Open letter to Mark Rathbun, May 31, 2009

[Gerry Armstrong]

I didn't post this earlier, although the Schwarz noted it on a.r.s. I
posted it on my site and e-mailed Rathbun but neither he nor someone
from his posse has responded, which, since he was involved in all
sorts of Fair Game against me in the cult, including the 1984 Loyalist
op, is to me a very significant response. Rinder, of course, was a
"Loyalist" Rathbun et al. used for a couple of illegally videotaped
face-to-face meetings. Loyalists Redux. Opus eram solvo. Servo is sic.

Easier here to follow quoting, paragraphing, etc.:
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/3292

Open letter to Mark C. Rathbun
May 31st, 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.
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/legal/a1/appeal/decl-rathbun-1991-08-13.html

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.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tenet 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:

DECLARATION OF MARK C. RATHBUN

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.�
http://carolineletkeman.org/sp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=168&Itemid=201
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.

http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/legal/a1/breckenridge-decision.html#paranoid

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.
http://suppressiveperson.org/spdl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=20&Itemid=27
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.
http://suppressiveperson.org/spdl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=462&Itemid=38
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?
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/findings-recs-1978-10-04.html

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.�
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/sp/pl-1967-10-18-penalties-for-lower-conds.html
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/hco-ethics-order-30.html
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.
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/sp/pl-1969-02-16-battle-tactics-reiss-87.html

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:
http://www.nixoncenter.org/publications/FairGame.pdf
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?
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/30/politics/politico/main4218172.shtml
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.�
Id.

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.

http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/writings/ars/ars-2000-03-11.html

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:
http://carolineletkeman.org/sp/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=14&id=122&Itemid=162

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:
http://www.e-pages.dk/dods/86/43

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.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 31 JANUARY 1983
CORRECTED AND REISSUED 6 FEBRUARY 1983
Remimeo
(Corrects typo in paragraph 12)

THE REASON FOR ORGS

The only reason orgs exist is TO SELL AND DELIVER MATERIALS AND
SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC AND GET IN PUBLIC TO SELL AND DELIVER TO. THE
OBJECT IS TOTALLY FREED CUSTOMERS!
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!
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

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.
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/hubbard-hw-ltr-1983-02-03.pdf
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.
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/cult-press-rls-1983-02-10.html
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
http://ak.static.dailymotion.com/dyn/preview/320�240/2040081.jpg
what Hubbard called in very early scripture a �Hindu hypnoscope:�
http://carolineletkeman.org/sp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=389&Itemid=240
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.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
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, �lan 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.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE

Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 MAY 1985
Remimeo
BPI
C/Ses
Ethics Courses
Hubbard Senior
Sec Checker Course
C/S Series 120
HONESTY AND CASE GAIN
Refs:
HCOB 5 Oct. 61 CLEAN HANDS MAKE A HAPPY LIFE
HCOB 8 Feb. 60 HONEST PEOPLE HAVE RIGHTS, TOO
HCOB 15 Nov. 72 II STUDENTS WHO SUCCEED
HCOB 13 Oct. 82 C/S Series 116
ETHICS AND THE C/S
Booklet: The Way To Happiness
Booklet: Axioms and Logics

DISHONESTY CAN PREVENT CASE GAIN.
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.
HONESTY OPENS THE DOOR TO CASE GAIN.
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?
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

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,�
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/legal/a1/mutual-release-1986.html
a beneficiary in the judicial enforcement effort, which had started by
the time you signed your 1991 Declaration,
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/legal/a1/decl-1991-11-17.html
and a beneficiary in Scientology�s injunction, judgment, contempt
orders and other judicial rulings against me.
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/legal/a4/injunction-csi-v-armstrong.html
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.
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/crim/241fin.php

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.
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/crim/242fin.htm

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:

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE

Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 9 JULY 1980R REVISED 25 MARCH 1989

Remimeo
All Hats

ETHICS, JUSTICE AND THE DYNAMICS

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 merriam-webster.com (or any other source if you want):

Main Entry:dwin�dle
Pronunciation:\�dwin-d?l\
Function:verb
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
Date:1596
intransitive verb
: to become steadily less : shrink
transitive verb
: to make steadily less
synonyms see decrease
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dwindle

This will probably help too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral

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:
http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/SH9_2.HTM
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:
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/
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 �.

THE CRIMINAL, NO MATTER WHAT HARM HE IS DOING TO OTHERS, IS
ALSO SEEKING TO DESTROY HIMSELF. HE IS IN PROTEST AGAINST HIS OWN
SURVIVAL.

Id.

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:

THE CRIMINAL ACCUSES OTHERS OF THINGS WHICH HE HIMSELF IS
DOING.
* * *
THE CRIMINAL MIND RELENTLESSLY SEEKS TO DESTROY ANYONE IT
IMAGINES MIGHT EXPOSE IT.
* * *
THE CRIMINAL ONLY SEES OTHERS AS HE HIMSELF IS.

Id.

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.

Id.

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.

[Signed]
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
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org

[John Dorsay]

Gerry Armstrong wrote:
> I didn't post this earlier, although the Schwarz noted it on a.r.s. I
> posted it on my site and e-mailed Rathbun but neither he nor someone
> from his posse has responded, which, since he was involved in all
> sorts of Fair Game against me in the cult, including the 1984 Loyalist
> op, is to me a very significant response. Rinder, of course, was a
> "Loyalist" Rathbun et al. used for a couple of illegally videotaped
> face-to-face meetings. Loyalists Redux. Opus eram solvo. Servo is sic.

There is another possible reason for the lack of response. Have you
considered a slightly shorter, somewhat less antagonistic and more
personally engaging variation of your message such as

Greetings Mark!

I was delighted to learn you have left the cult! I would very much
like to take you up on your offer to help people who have been
targeted by the cult over the years. Pleas contact me at...

Thanks!

> Easier here to follow quoting, paragraphing, etc.:
> http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/3292
>
> Open letter to Mark C. Rathbun
> May 31st, 2009

<snip tl;dr>

John

--

Why is the <cough>anonymous</cough> cyberstalker posting as

advocatesforch...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/mlopgl)
andro...@rocketmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/m8uqm5)
avenging....@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ntx742)
babustis....@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/n4aj72)
didacticd...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/lutsrq)
frustrate...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/l8pvqz)
gaussian.ge...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/l3ej9v)
miracleson...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/n44r8v)
nashvil...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ntofx6)
nineteentwenty...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/m7wr3m)
parro...@googlemail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ne9on4)
particle...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/lvhcsk)
preparingf...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/n8w3zt)
sapphir...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/mxmzs7)
sarnerpse...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/l9aqmp)
saruman...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/ncdf5t)
scandalous...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/l95o7f)
somati...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ll799u)
ukrainian...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/mrcglf)

trying so hard to discredit Monica Pignotti and other critics of
the abusive "treatment" called "Attachment Therapy"?

Why doesn't he direct people to the American Psychological
Association Division 37 Task Force position paper at
http://www.apa.org/divisions/div37/RADTaskForceManuscript.pdf
instead?

[Jonathon Barbera]

On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:56:30 -0400, John Dorsay
<restim...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Gerry Armstrong wrote:
>> I didn't post this earlier, although the Schwarz noted it on a.r.s. I
>> posted it on my site and e-mailed Rathbun but neither he nor someone
>> from his posse has responded, which, since he was involved in all
>> sorts of Fair Game against me in the cult, including the 1984 Loyalist
>> op, is to me a very significant response. Rinder, of course, was a
>> "Loyalist" Rathbun et al. used for a couple of illegally videotaped
>> face-to-face meetings. Loyalists Redux. Opus eram solvo. Servo is sic.
>
>There is another possible reason for the lack of response. Have you
>considered a slightly shorter, somewhat less antagonistic and more
>personally engaging variation of your message such as
>
>
>Greetings Mark!
>
>I was delighted to learn you have left the cult! I would very much
>like to take you up on your offer to help people who have been
>targeted by the cult over the years. Pleas contact me at...
>
>Thanks!
>
>> Easier here to follow quoting, paragraphing, etc.:
>> http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/3292
>>
>> Open letter to Mark C. Rathbun
>> May 31st, 2009
>
><snip tl;dr>
>
>
>John

Your mini-letter is not consistent with Gerry's intent.

Here is what Gerry should write:

Mark,

I am disappointed with your persistence in defending the evil L. Ron
Hubbard and his soul damaging Scientology. I want you now to defend
your religious philosophy even though I plan to dismiss your every
response as the result of years of cult brainwashing.

Love, Gerry.

[Eldon]

On Jul 14, 3:56 pm, John Dorsay <restimula...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Gerry Armstrong wrote:
> > I didn't post this earlier, although the Schwarz noted it on a.r.s. I
> > posted it on my site and e-mailed Rathbun but neither he nor someone
> > from his posse has responded, which, since he was involved in all
> > sorts of Fair Game against me in the cult, including the 1984 Loyalist
> > op, is to me a very significant response. Rinder, of course, was a
> > "Loyalist" Rathbun et al. used for a couple of illegally videotaped
> > face-to-face meetings. Loyalists Redux. Opus eram solvo. Servo is sic.
>
> There is another possible reason for the lack of response.  Have you
> considered a slightly shorter, somewhat less antagonistic and more
> personally engaging variation of your message such as
>
> Greetings Mark!
>
> I was delighted to learn you have left the cult!  I would very much
> like to take you up on your offer to help people who have been
> targeted by the cult over the years.  Pleas contact me at...

John,
This missive may be a bit ponderous, but I don't think Gerry wants
help. As I recall, Marty was offering to help people who have been
abused and confused by the cult, i.e. disillusioned departed staff
members. Gerry falls into another category.

>
> Thanks!
>
> > Easier here to follow quoting, paragraphing, etc.:
> >http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/3292
>
> > Open letter to Mark C. Rathbun
> > May 31st, 2009
>
> <snip tl;dr>
>
> John
>
> --
>
> Why is the <cough>anonymous</cough> cyberstalker posting as
>

> advocatesforchildreninther...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/mlopgl)
> android...@rocketmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/m8uqm5)
> avenging.arcsec...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ntx742)
> babustis.chromas...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/n4aj72)
> didacticderivat...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/lutsrq)
> frustrated.flux...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/l8pvqz)
> gaussian.generalizat...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/l3ej9v)
> miraclesonmainstr...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/n44r8v)
> nashvilletun...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ntofx6)
> nineteentwentyeight.overt...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/m7wr3m)
> parrottk...@googlemail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ne9on4)
> particle.princ...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/lvhcsk)
> preparingforadopt...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/n8w3zt)
> sapphire.tr...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/mxmzs7)
> sarnerpseudoscie...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/l9aqmp)
> sarumaniseng...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/ncdf5t)
> scandalousinventi...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/l95o7f)
> somatic.a...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ll799u)
> ukrainianadopti...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/mrcglf)

[John Dorsay]

Eldon wrote:
> On Jul 14, 3:56 pm, John Dorsay <restimula...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Gerry Armstrong wrote:
>> > I didn't post this earlier, although the Schwarz noted it on a.r.s. I
>> > posted it on my site and e-mailed Rathbun but neither he nor someone
>> > from his posse has responded, which, since he was involved in all
>> > sorts of Fair Game against me in the cult, including the 1984 Loyalist
>> > op, is to me a very significant response. Rinder, of course, was a
>> > "Loyalist" Rathbun et al. used for a couple of illegally videotaped
>> > face-to-face meetings. Loyalists Redux. Opus eram solvo. Servo is sic.
>>
>> There is another possible reason for the lack of response. Have you
>> considered a slightly shorter, somewhat less antagonistic and more
>> personally engaging variation of your message such as
>>
>> Greetings Mark!
>>
>> I was delighted to learn you have left the cult! I would very much
>> like to take you up on your offer to help people who have been
>> targeted by the cult over the years. Pleas contact me at...
>
> John,
> This missive may be a bit ponderous, but I don't think Gerry wants
> help. As I recall, Marty was offering to help people who have been
> abused and confused by the cult, i.e. disillusioned departed staff
> members. Gerry falls into another category.

I understood read Gerry's post to say he was disappointed that there
was no response. Maybe I misunderstood and he desired a
non-response. If that's the case, his open letter was perfect.

OTOH, if he *did* desire a response, there's an old saying about
catching more flies with honey that strikes me as appropriate. I
stopped reading the screed after the first three or four paragraphs.

If his intent was to warn people away from association with Rathbun,
I did not read far enough to see that.

There is merit to the standard essay structure of

1. Tell them what you are going to say.
2. Say it.
3. Tell them what you said.

Especially when the essay runs 3000 lines.

John

--

Why is the <cough>anonymous</cough> cyberstalker posting as

advocatesforch...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/mlopgl)

andro...@rocketmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/m8uqm5)
avenging....@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ntx742)
babustis....@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/n4aj72)
didacticd...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/lutsrq)
frustrate...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/l8pvqz)
gaussian.ge...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/l3ej9v)
miracleson...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/n44r8v)
nashvil...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ntofx6)
nineteentwenty...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/m7wr3m)
parro...@googlemail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ne9on4)
particle...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/lvhcsk)
preparingf...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/n8w3zt)
sapphir...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/mxmzs7)
sarnerpse...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/l9aqmp)
saruman...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/ncdf5t)
scandalous...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/l95o7f)
somati...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ll799u)

ukrainian...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/mrcglf)

[banchukita]

Perhaps Gerry didn't really expect any 'help' from Mark.

By making it an open letter, I think he was just trying to make a
point.
That he did it in 3000 lines might be a sign of how totally ticked off
he is?
I'm sure he's been waiting a long time for Mark to address the issues
Gerry brings up, which seem pretty darn valid, if laboriously wordy,
to me.

Sadly, I don't think Mark will ever be able to respond like a real
human, which underscores Gerry's open letter. My opinion is only
based on Mark's actions in and since he left Scn, Inc. I have no other
personal knowledge of him, so take it for what it's worth.

-maggie, human being

> John
>
> --
>
> Why is the <cough>anonymous</cough> cyberstalker posting as
>

> advocatesforchildreninther...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/mlopgl)
> android...@rocketmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/m8uqm5)
> avenging.arcsec...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ntx742)
> babustis.chromas...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/n4aj72)
> didacticderivat...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/lutsrq)
> frustrated.flux...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/l8pvqz)
> gaussian.generalizat...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/l3ej9v)
> miraclesonmainstr...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/n44r8v)
> nashvilletun...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ntofx6)
> nineteentwentyeight.overt...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/m7wr3m)
> parrottk...@googlemail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ne9on4)
> particle.princ...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/lvhcsk)
> preparingforadopt...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/n8w3zt)
> sapphire.tr...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/mxmzs7)
> sarnerpseudoscie...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/l9aqmp)
> sarumaniseng...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/ncdf5t)
> scandalousinventi...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/l95o7f)
> somatic.a...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ll799u)

> ukrainianadopti...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/mrcglf)

[John Dorsay]

banchukita wrote:

> Perhaps Gerry didn't really expect any 'help' from Mark.
>
> By making it an open letter, I think he was just trying to make a
> point.
> That he did it in 3000 lines might be a sign of how totally ticked off
> he is?
> I'm sure he's been waiting a long time for Mark to address the issues
> Gerry brings up, which seem pretty darn valid, if laboriously wordy,
> to me.

No doubt.

> Sadly, I don't think Mark will ever be able to respond like a real
> human, which underscores Gerry's open letter. My opinion is only
> based on Mark's actions in and since he left Scn, Inc. I have no other
> personal knowledge of him, so take it for what it's worth.

I don't doubt the merits of Gerry's complaint. But if he genuinely
hopes for any sort of acknowledgment ("help", in a broad sense) from
one of his principal antagonists, "have you stopped beating your
wife" questions are unlikely to achieve it.

Even if the antagonist really was beating his wife.

If Gerry's expressed disappointment at the lack of response was
simply rhetoric, then I misunderstood his OP and my comments are
completely irrelevant.

John

--

Why is the <cough>anonymous</cough> cyberstalker posting as

advocatesforch...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/mlopgl)

andro...@rocketmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/m8uqm5)
avenging....@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ntx742)
babustis....@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/n4aj72)
didacticd...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/lutsrq)
frustrate...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/l8pvqz)
gaussian.ge...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/l3ej9v)
miracleson...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/n44r8v)
nashvil...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ntofx6)
nineteentwenty...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/m7wr3m)
parro...@googlemail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ne9on4)
particle...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/lvhcsk)
preparingf...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/n8w3zt)
sapphir...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/mxmzs7)
sarnerpse...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/l9aqmp)
saruman...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/ncdf5t)
scandalous...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/l95o7f)
somati...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ll799u)

ukrainian...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/mrcglf)

[Hartley Patterson]

restim...@gmail.com says:

> "have you stopped beating your
> wife" questions are unlikely to achieve it.

You used the phrase that had just popped into my mind, spooky...

Yes, "Open letter to..." and "Question for...", on ARS at least, tend to
be of that type rather than wanting or indeed expecting a useful reply.

--
69 Ways to spot a Suppressive Person
http://www.newsfrombree.co.uk/stolgy_10.htm

[Gregory Hall]

"Gerry Armstrong" <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote in message
news:aoso55pl5s1k0qvjn...@4ax.com...

>I didn't post this earlier, although the Schwarz noted it on a.r.s. I
> posted it on my site and e-mailed Rathbun but neither he nor someone
> from his posse has responded, which, since he was involved in all

<humongous snip>

The fellow in Texas is clearly an imposter. You wasted your time. Sorry. You
should have listened to Ms. Schwarz. She knows what's going on when it comes
to Marty Rathbun.

--
Gregory Hall

[henri]

On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:57:11 -0700 (PDT), banchukita
<banch...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Sadly, I don't think Mark will ever be able to respond like a real
>human, which underscores Gerry's open letter.

Speaking as an actual human, if I got emailed a monotonous, rambling
monstrosity like this "open letter," my response would be to put it on
my reading list somewhere after Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
Finnegans Wake, and The Golden Bough. Whoever sent it could expect a
rseponse some time in 2020 or so.

[realpch]

Gerry Armstrong wrote:
>
> I didn't post this earlier, although the Schwarz noted it on a.r.s. I
> posted it on my site and e-mailed Rathbun but neither he nor someone
> from his posse has responded, which, since he was involved in all
> sorts of Fair Game against me in the cult, including the 1984 Loyalist
> op, is to me a very significant response. Rinder, of course, was a
> "Loyalist" Rathbun et al. used for a couple of illegally videotaped
> face-to-face meetings. Loyalists Redux. Opus eram solvo. Servo is sic.
>
> Easier here to follow quoting, paragraphing, etc.:
> http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/3292
>
> Open letter to Mark C. Rathbun
> May 31st, 2009
>
> Dear Mark:

<snip>

It's too long.

Peach
--
Extra! Extra! Read All About It!
Save some dough, save some grief:
http://www.xenu.net
http://www.scientology-lies.com

[realpch]

John Dorsay wrote:
>
> Gerry Armstrong wrote:
> > I didn't post this earlier, although the Schwarz noted it on a.r.s. I
> > posted it on my site and e-mailed Rathbun but neither he nor someone
> > from his posse has responded, which, since he was involved in all
> > sorts of Fair Game against me in the cult, including the 1984 Loyalist
> > op, is to me a very significant response. Rinder, of course, was a
> > "Loyalist" Rathbun et al. used for a couple of illegally videotaped
> > face-to-face meetings. Loyalists Redux. Opus eram solvo. Servo is sic.
>
> There is another possible reason for the lack of response. Have you
> considered a slightly shorter, somewhat less antagonistic and more
> personally engaging variation of your message such as
>
> Greetings Mark!
>
> I was delighted to learn you have left the cult! I would very much
> like to take you up on your offer to help people who have been
> targeted by the cult over the years. Pleas contact me at...
>
> Thanks!
>
> > Easier here to follow quoting, paragraphing, etc.:
> > http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/3292
> >
> > Open letter to Mark C. Rathbun
> > May 31st, 2009
>
> <snip tl;dr>
>
> John

<snip>

That would be my opinion, also. I'd toss such a letter if I got it, or
put it away for posterity, without reading it. Posterity would probably
not read it either.

[phil scott]

> > instead?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

little banjo.....(for whom I have limitless respect across all of the
broad spectrums)...

some of us, all through the worlds long history have chosen to stand
before ruthlessly armed, hidden and protected tryanny, alone.. with
our single sword drawn., in the open, with no cover.... as thousands
of arrows, spears, big rocks...dead cattle..and pots of boiling oil
rained down on us.

we stood and stand today, alone because there is no such an army of
our type. so we stand alone.
We refuse to talk even as our tongues are yanked out, and our
intestines spilled before us in the torture chambers...we stand that
way before the firing squads, silent.

Thats who we are........ what we have done says it all.... it is never
ever debatable.

we stood alone. before the german machine guns, bare chested at
Normady, with no cover.... and we did it in broad day light, and we
do it now,
and all through history and into the future we will do it again....
and agaisnt all of these odds, we prevail.

that says it all... it is that, that is the hope of
mankind. and we stand in spite of the lies and spin against us,
often abandon by
our own because of those lies...but we choose to stand, none
the less, into the gattling gun fire, as we notice the cherry blossoms
are in bloom.

Phil scott

[barbz]

You forgot Dianetics...

--
xenubarb
Chaplain, ARSCCwdne

A walk down the path of history is crunchy with the crispy corpses of
those who pooh-poohed or ignored the clown car of ridicule when it
pulled-up to the curb.

Stephen Jones

[phil scott]

> advocatesforchildreninther...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/mlopgl)
> android...@rocketmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/m8uqm5)
> avenging.arcsec...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ntx742)
> babustis.chromas...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/n4aj72)
> didacticderivat...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/lutsrq)
> frustrated.flux...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/l8pvqz)
> gaussian.generalizat...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/l3ej9v)
> miraclesonmainstr...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/n44r8v)
> nashvilletun...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ntofx6)
> nineteentwentyeight.overt...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/m7wr3m)
> parrottk...@googlemail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ne9on4)
> particle.princ...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/lvhcsk)
> preparingforadopt...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/n8w3zt)
> sapphire.tr...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/mxmzs7)
> sarnerpseudoscie...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/l9aqmp)
> sarumaniseng...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/ncdf5t)
> scandalousinventi...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/l95o7f)
> somatic.a...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ll799u)

> ukrainianadopti...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/mrcglf)

>
> trying so hard to discredit Monica Pignotti and other critics of
> the abusive "treatment" called "Attachment Therapy"?
>
> Why doesn't he direct people to the American Psychological

> Association Division 37 Task Force position paper athttp://www.apa.org/divisions/div37/RADTaskForceManuscript.pdf
> instead?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

there are times for the use of honey.. in small matters only.... and
there are times to stand with the sword...the best among us
choose to take that stand alone.

these are not small matters, at issue was literal murder, and the
spiritial murder of thousands. we dont use no fucking honey in
those cases John... especially standing along against a hidden army
of thugs, what we do however, is carry a razor sharp 18" long forward
weighted bolo knife in our very very strong right hand.

thats how it is with those who have stook against tyranny anywhere...
throughout history... especially if the only sword was truth.

Phil scott

[phil scott]

Barbara is on record in various spots saying the real marty
dissapeared later than 1991... it was
as early as 1980-82 that the real marty was on staff, and into the
later 80's the RTC involved
in these criminally insane attacks against critics...including Gerry,
who btw,, stood largely alone
in that time frame... and has prevailed.

Your idiot spin and blather of total cowardice not withstanding.

Phil scott

[Gregory Hall]

"phil scott" <ph...@philscott.net> wrote in message
news:5ec1f155-b6fe-4a01...@x6g2000prc.googlegroups.com...

>
> Barbara is on record in various spots saying the real marty
> dissapeared later than 1991...

WRONG!

Pay attention, why don't you? Barbara never said that. She said as far as
she can tell the real Marty was arrested and imprisioned in 1988-1989
probably in Spain. Soon thereafter, the actor who now resides in Texas
stepped in and took the original Marty's place because the imposter L. Ron
Hubbard didn't want any bad publicity about Marty being arrested and tossed
into the slammer. It wouldn't have looked good. The real L. Ron Hubbard
would not have allowed his friend and compatriot, the original Mark C.
Rathbun (de Rothschild), to languish in prison.

> it was
> as early as 1980-82 that the real marty was on staff, and into the
> later 80's the RTC involved
> in these criminally insane attacks against critics...including Gerry,
> who btw,, stood largely alone
> in that time frame... and has prevailed.
>
> Your idiot spin and blather of total cowardice not withstanding.

You're the one posting your incorrect assumptions as if they were facts.
That's a major problem with you anti-Scientology hate mongers. You twist the
facts to suit your own ends and then you can't keep track of your own lies
because they become too convoluted.

--
Gregory Hall
http://outingextremistanti-scientologists.blogspot.com/

Phil scott

[Gerry Armstrong]

On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:56:30 -0400, John Dorsay
<restim...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Gerry Armstrong wrote:
>> I didn't post this earlier, although the Schwarz noted it on a.r.s. I
>> posted it on my site and e-mailed Rathbun but neither he nor someone
>> from his posse has responded, which, since he was involved in all
>> sorts of Fair Game against me in the cult, including the 1984 Loyalist
>> op, is to me a very significant response. Rinder, of course, was a
>> "Loyalist" Rathbun et al. used for a couple of illegally videotaped
>> face-to-face meetings. Loyalists Redux. Opus eram solvo. Servo is sic.
>
>There is another possible reason for the lack of response. Have you
>considered a slightly shorter, somewhat less antagonistic and more
>personally engaging variation of your message such as

It's well documented that Rathbun was a tough son-of-a-bitch inside,
and I can't imagine that he's become a wimpy son-of-a-bitch since
leaving, if he really is standing up to Miscavige.

He already had 4 years of opportunities to communicate with me and do
something to end his [erstwhile] cult's war on me. He already had all
the excuses he needed to not help. He also has, without me saying
anything, all the reasons he'd ever need to knock off the excuses.

It still makes me chuckle that I posted and sent Mark my letter just
before the SP Times series.

I posted it to a.r.s. now because it's on topic and timely, and in
case Mark's posse missed it elsewhere.

The cult's war on me is approaching 28 years. I want Rathbun, and in
fact every cultist or non-cultist Scientologist to knock off the
namby-pamby panty-waist dilettante BS, if necessary knock Miscavige on
his thetan, and end their stupid war. If Mark does nothing, he of
course supports the cult, because his doing nothing is Miscavige's
command intention for him, but also nothing would have changed. I'm
not lamenting Rathbun's no response, because nothing changed, although
things are just a bit funnier.

In addition to sincerely requesting precisely the help Mark offered, I
wanted to make a record that really would dissect his declaration,
which has been important to me for many years.

I have all sorts of things to engage him about just because he was so
involved in the cult's Fair Game for so many years, perhaps most
importantly in the black PR he and Misvcavige wrote about me in the
cult's IRS 1023 submission.

Or my materials cult agents broke into my car to steal:,
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/3304

>
>
>Greetings Mark!
>
>I was delighted to learn you have left the cult! I would very much
>like to take you up on your offer to help people who have been
>targeted by the cult over the years. Pleas contact me at...
>
>Thanks!
>
>> Easier here to follow quoting, paragraphing, etc.:
>> http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/3292
>>
>> Open letter to Mark C. Rathbun
>> May 31st, 2009
>
><snip tl;dr>
>
>
>John

� Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org

[Eldon]

Barbara is on record in various spots as saying various things, and
will always say that Marty or LRH had already been replaced by an
impostor at the point they said or did anything that appeared
ignoble.

As in the publishing date of Dianetics or the day after Marty joined
Scientology, if those dates turn out to be convenient hallucinations.

[John Dorsay]

Gerry Armstrong wrote:

<snip>

> In addition to sincerely requesting precisely the help Mark offered, I
> wanted to make a record that really would dissect his declaration,
> which has been important to me for many years.

These are mutually exclusive goals. Dissecting his declaration (and
his other actions in the cult's campaign against you, for that
matter) can only serve to push him to the defensive. It certainly
won't lead to help.

That should be obvious.

> I have all sorts of things to engage him about just because he was so
> involved in the cult's Fair Game for so many years, perhaps most
> importantly in the black PR he and Misvcavige wrote about me in the
> cult's IRS 1023 submission.

He knows the details already. You can bury him in the minutiae of
his misdeeds if you wish, but this will move his interests more and
more towards those of Slappy the Asthmatic Dwarf. If you push hard
enough, you will wind up pushing them to work together against you,
an old alignment that they will both find quite comfortable.

Phil commented that there is a time to brandish your sword. There
is also a time to choose your battles.

[phil scott]

On Jul 14, 10:59 am, "Gregory Hall" <gregh...@home.fake> wrote:
> "phil scott" <p...@philscott.net> wrote in message

Marty was committing his attrocities on behalf of the cult years
before the date of 1988 -89 you
and apparently barbara gave for the dissapearance of the real marty.

according to your statements then, and the history of attacks on
Gerry, the REAL Marty did a
lot of it, showed up in court and lied to Gerrys face............
duhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

Phil scott

[phil scott]

On Jul 14, 11:52 am, John Dorsay <restimula...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Gerry Armstrong wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > In addition to sincerely requesting precisely the help Mark offered, I
> > wanted to make a record that really would dissect his declaration,
> > which has been important to me for many years.
>
> These are mutually exclusive goals.  Dissecting his declaration (and
> his other actions in the cult's campaign against you, for that
> matter) can only serve to push him to the defensive.  It certainly
> won't lead to help.
>
> That should be obvious.
>
> > I have all sorts of things to engage him about just because he was so
> > involved in the cult's Fair Game for so many years, perhaps most
> > importantly in the black PR he and Misvcavige wrote about me in the
> > cult's IRS 1023 submission.
>
> He knows the details already.  You can bury him in the minutiae of
> his misdeeds if you wish, but this will move his interests more and
> more towards those of Slappy the Asthmatic Dwarf.  If you push hard
> enough, you will wind up pushing them to work together against you,
> an old alignment that they will both find quite comfortable.

> Phil commented that there is a time to brandish your sword.  There
> is also a time to choose your battles.
>
> John

errrr John... you dont know our character type at all.... we'all dontz
brandish a damn thing...
brandishing is for idiots. Marty the back stabber, still in the
cults pocket, and non responsive to
one of his primary targets chooses to hide and spin.

some of us will not be forgiving him or kissing his ass in the hopes
that he will grow some balls and
actually testify to something that could get him and is earshwhile
buddies a few decades in prison.

He has no balls... yes he was vicious, but thats not integrity or
courage or decency... a few of
us will not be kissing is completely sorry ass, some of us will be
doing our best to see him in the
federal pen.

Yourself though, can butter him up ...he might need the lubrication.

Phil scott

>
> --
>
> Why is the <cough>anonymous</cough> cyberstalker posting as
>

> advocatesforchildreninther...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/mlopgl)
> android...@rocketmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/m8uqm5)
> avenging.arcsec...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ntx742)
> babustis.chromas...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/n4aj72)
> didacticderivat...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/lutsrq)
> frustrated.flux...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/l8pvqz)
> gaussian.generalizat...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/l3ej9v)
> miraclesonmainstr...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/n44r8v)
> nashvilletun...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ntofx6)
> nineteentwentyeight.overt...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/m7wr3m)
> parrottk...@googlemail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ne9on4)
> particle.princ...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/lvhcsk)
> preparingforadopt...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/n8w3zt)
> sapphire.tr...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/mxmzs7)
> sarnerpseudoscie...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/l9aqmp)
> sarumaniseng...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/ncdf5t)
> scandalousinventi...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/l95o7f)
> somatic.a...@gmail.com (http://tinyurl.com/ll799u)

> ukrainianadopti...@yahoo.com (http://tinyurl.com/mrcglf)

[xenufrance]

"John Dorsay" <restim...@gmail.com> a �crit dans le message de news:
h3i701$gbk$1...@arscc.motzarella.org...
> banchukita wrote:
>

>
> I don't doubt the merits of Gerry's complaint. But if he genuinely
> hopes for any sort of acknowledgment ("help", in a broad sense) from
> one of his principal antagonists, "have you stopped beating your
> wife" questions are unlikely to achieve it.
>
> Even if the antagonist really was beating his wife.

speaking of beaten wives, we observed some few days ago that one of the CC
staff women in Paris had been beaten, her face was full of blows, but she
had not blown. We don't know yet what happened to her.

I got three pre-miscavige witnesses who endured being beaten too, long
before Hubbard died. That was in the Sea Org, therefore somewhere between
1965 and 1980 (the last who told me had left somewhere then).

r

[John]

>"banchukita" <banch...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:918df8be-6875-4df4-9cd5-snip

>Perhaps Gerry didn't really expect any 'help' from Mark.

No, he probably just wanted something human, like an apology, some sense of
contrition etc.

[Barbara loves Marty]

On Jul 14, 12:45 pm, phil scott <p...@philscott.net> wrote:
> On Jul 14, 8:27 am, "Gregory Hall" <gregh...@home.fake> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Gerry Armstrong" <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote in message
>
> >news:aoso55pl5s1k0qvjn...@4ax.com...
>
> > >I didn't post this earlier, although the Schwarz noted it on a.r.s. I

> > > posted it on my site and e-mailedRathbunbut neither he nor someone

> > > from his posse has responded, which, since he was involved in all
>
> > <humongous snip>
>
> > The fellow in Texas is clearly an imposter. You wasted your time. Sorry. You
> > should have listened to Ms. Schwarz. She knows what's going on when it comes
> > to MartyRathbun.
>
> > --
> > Gregory Hall
>
> Barbara is on record in various spots saying the real marty
> dissapeared later than 1991... it was
> as early as 1980-82 that the real marty was on staff, and into the
> later 80's the RTC involved
> in these criminally insane attacks against critics...including Gerry,
> who btw,, stood largely alone
> in that time frame... and has prevailed.
>
> Your idiot spin and blather of total cowardice not withstanding.
>

> Phil scott- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

This true, the orginal Marty likely was arrested wrongfully on
November 21, 1988 and this affdavit was written a few years later but
I am convnced that this affidavit was written by the orignal Marty and
that it is his signature. (Did you see that wonderful handwriting of
his?)

Even if one is wrongfully in prison, a person can still write an
affidavit. There is no law against it.

The doppelganger can't take anything back that he wrote.

The affidavit is true and Gerry Armstrong is lawless person. He webbed
this dirty picture and doctored Marty's face in it.

Also, Gerry Armstrong fabricated lots of lies against L. Ron Hubbard
and against me too. Since years he lies that I would be a David
Miscavige operation. How dare him spread such lies!

Barbara Schwarz
--
Tilman Hausherr webs defamation on me that he and Korey Jerome Kruse
aka Simkatu and
other socks scribbled once on Wikipedia:
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/media-newsroom/tilman-hausherr/
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/media-newsroom/tilman-hausherr/
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/intolerance-hate/whistle-blowers/the-clearwater-letters/tilman-hausherr/
http://bernie.cncfamily.com/sc/kids.htm#Debate_with_Tilman_Hausherr
http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Hausherr&btnG=Google+Search&domains=BERNIE.CNCFAMILY.COM&sitesearch=BERNIE.CNCFAMILY.COM
http://www.alarmgermany.org/tilman.htm
http://cyber-stalker-korey-jerome-kruse.blogspot.com/
http://phorums.com.au/archive/index.php/t-156307.html

[Barbara loves Marty]

On Jul 14, 7:32 am, Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
> I didn't post this earlier, although the Schwarz noted it on a.r.s. I

> posted it on my site and e-mailedRathbunbut neither he nor someone

> from his posse has responded, which, since he was involved in all
> sorts of Fair Game against me in the cult, including the 1984 Loyalist
> op, is to me a very significant response. Rinder, of course, was a

> "Loyalist"Rathbunet al. used for a couple of illegally videotaped

> face-to-face meetings. Loyalists Redux. Opus eram solvo. Servo is sic.

It's a great and true and correct affidavit. Face it like a man and
don't whine like a chicken, Gerry Armstrong. Face up to what you did,
you spineless whimp.

The doppelganger can't cancel that affidavit because he didn't write
it. And the real one will never let you off the hook. You also owe him
millions of Dollars in damages for having smeared his image, violated
his copyright and defamed him.

--

>

> Easier here to follow quoting, paragraphing, etc.:http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/3292
>
> Open letter toMarkC.Rathbun
> May 31st, 2009
>
> DearMark:
>
> 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.http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/legal/a1/appeal/decl-rathbun-19...

> movement, or profession.http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tenetYour declaration

>     I,MarkC.Rathbun, hereby declare:

> facts about his former religion and its system of ethics and ...
>
> read more »

[Barbara loves Marty]

On Jul 14, 9:05 am, Jonathon Barbera <jonathonbarb...@ispname.net>
wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:56:30 -0400, John Dorsay
>
>
>
>
>
> <restimula...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Gerry Armstrong wrote:
> >> I didn't post this earlier, although the Schwarz noted it on a.r.s. I

> >> posted it on my site and e-mailedRathbunbut neither he nor someone

> >> from his posse has responded, which, since he was involved in all
> >> sorts of Fair Game against me in the cult, including the 1984 Loyalist
> >> op, is to me a very significant response. Rinder, of course, was a

> >> "Loyalist"Rathbunet al. used for a couple of illegally videotaped

> >> face-to-face meetings. Loyalists Redux. Opus eram solvo. Servo is sic.
>
> >There is another possible reason for the lack of response.  Have you
> >considered a slightly shorter, somewhat less antagonistic and more
> >personally engaging variation of your message such as
>
> >GreetingsMark!
>
> >I was delighted to learn you have left the cult!  I would very much
> >like to take you up on your offer to help people who have been
> >targeted by the cult over the years.  Pleas contact me at...
>
> >Thanks!
>
> >> Easier here to follow quoting, paragraphing, etc.:
> >>http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/3292
>
> >> Open letter toMarkC.Rathbun
> >> May 31st, 2009
>
> ><snip tl;dr>
>
> >John
>
> Your mini-letter is not consistent with Gerry's intent.
>
> Here is what Gerry should write:
>
> Mark,
>
> I am disappointed with your persistence in defending the evil L. Ron
> Hubbard and his soul damaging Scientology. I want you now to defend
> your religious philosophy even though I plan to dismiss your every
> response as the result of years of cult brainwashing.
>

> Love, Gerry.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

The real Marty is completely aware over Gerry's lousy character. Gerry
can't fool the real Marty with anything.

--

[Barbara loves Marty]

On Jul 14, 9:09 am, Eldon <EldonB...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jul 14, 3:56 pm, John Dorsay <restimula...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Gerry Armstrong wrote:
> > > I didn't post this earlier, although the Schwarz noted it on a.r.s. I

> > > posted it on my site and e-mailedRathbunbut neither he nor someone

> > > from his posse has responded, which, since he was involved in all
> > > sorts of Fair Game against me in the cult, including the 1984 Loyalist
> > > op, is to me a very significant response. Rinder, of course, was a

> > > "Loyalist"Rathbunet al. used for a couple of illegally videotaped

> > instead?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Gerry wants somebody to weigh only 25 pounds and do the vulture
position with him.
And I can't blame anybody refusing that offer.

http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/anti-religious-extremists/gerald-armstrong/what-his-friends-think-of-him/

[Barbara loves Marty]

On Jul 14, 9:57 am, banchukita <banchuk...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 14, 10:43 am, John Dorsay <restimula...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

Gerry is a very weird bird. He doesn't think like a human. He just
thinks that he wants some worms and that anybody who goes by the Marty
should provide him with worms.

http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/anti-religious-extremists/gerald-armstrong/what-his-friends-think-of-him/
--

--

>
>
>

> > Eldon wrote:
> > > On Jul 14, 3:56 pm, John Dorsay <restimula...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> Gerry Armstrong wrote:
> > >> > I didn't post this earlier, although the Schwarz noted it on a.r.s. I

> > >> > posted it on my site and e-mailedRathbunbut neither he nor someone

> > >> > from his posse has responded, which, since he was involved in all
> > >> > sorts of Fair Game against me in the cult, including the 1984 Loyalist
> > >> > op, is to me a very significant response. Rinder, of course, was a

> > >> > "Loyalist"Rathbunet al. used for a couple of illegally videotaped

> I'm sure he's been waiting a long time forMarkto address the issues

> Gerry brings up, which seem pretty darn valid, if laboriously wordy,
> to me.
>

> Sadly, I don't thinkMarkwill ever be able to respond like a real

> human, which underscores Gerry's open letter.  My opinion is only

> based onMark'sactions in and since he left Scn, Inc. I have no other

[Barbara loves Marty]

On Jul 14, 1:21 pm, Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:56:30 -0400, John Dorsay
>

> <restimula...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Gerry Armstrong wrote:
> >> I didn't post this earlier, although the Schwarz noted it on a.r.s. I

> >> posted it on my site and e-mailedRathbunbut neither he nor someone

> >> from his posse has responded, which, since he was involved in all
> >> sorts of Fair Game against me in the cult, including the 1984 Loyalist
> >> op, is to me a very significant response. Rinder, of course, was a

> >> "Loyalist"Rathbunet al. used for a couple of illegally videotaped

> >> face-to-face meetings. Loyalists Redux. Opus eram solvo. Servo is sic.
>
> >There is another possible reason for the lack of response.  Have you
> >considered a slightly shorter, somewhat less antagonistic and more
> >personally engaging variation of your message such as
>

> It's well documented thatRathbunwas a tough son-of-a-bitch inside,

> and I can't imagine that he's become a wimpy son-of-a-bitch since
> leaving, if he really is standing up to Miscavige.

I am sure that Gerry Armstrong knows that not just L. Ron Hubbard had
a doppelganger but Marty too and that this correct affidavit was
written by the original Marty and not the doppelganger. Gerry knows
that the original Mark Rathbun would never take his affidavit back so
he tries to get the doppelganger to do something to eliminate the
truthful affidavit that another person wrote.

>
> He already had 4 years of opportunities to communicate with me and do
> something to end his [erstwhile] cult's war on me. He already had all
> the excuses he needed to not help. He also has, without me saying
> anything, all the reasons he'd ever need to knock off the excuses.

I would not take the "opportunity" to communicate with scum Gerry
either.
>
> It still makes me chuckle that I posted and sentMarkmy letter just

> before the SP Times series.
>
> I posted it to a.r.s. now because it's on topic and timely, and in

> caseMark'sposse missed it elsewhere.
>
> The cult's war on me is approaching 28 years. I wantRathbun, and in

> fact every cultist or non-cultist Scientologist to knock off the
> namby-pamby panty-waist dilettante BS, if necessary knock Miscavige on

> his thetan, and end their stupid war. IfMarkdoes nothing, he of

> course supports the cult, because his doing nothing is Miscavige's
> command intention for him, but also nothing would have changed. I'm

> not lamentingRathbun'sno response, because nothing changed, although

> things are just a bit funnier.

See, it is exactly as I said. He wants the doppelganger to declare a
truthful affidavit as not truthful and wrongfully state that Gerry
didn't exactly all that what's in his affidavit.
>
> In addition to sincerely requesting precisely the helpMarkoffered, I

> wanted to make a record that really would dissect his declaration,
> which has been important to me for many years.

If this declaration ever should be undone, I will write a new one on
Gerry with nothing but the horrible truth about him.

>
> I have all sorts of things to engage him about just because he was so
> involved in the cult's Fair Game for so many years, perhaps most
> importantly in the black PR he and Misvcavige wrote about me in the
> cult's IRS 1023 submission.

He is fair gaming L. Ron Hubbard, Marty Rathbun, and me many years.

>
> Or my materials cult agents broke into my car to steal

I think that Gerry did not just steal material from the C of S, I
think that he also planted forgeries.

--

http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/anti-religious-extremists/gerald-armstrong/what-his-friends-think-of-him/
--

--

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >GreetingsMark!

>
> >I was delighted to learn you have left the cult!  I would very much
> >like to take you up on your offer to help people who have been
> >targeted by the cult over the years.  Pleas contact me at...
>
> >Thanks!
>
> >> Easier here to follow quoting, paragraphing, etc.:
> >>http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/3292
>
> >> Open letter toMarkC.Rathbun
> >> May 31st, 2009
>
> ><snip tl;dr>
>
> >John
>

> © Gerry Armstronghttp://www.gerryarmstrong.org- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Gerry wants somebody to weigh only 25 pounds and do the vulture

[Barbara loves Marty]

On Jul 14, 1:48 pm, Eldon <EldonB...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jul 14, 7:45 pm, phil scott <p...@philscott.net> wrote:

Some people are really good (not like you or Gerry) and certain things
are out of character.
Of course I recognize that they did not what was out of character for
them.

The affidavit about Gerry Armstrong is CORRECT. He wants the
doppelganger to remove what the original Marty wrote. Gerry's
intentions are lawless.

Barbara Schwarz

[Barbara loves Marty]

On Jul 14, 6:18 pm, "John" <j...@junk.com> wrote:
> >"banchukita" <banchuk...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

An apology? Gerry Armstrong does not deserve an apology. Marty
deserves a million apologies from one from Gerry. Ron deserves a
million of apologies from Gerry and so do I.

Barbara Schwarz

[Barbara loves Marty]

On Jul 14, 12:59 pm, "Gregory Hall" <gregh...@home.fake> wrote:
> "phil scott" <p...@philscott.net> wrote in message

That is correct, Greg. The original Marty disappeared around November
21, 1988.

But the impostor of L. Ron Hubbard died in 1986. DM took over then.

Barbara Schwarz

[phil scott]

On Jul 14, 4:57 pm, Barbara loves Marty

> other socks scribbled once on Wikipedia:http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/media-newsroom/tilman-hausherr/http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/media-newsroom/tilman-hausherr/http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/intolerance-hate/whistle-blowers...http://bernie.cncfamily.com/sc/kids.htm#Debate_with_Tilman_Hausherrhttp://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Hausherr&btnG=Google...http://www.alarmgermany.org/tilman.htmhttp://cyber-stalker-korey-jerome-kruse.blogspot.com/http://phorums.com.au/archive/index.php/t-156307.html- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Gerry or any of us could be wrong on some our estimations, but not on
the 98% larger picture. Regardless your
operating with DM or no, you have supported the criminal cult for most
of the last many years...that seemed to have
changed a bit lately..regarding DM. The nuances are not parsed by
most critics as there is no way to know all
the hidden details.... the big picture is plenty. You had been in
support of the cult. Personally I think you were kicked out
as you say, and just stuck in Hubbie defense mode.... splitting those
hairs in the blind is a waste of time... the cults operatives
kike to see its critics waste time.

thats why we settle for abouot 50,000 tons of circumstancial and
factual evidence then operate on that basis... if you dont want to
be called a cult op then Id suggest you cease supporting Hubbie, his
cult and his organization............ duhhh.

Gerry's expose of L Rong Hubbard is part of much larger puzzle
picture... the pieces he offered fit perfectly with the rest,
all on the same scene....with witnesses around the world, many
independent witnesses, and people testifying before the courts
in these matters...thousands of pages of testimony from hundreds and
hundreds people, independently collaborationg the
sort of Hubbard that is well defined in Hubbards damning
affirmations.... sorry, thats just how it is.

Hubbard was wall to wall corrupt, bright in some areas, criminally
insane in others...and just nutz in a wide range of other areas.
his organization hs ruined many lives.

Re your marty... the vicious attack on Gerry began in 1980 approx...
much of it done on your Marty's watch, even prior to your claim that
he vanished in 1988.

Personally I am quite sure your real marty is living in texas and is
who he claims to be, and has been instrumental in planning and
executing
hundreds of completely inexcusable crimes against other humans.

He needs to be in prison...odds of him repenting, speaking out and
facing prison for what he's done are near zero with his type
historically... he could
do that at any time without penalty if he had any balls by turning
states evidence.

but alas.. he does not have a pair... he was vicious as hell though.
but that has nothing to do with integrity or courage at all of course,
iits the oposite.
thanks for confirming his hand writting on the legal documents.

Phil scott

[phil scott]

On Jul 14, 4:18 pm, "John" <j...@junk.com> wrote:
> >"banchukita" <banchuk...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

yes, that would be about right...and turning states evidence so the
roots of the
crime wave can be exposed and dug up...that would also reverse some of
the damages, and
allow Gerry and hundreds of others to collect court costs, and medical
expenses incurred
as a result of the last 25 years worth of vicious attacks from the
criminal cult, wiith Marty Rathbun
leading much of that criminal insanity... and btw, still justifying
it...as he defends Hubbard and tries
to frame those he ruinned as to blame for being his victims.

Phil scott

.

Phil scott

[Agent Wiggs]

>"realpch" <rea...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:4A5CBA7F...@aol.com...

Yeah, I started trying to read it, but ended up skimming, because after
reading the words "diametrically opposed one hundred and eighty degrees"
20 or 30 times in quick succession it all became a meaningless jumble of
words. Bloody valid point though, but could do with being a tad shorter,
and a lot less repititious.
--

Noli nothi permittere te terere.

[phil scott]

On Jul 15, 7:03 pm, "Agent Wiggs" <agentwi...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
> >"realpch" <real...@aol.com> wrote in message

> Noli nothi permittere te terere.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

if you view much of what some guys like myself and perhaps Gerry
write, viewing it as a supository helps.

Phil scott

[henri]

On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 03:03:48 +0100, "Agent Wiggs"
<agent...@rocketmail.com> wrote:

>Yeah, I started trying to read it, but ended up skimming, because after
>reading the words "diametrically opposed one hundred and eighty degrees"
>20 or 30 times in quick succession it all became a meaningless jumble of
>words. Bloody valid point though, but could do with being a tad shorter,
>and a lot less repititious.

Never let it be said that Gerry Armstrong perpetrated the tragedy of
saying in one page what could be said perfectly well in a thousand.

[Agent Wiggs]

"phil scott" <ph...@philscott.net> wrote in message

news:57eff490-b151-4eec...@x25g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

Understood, but I mean, look at the size of that thing!

Only a serious masochist would entertain the notion of taking such a
suppository.

[phil scott]

On Jul 22, 3:19 pm, "Agent Wiggs"
<agent'donewithspam'wi...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
> "phil scott" <p...@philscott.net> wrote in message

ok ok you are assuming a person volunteers... they dont...

we know that... Gerry knows that, and provides the appropriate load

[Eldon]

To Marty Rathbun, right? Who totally ignored Gerry, right? And who, in
fact, still worships Hubbard's infinite wisdom. Yet, Gerry's rambling,
prolix and insulting epistle should have caused an epiphany, right?
But oops! It had no apparent effect whatsoever.

But oh, now you say that was just satire anyway, despite what Gerry
said about wanting some real world action. Duh.

Both you and Gerry might want to adjust your attitudes in the
direction of pragmatism, Phil. What you're doing lately seems a tad
delusional and paranoid. I honestly wish you both the best, but maybe
some psych meds would be helpful. No shit.

[Out_Of_The_Dark]

On Jul 14, 8:32 am, Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
> <

Hi Gerry,

I admire you alot and I know it took alot for you to get that letter
out to him. It's obvious that you wanted to get in what you could
after all these years, but it is way too much for someone like him in
his current mindset to even venture to read. The fact that it went
beyond a few questions and had an accusatory tone to parts of it is
probably why you did not receive a reply.

I wrote Mark Rathbun a couple of questions in a brief manner and
received a reply within a week of sending it. I suppose that I
received a reply because my letter was simply stated and had no
accusations nor "HE&R" in it. Just a few questions, one of which was
personal to him, the other perosnal to me, which he did answer but
hecould have chosen not to. I think it was my approach that got me a
reply. It was written in order to get answers, not to argue points of
difference or take up issues ofthe past which he ws a part of. Mind
you, I could have done that because I have some serious concerns about
his legitimizing Scientology and Hubbard and I know he was responsible
for many things he's yet not taken responsibility for. But I chose to
write with 2 questions in mind and ask that he answer them, and he
did.

Mark continues to be entrenched in scientology, considering it a
religion and a valid practice. I'm surprised that he's not gotten a
minister shingle outside the door, but the lack of it is probably due
to the fact that no one bothered to make him do the course. Anyway,
he's a "squirrel" now. A free-zoner. Its disconcerting that he seems
to be aiming for a takeover of the church and that some exs are
kissing up to him like he's a savior for speaking up. It boarders on
delusional.

That is probably the main reason why you did not get an answer. It
take alot of courage to face up to what scientology does to a person's
mind and soutl as well as what one has done to others. I don't think
that Mark is anywhere near that task.
And that is why less is probably better than more in the way of
communcation. Having perspective takes getting perspective and I don't
believe Mark has that a grip on the whole thing yet.

Mary

[Agent Wiggs]

"phil scott" <ph...@philscott.net> wrote in message

news:e8381f01-3c2f-4eba...@i18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...

It's only effective if he reads it though, and I seriously doubt he will
have read more than a paragraph or two of that. I know if it had been
directed at me I'd have read a couple of lines and then sacked it off.
Nobody is gonna spend the time to read through a repetitive, 10000 word
missive on why they are an ass-hole.

[phil scott]

On Jul 23, 7:46 am, "Agent Wiggs"

thats all correct.... however in these cases it is not the content of
the supository that
is as relevant as the length and breadh... insertion is the crucial
goal.

aside from that, one of the cults biggest and most successful dodges
is asking you to 'write it up'
then if you leave ouot any tiny detail, ask for all the details,,
until your screed is 90 pages long... then they
trash it....so some have gotten into the habit of being very very
explicit, elaborated and in great detail
covering all bases.

If you said for instance that 'water is wet' these would point out
that ICE is water and its not wet...etc.. endlessly,
thus the supositorial nature of what some write...it also serves in
court case for various reasons, if the cult wants
to use it against you they must address all of the points and issues
you have raised.... in this example here with
the supository...etc.. that would need to be addressed in great detail
before the Jury... some of us have
extensive experience in that aspect.

and then...there is individual rage... some of us express it
neatly....others of us just grab a handfully and shove it etc.

Phil Scott

[Barbara loves Marty]

On Jul 22, 7:14 pm, Eldon <EldonB...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jul 23, 1:11 am, phil scott <p...@philscott.net> wrote:
>

Gerry Armstrong is ignored by the original Marty, who wrote this
correct affidavit about him. He is also ignored by his doppelganger.
He is also ignored by many other people. Perhaps Gerry should eat
something that people don't overlook him all the time? His body fits
through a needle head.

Barbara Schwarz

Phil Scott defames L. Ron Hubbard by fabricating the worst kind of
stuff about him.
That's why I don't talk anymore to Phil Scott. He is obsessed with
satan crap and defamation.
--

--
Tilman Hausherr webs defamation on me that he and Korey Jerome Kruse
aka Simkatu and
other socks scribbled once on Wikipedia:

[Barbara loves Marty]

On Jul 22, 8:49 pm, Out_Of_The_Dark <formerlyfoo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 14, 8:32 am, Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
>
> >  <

You both know that Gerry Armstrong wants the doppelganger to declare
the affidavit of the original Marty as invalid. This intention is a
crime under the laws.

Barbara Schwarz

Phil Scott defames L. Ron Hubbard by fabricating the worst kind of
stuff about him.
That's why I don't talk anymore to Phil Scott. He is obsessed with
satan crap and defamation.
--

--
Tilman Hausherr webs defamation on me that he and Korey Jerome Kruse
aka Simkatu and
other socks scribbled once on Wikipedia:
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/media-newsroom/tilman-hausherr/
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/media-newsroom/tilman-hausherr/
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/intolerance-hate/whistle-blowers/the-clearwater-letters/tilman-hausherr/
http://bernie.cncfamily.com/sc/kids.htm#Debate_with_Tilman_Hausherr
http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Hausherr&btnG=Google+Search&domains=BERNIE.CNCFAMILY.COM&sitesearch=BERNIE.CNCFAMILY.COM
http://www.alarmgermany.org/tilman.htm
http://cyber-stalker-korey-jerome-kruse.blogspot.com/
http://phorums.com.au/archive/index.php/t-156307.html

>

[Out_Of_The_Dark]

On Jul 23, 9:08 pm, Barbara loves Marty

<barbaralovesmarty...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 22, 8:49 pm, Out_Of_The_Dark <formerlyfoo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 14, 8:32 am, Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
>
> > >  <
>
> You both know that Gerry Armstrong wants the doppelganger to declare
> the affidavit of the original Marty as invalid. This intention is a
> crime under the laws.
>
>  Barbara Schwarz
>
> Phil Scott defames L. Ron Hubbard by fabricating the worst kind of
> stuff about him.
> That's why I don't talk anymore to Phil Scott. He is obsessed with
> satan crap and defamation.
> --
>
> --
> Tilman Hausherr webs defamation on me that he and Korey Jerome Kruse
> aka Simkatu and

> other socks scribbled once on Wikipedia:http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/media-newsroom/tilman-hausherr/http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/media-newsroom/tilman-hausherr/http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/intolerance-hate/whistle-blowers...http://bernie.cncfamily.com/sc/kids.htm#Debate_with_Tilman_Hausherrhttp://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Hausherr&btnG=Google...http://www.alarmgermany.org/tilman.htmhttp://cyber-stalker-korey-jerome-kruse.blogspot.com/http://phorums.com.au/archive/index.php/t-156307.html

> > Mary- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

How is it a crime? Under what law? Stop making generalizations.

[Barbara Schwarz]

On Jul 25, 8:05 am, Out_Of_The_Dark <formerlyfoo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 23, 9:08 pm, Barbara loves Marty
>
>
>
>
>
> <barbaralovesmarty...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jul 22, 8:49 pm, Out_Of_The_Dark <formerlyfoo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 14, 8:32 am, Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
>
> > > >  <
>
> > You both know that Gerry Armstrong wants the doppelganger to declare
> > the affidavit of the original Marty as invalid. This intention is a
> > crime under the laws.
>
> >  Barbara Schwarz
>
> > Phil Scott defames L. Ron Hubbard by fabricating the worst kind of
> > stuff about him.
> > That's why I don't talk anymore to Phil Scott. He is obsessed with
> > satan crap and defamation.
> > --
>
> > --
> > Tilman Hausherr webs defamation on me that he and Korey Jerome Kruse
> > aka Simkatu and

> > other socks scribbled once on Wikipedia:http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/media-newsroom/tilman-hausherr/h...

> How is it a crime? Under what law? Stop making generalizations.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

I am shocked about your poor understanding of the laws, Mary.

There are numberous laws that are violated in this situation:

1) The original Marty Rathbun who wrote the affidavit is wrongfully
incarcerated somewhere and can't make any appearance.
2) A doppelganger is hired likely By DM to take over Marty's
function.
3) This doppelganger leaves the DM management after 20 years and Gerry
Armstrong appears on all kinds of channels and wants this doppelganger
to remove or declare void what the original Marty wrote so that
Gerry's actual above the law activities are washed away.

There are so many law violations involved that would take hours and
pages to list them all. Most of all, Gerry's attentions and activities
are violations against the original Marty's human and civil rights.

Anyway, I noticed a posting of you in which indicated that you think
that there is just just a family de Rothschild is Europe. What makes
you think that there is not an American family de Rothschild? Because
you have a tendency to think you know all best?

Barbara Schwarz
--

Phil Scott defames L. Ron Hubbard by fabricating the worst kind of
stuff about him.
That's why I don't talk anymore to Phil Scott. He is obsessed with
satan crap and defamation.
--

--
Tilman Joerg Hausherr, from Berlin, Siemens employee webs defamation

on me that he and Korey Jerome Kruse aka Simkatu and
other socks scribbled once on Wikipedia:

[Out_Of_The_Dark]

On Jul 25, 4:23 pm, Barbara Schwarz <BarbaraSchwarz2...@excite.com>
wrote:

> other socks scribbled once on Wikipedia:http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/media-newsroom/tilman-hausherr/http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/media-newsroom/tilman-hausherr/http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/intolerance-hate/whistle-blowers...http://bernie.cncfamily.com/sc/kids.htm#Debate_with_Tilman_Hausherrhttp://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Hausherr&btnG=Google...http://www.alarmgermany.org/tilman.htmhttp://cyber-stalker-korey-jerome-kruse.blogspot.com/http://phorums.com.au/archive/index.php/t-156307.html- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Just as I thought. You provide no law references. Your comments court
laws being broken are just a bunch of
generalities, Barbara . It's very SPish to communicate in generalities
like that. Hubbard said so, right?

ps: I have no idea what you are talking about on the deRothchild
thing. Supply a link and then I will answer.

[Barbara Schwarz]

> > other socks scribbled once on Wikipedia:http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/media-newsroom/tilman-hausherr/h...Hide quoted text -

>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Just as I thought. You provide no law references. Your comments court
> laws being broken are just a bunch of
> generalities, Barbara .

Why would I waste my time trying to prove something to you? Law
research takes time. But anybody with some legal feeling knows that
Gerry can't make a doppelganger to change the affidavit of the person
who really wrote it.

>It's very SPish to communicate in generalities
> like that. Hubbard said so, right?

Suddenly you say he is right? It is SPs to twist the facts as you do.

>
> ps: I have no idea what you are talking about on the deRothchild

> thing. Supply a link and then I will answer.-

Its on the EX-Scio message board.

>Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Why would I waste my time with a dishonest person as yourself?

Barbara Schwarz

[Out_Of_The_Dark]

On Jul 26, 12:05 am, Barbara Schwarz <BarbaraSchwarz2...@excite.com>

> > > other socks scribbled once on Wikipedia:http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/media-newsroom/tilman-hausherr/h...quoted text -

>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Just as I thought. You provide no law references. Your comments court
> > laws being broken are just a bunch of
> > generalities, Barbara .
>
> Why would I waste my time trying to prove something to you? Law
> research takes time. But anybody with some legal feeling knows that
> Gerry can't make a doppelganger to change the affidavit of the person
> who really wrote it.
>
> >It's very SPish to communicate in generalities
> > like that. Hubbard said so, right?
>
> Suddenly you say he is right? It is SPs to twist the facts as you do.
>
>
>
> > ps: I have no idea what you are talking about on the deRothchild
> > thing. Supply a link and then I will answer.-
>
> Its on the EX-Scio message board.
>
> >Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Why would I waste my time with a dishonest person as yourself?
>

> Barbara Schwarz- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Barbara, you are no scientologist because if you were you would not
speak in generalities. Only OSA posts crap like you just posted.

You would know that I am not A=A about scientology and do so grant
others the right to believe what they want, including you, as long as
the accusations made to me are backed by proof.

Just because I believe now that Hubbard was not the God he was made
out to be by scientology propaganda and by his own creative
imagination and marketing skills, does not mean that I hate the man or
all his works nor that I will call you nuts because you believe him to
be something otherwise. I am not like that Barbara. You need to stop
A=Aing me and distinguish what I post by the content of what I post.

The more you try to defend your version of who you believe Hubbard to
be with attacks against others who knew him or who worked with him, or
who studied his works more than you ever did, the less anyone believes
what you post. It's bad enough that you have no proof of your
relationship with Hubbard and Mark, and a few here go out of their
way to call you nuts for that, but I let it slide because I now how
passionate you are about these beliefs and how important they are to
who you are and so i don't question those. But when it comes to
attacking others with generalities, like you have here with Gerry, is
just plain wrong because you come with no proof and you attack a man
who believe just as strongly about what he's doing. The difference is
that he has had access to dox, which you do everything you can to post
attacks to distract from that fact.

If you are looking for agreement on what you believe about Hubbard,
you are doing it all wrong. Try some of Hubbard's tech in your posts,
like WTH and ARC, and you may find that you will accomplish more of
what you are aiming for. Being oppositional with everyone who does not
agree with you is NOT what Hubbard would want you to do. You cannot
'force circle into a square', Barbara,. Some of your posts lately
have started out in ARC but then you get all HE &R when the button
pushers come along, instead of ignoring them. ARC goes a long way.
Stop looking at a disagreement as being an attack. Do some review of
info which you claim to love and defend. There's nothing worse than a
hypocrite, saying one ting and doing another.
http://www.ehow.com/how_2104532_use-arc-triangle-every-day.html

Just because I don't agree with much of scientology anymore does not
mean that I should attack others for agreeing with it. If I said " I
don't agree with this ARC stuff" you would be demanding I prove it is
not what Hubbard claims it to be. Since I am not invalidating the ARC
triangle in this post does not man I agree with it but I respect the
scientologist's use of it enough to say ' hey, practice what you
preach here'. It's kind of disappointing to see when you are not
using the tech you defend because I have no ill will for you, Barbara.
I don't like seeing you get into opterms with some of these idiot
button pushers. It's a waste and gets you no where.

So try some more ARC and KRC in your posts and you will find that you
will get some it back in reply. The rest is drama.

[Agent Wiggs]

"phil scott" <ph...@philscott.net> wrote in message

news:9b19c046-4274-4191...@d36g2000prb.googlegroups.com...

Wow, I honestly hadn't considered the potential for courtroom comedy
there!

I think I understand now, too, cheers Philsie!

[Barbara loves Marty]

> > > > other socks scribbled once on Wikipedia:http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/media-newsroom/tilman-hausherr/h...text -

>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Just as I thought. You provide no law references. Your comments court
> > > laws being broken are just a bunch of
> > > generalities, Barbara .
>
> > Why would I waste my time trying to prove something to you? Law
> > research takes time. But anybody with some legal feeling knows that
> > Gerry can't make a doppelganger to change the affidavit of the person
> > who really wrote it.
>
> > >It's very SPish to communicate in generalities
> > > like that. Hubbard said so, right?
>
> > Suddenly you say he is right? It is SPs to twist the facts as you do.
>
> > > ps: I have no idea what you are talking about on the deRothchild
> > > thing. Supply a link and then I will answer.-
>
> > Its on the EX-Scio message board.
>
> > >Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Why would I waste my time with a dishonest person as yourself?
>
> > Barbara Schwarz- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Barbara, you are no scientologist because if you were you would not
> speak in generalities. Only OSA posts crap like you just posted.

Oh, what a crap, Mary. Who has time to list all names of all people on
Earth when talking about mankind.

As far as Gerry is concerned, I have not posted any generality, and
you better watch out that nobody and particlarly I never catch you in
a generality in your postings.

You beloved lying Gerry defames me since years on his website that I
am a DM operations. He knows exactly that I am not and so do you.

You are the hypocrite. And you are not even remotely religious. It is
your cover.

I know what Gerry is up to as I can count 1 and 1 together. He wants
that Mr. Texas revokes the affidavit that the original Marty wrote.
Period.

And you have no problem with it, which shows me that you have no
respect of the original Marty's human and civil rights or the law.

An affidavit is a very important instrument under the law. It needs to
be protected in order for people to be able to trust data. Gerry is
everything that is in this affidavit and worse.

He should be sued on this porn "comic" that he has on his website
using Marty's name/face.

Barbara Schwarz

Phil Scott defames L. Ron Hubbard by fabricating the worst kind of
stuff about him.
That's why I don't talk anymore to Phil Scott. He is obsessed with
satan crap and defamation.

--

Tilman Joerg Hausherr, from Berlin, Siemens employee webs defamation
on me that he and Korey Jerome Kruse aka Simkatu and
other socks scribbled once on Wikipedia: