar.

Hubbard never cancelled Fair Game. It cannot be cancelled until Scientology cancels the SP doctrine. The cult, in actuality, is more active than ever in its drive to indoctrinate people in the doctrine, as can be seen with all the ads in all the mags selling the PTS/SP Course, the SP Masks all over the place, and the doctrine’s inclusion even in the front groups’ basic programs.

Fair Game constitutes a crime. It is unlawful to attack and pursue people as Scientology attacks and pursues them, the Fair Game on me being a fair example. The SP doctrine is a key element in the conspiracy to commit that crime. Fair Game is the way sociopaths view their fellow human beings: legitimately open to attack and pursuit. Scientology is a specific form of organized sociopathy.

What you call “Fair Game” is a straw term. And whether Scientology calls Fair Game “Fair Game” or “something different from Fair Game” is irrelevant. Fair Game is Scientology’s philosophy, policy and practice for handling or treating individuals in the Suppressive Person Class. Fair Game includes everything done in handling or treating SPs, whether or not such actions are identified or “justified” in the “levels of ethics actions” listed in Hubbard’s “Ethics Review” PL. The philosophy of Fair Game states that attacking and pursuing SPs is legitimate. Fair Game policies and practices get that religious philosophy applied.

Since the SP class is “created” solely by Scientology’s religious scripture and Scientologists’ religious application of that scripture, the class is a religious class. As a religious class, it’s similar to the “non-believer class,” which is “created” by one religion of “believers” or another. The SP doctrine incites and directs Scientologists to persecute individuals in the SP class, which, being only two and a half percent of the planetary population, is a persecuted religious minority. Fair Game is every attack on SPs, every pursuit of any SP in any way, every word written or spoken about SPs in Scientology scripture or in Scientology orders or communications of any kind.

Scientologists cannot but insist that their organization or religion only attacks and pursues SPs, because to admit otherwise also acknowledges that, in some cases at least, the attacks and pursuits are illegitimate. Consequently, every wog that Scientology or Scientologists have ever attacked or pursued is actually in the SP class, whether Hubbard or Miscavige had them declared SP, either formally or informally. To honestly and gracefully end Fair Game, all attacks or pursuits of SPs in any way should be seen as illegitimate. It is not difficult to see all of Scientology’s attacks or pursuits of SPs as illegitimate, they are all illegitimate.

What greatness of Hubbard, Miscavige and Scientology to leave open a crack the door back into their organization or church, which stands one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental tenets of truth, integrity, honesty and fair dealing! Scientology doesn’t bring increased spiritual awareness to all individuals; in fact it doesn’t even permit increased spiritual awareness because increasing spiritual awareness would be an “other practice.” Scientologists’ clear intention, as authorized and enforced by their religion’s leader, stands one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to increasing spiritual awareness, and, in truth, the intention is to bring spiritual ignorance to everyone and to suppress and eradicate increased spiritual awareness. That is what the religion and the Church of Scientology are about; because the way to increased spiritual awareness for any Scientologist, if that Scientologist seeks increased spiritual awareness, can begin with getting free of Scientology.

47. Armstrong stands as an apostate who has found a single mistranslated line that never made it into an edition of the Bible. An apostate who, on the basis of this non-existent piece of scripture, is attempting to allege that all of Christianity is built upon a false premise and that all the teachings of Jesus and his disciples are mere coverings for the one line of alleged “scripture” which he feels “tells it all”. The Court would surely recognize the absurdity of this position and would never permit the apostate to claim that his theft of sacred religious documents was warranted by his “state of mind”. Yet this is an exact parallel to the situation which occurred at the Armstrong trial and which was countenanced by Judge Breckenridge and, so far, by this Court. Moreover, Armstrong well knows that it is a fundamental tenet of the Church that Church policy must be in writing to be valid (”in Scientology we say, ‘if it isn’t written, it isn’t true.’”[“The Hidden Data Line, 16 April 1965] The term “fair game” is not in the writings of the Church and is not Church policy. All valid and enforceable Church policy is published and available to parishioners. The “fair game” policy has not been published since its cancellation prior to Armstrong joining the Church and is not published in any current volumes of Scientology writings, and indeed was never published in any edition of any of the Scientology policy volumes. It is not something that is open to interpretation by Armstrong, Judge Breckenridge, or anyone else. It does not exist.

Your assertion that I stood as an apostate who has found a single mistranslated line that never made it into an edition of the Bible, and who, on the basis of this nonexistent piece of scripture, is attempting to allege that all of Christianity is built upon a false premise and that all the teachings of Jesus and his disciples are mere coverings for the one line of alleged scripture, contains, as I’m sure you now cannot but acknowledge, a load of BS. There was no mistranslated line in Scientology cult scripture. I’ve never claimed that what wasn’t policy was policy, written or not. From the moment I accepted (it seems eons ago) that Scientology is a religion, I’ve also never claimed that anything that wasn’t in scripture was in scripture, or vice versa. So you stuck me up in a straw position for the Court to surely recognize as absurd, which, of course, it was, along with an almost endless parade of straw absurdities.

The exact parallel to Christianity in the Scientology v. Armstrong paradigm is what Scientology, Hubbard, Miscavige, you, everyone under him, and all other beneficiaries have done to prevent me from discussing my religious experiences and religious knowledge in the Scientology religion, and punish me for any such discussions. The willfully sociopathic Scientology leaders, first under LRH and now DM, concoct and enforce the idea that it’s perfectly legal, pro-survival, desirable, and very easy to use the secular courts to prevent people from discussing their religion or erstwhile religion, or their religious experiences and knowledge, if they’re “apostates.” It’s actually illegal, contra-survival, undesirable for everyone, impossible, dangerous and sick. Note, by the way, that “apostates,” as Scientology and Scientologists like yourself call us, also comprise a minority religious class that Scientology and Scientologists persecute, even by calling us apostates.

Every beneficiary knows that any sane secular court in the west would surely recognize the absurdity of Christianity and Christians and all their agents, lawyers, etc. using that court to prevent apostates; that is, people who have left the Christian faith, or left some Christian church or other; from discussing Christ, Christianity and the Christian apostates’ religious experiences in or knowledge of the Christian religion. Yet this is an exact parallel to the situation that all the Scientology religious beneficiaries postulated and brought to pass against me. Christianity and Christians don’t use the secular courts to prevent apostates from discussing Christ, Christianity or the apostates’ religious experiences or knowledge, so there are no cases of courts either enforcing or refusing to enforce such a sociopathic concept.

I do indeed well know that it is a claimed fundamental tenet of Scientology that policy must be in writing to be valid. I also well know that Scientology’s actual fundamental tenet on this point is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the claimed fundamental tenet. Many of Scientology’s actual policies are one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the organization’s claimed and written policies, including the claimed policy that policy must be in writing to be valid. The policy, order, arbitrary or whim that renders the Scientology policy that policy must be in writing to be valid invalid is, of course, not in writing. Scientology is a dictatorship and Miscavige is its dictator. Scientology “policy” serves his personal policies, orders, arbitraries and whims, a reality that is not in “policy” and is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the claimed and written “policy.”

The fact is that Scientology, despite its claimed fundamental tenet to the contrary, operates on a “hidden data line,” and its Fair Game philosophy, policy and practice are included in what Miscavige has Scientology try to hide. The term “Fair Game” was ordered not to be used, and has been removed from many of the places it appeared in Scientology’s scripture, because the policy and practice of Fair Gaming people is, in the wog world’s laws, unlawful, and Hubbard, DM and virtually all the beneficiaries know it’s unlawful. Fair Game exists as Scientology philosophy, policy and practice, and your averment that it doesn’t exist is a lie, and, to Fair Game’s targets, more Fair Game.

48. Now the Court has the heretofore missing data about the nature and weight of Scientology scriptures. Now the indefensible nature of Armstrong’s “state of mind” defense is clear. And further, now it is clear that Armstrong’s asserted defense has forced the Court into the role of interpreter of the true meaning of Scientology scriptures, a role which is anathema to the First Amendment. Church scriptures are straight-forward on this matter: Church members and Church organizations are expected to (and do) maintain the highest standards of ethical behavior in their dealings with their fellow men and with the institutions of our society.

I trust you now see you’ve written a crock. Scientology scripture is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to the fundamental tenet of straight-forwardness on the matter of its members’ and organizations’ standards of ethical behavior.

49. Mr. Hubbard cared deeply for mankind and dedicated his life and his work to doing what he could to make life better — and happier — for all mankind. It is this care and dedication which is carried on by Scientologists the world over, and their own happiness and that of those around them reflect just that. Mr. Hubbard expressed the purpose underlying his work in an article entitled, The Aims of Scientology:

A civilization without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights, and where man is free to rise to greater heights, are the aims of Scientology.

Everybody knows those are Scientology’s claimed aims. But Hubbard’s and Miscavige’s Command Intention is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to these aims, and it is Command Intention that Scientologists comply with, not the organization’s published “aims.” Hubbard and DM being sociopaths, and Scientology being organized sociopathy, willfully generate insanity, or other psychological injury in their victims. They are pathologically dishonest, and every Scientology church and affiliated entity and virtually every Scientologist is contracted to suppress and destroy honest people’s rights.

50. The truth regarding the Church of Scientology is clear. These are the true facts about the ethics and justice systems of the Church and the values which the writings of L. Ron Hubbard advance. These are tools of personal salvation which litigants against the Church violently malign and impugn. From the blackened depths of their criminal minds, they seek to destroy this hope for mankind through false pictures and wild allegations which merely reflect their own sordid intentions and actions. Yet, as this small sampling of the scriptures show, the truth is very different. The religion of Scientology places a premium upon ethical behavior; and Scientologists, as a group, are the most ethical people in the world today. In fact, the ethical standards which they maintain are far and above those of any other group.

What a terrible pack of lies, Mark, for a terribly evil purpose. What organization- manufactured hatred you showed for the good people who stood up to your cult, which was so dishonest and so unethical that you would say, years later, it stands one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own claimed most fundamental tenets. Either Scientology successfully turned you into a liar and a hater, or maybe you rose to the ecclesiastical position of Inspector General for Ethics, and were used to execute this declaration, because you already were a liar and hater. And maybe you’ll do nothing about all the lying you did about the SPs or apostates who got Scientology’s number, who confronted the fact that it stood one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to its own most fundamental tenets, and who stood up to its lying and unethical behavior. Or maybe now you’ll come forward, tell the truth, and help Scientology’s Fair Game victims to end the unjust war the organization is waging on us.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed in the State of California, the 13th day of August 1991.

Mark C. Rathbun

In case you now consider justifying not coming forward, not telling the truth, and not helping me, because I’m “just as bad as Scientology,” or I “pulled it in,” please know that I am not seeking to stop anyone from speaking, nor seeking to suppress or destroy anyone’s other basic human rights. I want wogs and Scientologists equally to think freely, speak freely, associate freely, worship freely, and live freely. On the other hand, Scientology, all its organizations or churches, its affiliated entities, and all of their directors, officers, employees, volunteers, agents and even attorneys seek to stop me from speaking, and all of them seek to suppress and destroy my other basic human rights. As you also know, these “beneficiaries” seek to suppress and destroy not just my rights, but the basic rights of anyone who would act in concert with me, which is potentially everyone on earth.

You didn’t mention in your 1991 declaration that you were a contractual beneficiary at the time, nor that Miscavige, the organization and individual beneficiaries were actively stopping speech and suppressing and destroying other basic human rights. It has dawned on some Scientologists, I’m sure, that they are contracted beneficiaries in something indefensibly evil, but they are themselves so suppressed, so trapped by their own misdeeds, and their heads apparently lie so uneasy from wearing their guilty consciences, that not one Scientologist over all these years has spoken up to be removed as a beneficiary. This is not astonishing, if the reality is confronted that Scientologists comprise a group that is one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to being the most ethical people in the world today, and that the ethical standards they maintain are one hundred eighty degrees diametrically opposed to being far and above those of any other group.

What Scientology and Scientologists have done to stop me and people who associate with me or act in concert with me from speaking freely is in fact blackmail and abuse, which form a massive dark operation. You knew about all this for years inside, probably, because of your proximity to Miscavige and Scientology litigation, from before the contract was written, but certainly from December 1986. If you’re even a volunteer now for DM, or for any Scientology related entity, you would still be a beneficiary.

As I said at the start of this letter, I’m a person in the class of persons you offered to help: a person in need of the help that you can give, and someone who once formally participated in Scientology but who now holds no hope nor intention of ever seeking help from that religion or organization. I know you learned the skill of telling the truth, and that’s the skill I’m asking you to now share. I’m asking you to make good with me, and on a one-on-one basis is fine with me. I know how to get hold of you, and I’m making this an open letter, and posting it openly, because this is not solely a personal matter but one that affects many people, potentially everyone.

Yours hopefully,

Gerry Armstrong
[contact info]

Declaration of Gerry Armstrong (March 7, 2006)

[…] 1

28. Scientology leaders had used the same Ken Hoden in a similar attempt in 1985 and 1986 to have me prosecuted by the Los Angeles District Attorney on charges


that the organization itself manufactured. Scientology ran a covert operation on me from 1982 through 1984 involving a writer Dan Sherman whom organization leaders operated to befriend me, get close to me, and set me up in a series of secretly recorded and videotaped meetings with other covert agents. Mr. Sherman and the other agents claimed that there were people inside the organization who wanted to reform it and stop Fair Game, but they were afraid for their lives and so sought out my help. The other agents David Kluge and Michael Rinder, pretending to be reformers, attempted to entrap me into the commission of crimes, without success. The recordings were made without my permission or knowledge and were illegal, and were in no way evidence of what Scientology claimed they were. Nevertheless, Scientology edited the recordings and used Mr. Hoden and others to try to get the LA DA to prosecute me, as well as my attorney Michael Flynn. Appended hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of the letter dated April 25, 1986 from LA DA to Mr. Hoden, et al. fortunately refusing prosecution or further investigation of Scientology’s claims.2 Scientology claimed that its covert videotaping operation was legal because it was authorized by the LA PD. As mentioned above, a Scientology agent had paid an LA PD officer at least ten thousand dollars for a series of phony “authorizations” to wiretap and eavesdrop on Mr. Flynn and me. Appended hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of a public announcement of April 23, 1985 from the LA Chief of Police denouncing the “authorizations” as not from the LAPD3 Despite the scathing denouncement from the Chief of Police, and the corrupt officer being suspended from


the LA PD, Scientology has continued to this day to justify its unlawful entrapment operation and the false charges it sought with the lie that the videotaping was approved by the LA PD.

29. At the time he attempted to have me prosecuted on Scientology’s trumped up charges, Mr. Hoden was part of the organization authorized and directed to handle or treat or Fair Game SPs. Scientologists in such positions are expected to lie, including under oath, to obstruct justice, and do what is necessary and can be gotten away with to harm the people organization leaders want harmed, like Mr. Henson and me. I believe that Mr. Hoden was used specifically in the efforts to have us prosecuted because he has been willing to lie, testify falsely or otherwise Fair Game us, whereas other Scientologists might not be so willing. I believe that my knowledge of Scientologists lying and testifying falsely as a practice, and specifically Ken Hoden lying, to have the organization’s SP victims prosecuted and jailed or otherwise harmed, was very relevant in Mr. Henson’s terrorism case, and if the jury had heard that testimony he would have been found not guilty on all counts.

30. The scriptural principle given by founder Hubbard that Scientology is following in its actions in the legal arena against people like Mr. Henson and me states:

The DEFENSE of anything is UNTENABLE. The only way to defend anything is to ATTACK, and if you ever forget that, then you will lose every battle you are ever engaged in, whether it is in terms of personal conversation, public debate, or a court of law. NEVER BE INTERESTED IN CHARGES. DO,
yourself, much MORE CHARGING, and you will WIN. And the public, seeing that you won, will then have a communication line to the effect that Scientologists WIN. Don’t ever let them have any other thought than that Scientology takes all of its objectives.4


The charges that the Scientologists and their agents who execute the Suppressive Person doctrine bring against their SP victims are often false charges. Scientology sought to have me falsely charged by the LA PD in 1982 for theft. In 1985 and 1986, as shown above, Scientology tried to have me prosecuted by the LA DA. In 1985 and 1986 Scientology tried to have me prosecuted by the FBI in Boston on a charge Scientology manufactured that I had impersonated an FBI officer.5 In 1992 through 1994, Scientology sought to have me punished for contempt of court on false charges. In 1997, Scientology was successful, as shown above, in having me punished with a fine and jail for reporting the organization’s threat to me after I was subpoenaed. In 1998, Scientology was successful in having me fined and ordered to jail for twenty-six days for expressions expressed in Canada and Germany.6  In 2001, Scientology was again successful in having me found in contempt of court for more religious expressions in Canada.7 In 2001, Scientology also sought to get me in trouble with the FSB, the Russian intelligence service that succeeded the KGB, and tried to have me picked up by U.S. agents in Moscow.8 In 2002, Scientology sought to have me charged by the Ekaterinburg, Russia prosecutor on the basis of false statements by Scientologists that I had trespassed in their office in that city. In 2004 and 2005 a Scientology agent leased an office across the street from my apartment in Chilliwack, B.C. Canada, spied on my wife throughout that period, and tried to trick us into making a video recording to later be used against us.9

31. I am convinced that Ken Hoden and any Scientologists who testified that they were frightened by Keith Henson possibly bombing them or hurting them in any way are lying as part of a conspiracy run by Scientology’s leaders to deprive him of his rights in violation 18 U.S.C. § 241, and in violation of other state and federal criminal statutes. What Scientology is trying to do in silencing me judicially and


extra-judicially demonstrates the same, and the list of beneficiaries of Scientology’s efforts to deprive me of my civil rights shows that the conspiracy is organization-wide. Since Scientology is demonstrably inter alia a criminal conspiracy against rights, Mr. Henson has every justification in the world to interfere with the conspiracy, even if the conspirators call their conspiracy religion.



Be Glad You Lost, Julie (November 9, 2003)

By Dan Garvin
9 November 2003


In the summer of 1985, I had been in OSA Int for less than a year. I was in charge of external computerization for OSA, which meant I got to go all over the place setting up and taking care of anything that had a CPU and wasn’t inside OSA Int. Up in Portland, Oregon, the “Christo Trial” was getting going. There was already a Trial Unit of OSA Int, OSA US, local DSA and other staff and some volunteers. Some attorneys were also in Portland Earle Cooley was the main one I dealt with. Miscavige was there, as were Marty Rathbun, Mike Sutter, Lynn Farny, Ken Long, Karen Hollander, and many other names you’d recognize. Many famous SPs were there too. Somebody got a nice picture once of Gerry Armstrong flipping the bird at the camera as he was leaving the courtroom.

The Christo Trial was a damages suit by Julie Christofferson against the Church in Portland for, IIRC, fraud and emotional distress and a number of related torts. By that time she was Julie Titchbourne, but we still called the case Christo in OSA. After a while, I was called up from LA. There were two or three condominiums in the same building in downtown Portland, near the courthouse. One was Earle Cooley’s; one was the work and research area for the OSA Int execs and senior Legal personnel; I think there was a third one for the ASI/RTC personnel (at that time, Miscavige was still calling himself ED ASI, although he was just as much the boss of everything as he is now, at least as far as OSA was concerned). These condos were fairly luxurious. The lesser beings worked in the Trial Unit at the Celebrity Centre. I got to work in the OSA Int Condo, although I slept in a hotel some distance away.

The reason I was brought up is that they wanted transcripts of the proceedings loaded into computers on a daily basis so they could be searched by Cooley, Farny, Long, et al. At first, so I was told by one of the attorneys (probably Tim Bowles), we were not even supposed to have been given the transcripts. Only the attorneys were allowed to have them, for some reason. So our attorneys of course violated this order and gave the transcripts to me and to other personnel. But I got pretty crappy copies. I had miniature duplicates of the INCOMM computers set up in the condo. They were made by a company called WICAT, and they had a Unix-like proprietary operating system. We had one or two OCR – optical character recognition – machines set up. In those days, OCRing was pretty primitive (or prohibitively expensive), and these could only handle certain fonts, which had to be in very good condition. So the crappy and illicit copies we were getting had to be mostly typed in by hand, and for that there were about a half dozen personnel who had been doing that type of thing in LA.

Later they got permission to let us have copies of the transcripts, and the quality improved vastly. The other typists were sent home and I was pretty much running the whole computer show. I could OCR and correct everything by myself. We had huge rack-mount tape drives with twelve- or fourteen-inch reels, each holding 10 MB of data. I used these for backups and to transfer the data up to the computer in Earle Cooley’s condo. The information was loaded into a database that INCOMM called FAST, which was like SIR, or Source Information Retrieval, which is all the LRH issues (of all kinds, and advices too for those authorized) in a searchable database. FAST was the same system exactly, but for non-LRH material. OSA was inputting all the documents in all legal cases, and later added just about everything else as well. When a case was going on, everybody would rush to get it into FAST as soon as possible so the legal vultures could pick it over for anything they could use to win points the next day in court.

The Christofferson case is a fascinating story, but one I don’t know very well. What’s relevant to this post is, we lost. The jury awarded Julie Titchbourne something like $30 million. Nothing like this had ever happened before (so I was told and believed). The loss would set a precedent and all the other “frivolous” deep-pocket lawsuits against Scientology churches would fall like dominoes in favor of the enemy. We were crushed. I had not been in the courtroom once the whole time I was there, but I came down to hear the decision – and share in the victory. When I heard the award against us, I literally did not know what to do. I thought it was the end of the world, or pretty close. It was impossible and unthinkable. Our religion could be shut down by ambulance-chasing attorneys and professional victims. I wandered out of the courtroom in a daze. I went down to a park in town and just walked around. Everything seemed surreal. But I realized we would not just cave in. We would appeal. We would fight with every ounce of our strength, and when that was gone, we would still fight on. I started to feel a little better. All the same, it was unbelievable. After all, RTC and ASI were running things directly, and if anybody would make sure LRH legal tech was standardly applied, they would and still we lost. Man, there must be some heavy-duty corruption going on behind the scenes, to create such a miscarriage of justice! Well, we’d find that, too, and somehow we’d win. We had to. The survival of the world depended on it.

So I got tired of moping and headed back to the condo. The execs and OSA guys were there; I don’t remember which ones but probably most of the ones who normally worked or attended conferences there. Nobody was saying much; it looked like everybody else hadn’t finished moping yet. So I took a hint and resumed moping. Every once in a while somebody would wonder what the hell we were going to do, or what went wrong, and speculate about how bad it was going to be. After a while, the CO OSA Int, Mike Sutter, spoke up. He said  (paraphrasing), “I don’t care if she thinks she won. That bitch is never going to see one single cent. I’ll kill her first. I don’t care if I get the chair it’s worth it. It’s just one lifetime.

I froze. I wasn’t moving much to begin with, but I froze solid. I didn’t want to breathe. I forgot all about our immediate problems. My CO had just said he was going to murder Julie Titchbourne. He was absolutely serious. I was in shock. Sure, she deserved to die all SPs did. But you can’t actually do that that sort of thing. My thoughts raced. Please, I thought, please, somebody say something that will make this stop. I was trying to think what I could say. If I said the wrong thing, or said it the wrong way, I’d be out of there that night and getting sec checked the next day. But this was madness!

There was not a sound in the room. It seemed like ten minutes but was probably only one. Finally Miscavige spoke up. Here’s what he didn’t say: He didn’t say, “Sutter, you’re fucking crazy, we don’t kill people!” He didn’t say, “You’re joking, right?” He didn’t explain that Julie’s estate would still get the money or that killing a plaintiff would be a hundred times worse for the Church than paying her even the whole $30 million. He just said, “No, this is what we’re going to do.” And then launched what within a day or two became the Portland Crusade.

The Crusade, along with a lot of flanking actions and, according to Cooley, his own research in the database I’d put together for him, worked, and the Judge, Londer, eventually threw out the decision. Julie would have had to start from scratch, with much tighter restrictions on what was admissible as evidence. I guess they just gave up.

Julie deserved that money, or at least some compensation for being screwed over by Scientology. I’m sorry for my part in stopping her from getting paid. But, then again, if the Crusade and everything had failed and she had won in the end, I wonder if Sutter would ultimately have made good on his promise to murder her. Even if the estate still collected Julie’s money, it sure would have made other plaintiffs think twice about their own cases. It may be that Julie’s loss is the only reason she is alive today.

One thing I am absolutely certain of: When Mike Sutter said he would kill her, he meant it, absolutely and literally. He certainly was not reprimanded or corrected at the time by anyone for suggesting this, and if any action was taken against him later, it was nothing I ever heard about – nor did anybody ever pull me aside and say, “You know we would never actually do that, right?” or some such. In fact, a few months later he was promoted to RTC. He was still in RTC as late as 1995 or so. I don’t know if he has been seen in the last few years. That could mean a number of things. He could just have a post that never requires him to leave the Gold Base, or he could have gone to the RPF, or he could have been transferred somewhere else on some secret post or mission. Or, for all I know, he could have gone off to do the Hit Man Full Hat and Apprenticeship.

Hubbard’s Code of Honor says, near as I can recall, “Your honor and integrity are more important than your physical body.” Also, the third and fourth dynamics (the group Scientology, and all mankind) are more important than anyone’s first dynamic (self an SP’s life or the life of whatever hero murdered the SP). To the average Scientologist and perhaps the average SO member, this interpretation of those ideals may sound extreme, even beyond extreme. As one nears the top of the ladder, though, I think they’re pretty typical. What may not be typical is the willingness to actually go through with it, mainly because the repercussions on Scientology would be far worse than the consequences of not committing the murder.

Lurkers, those of you still in the COS this is a glimpse at a side of RTC that you don’t hear about at the International Events. Next time you’re watching David Miscavige spewing his glib, formulaic PR at you, try remembering that this is a man to whom murdering a plaintiff was apparently just another option, one that he ultimately rejected in favor of a better one, but one he seemed to have no fundamental objections to.

Dan Garvin