As you know I felt degraded for participating in that set up of you.

It’s not clear to me what “set up” Marty Rathbun is referring to with regard to Jesse Prince. It might be related to Jesse Prince’s indictment over possession of a marijuana plant in August 2000, in which Scientology was a “key player.”

But really, I can’t tell: No details are shared regarding this “set up” for which Marty Rathbun “felt degraded for participating” in it.

I believe that all the details of whatever “set up” Marty Rathbun participated in on behalf of the Church of Scientology, whether the target was Jesse Prince or whoever else, should be made public.

No matter how often I try to convince myself that this is private matter between Marty Rathbun and Jesse Prince, I always come to the same conclusion: All the details of that set up need to be brought to public light.

The “set up” obviously has been very damaging to Jesse Prince, and he sure deserves heart felt apologies over it, from whoever participated in it.

Society, the public in general, also deserve an apology, because the “set up” of Jesse Prince inflicted injuries upon every element of society, to borrow Raymond Banoun’s statement regarding the Church of Scientology’s Operation Snow White.

Jesse Prince was the obvious victim, but not the only one. Any and all “set up” performed on behalf of the Church of Scientology inflict injuries upon society.

Any and all “set up” performed on behalf of the Church of Scientology discourage elements of society who might have contributed to expose the dangerous nature of the Church of Scientology from doing so.

These “set ups” to silence people created a chilling effect on many who might have contributed to further expose Scientology. These “set ups” also had a chilling effects on those former Scientologists who might have otherwise asked accountability and reparation from the Church of Scientology, as well as further expose it.

By discouraging scrutiny through Hubbard’s “head on a pike,” these “set ups” have helped (and quite possibly still help) prolong the campaign of abuse of basic human rights by the Church of Scientology. Society as a whole has, and still suffer from this lack of scrutiny into the operations of the Church of Scientology.

Jesse Prince was the visible victim, but such “set up” also victimize all those unseen and unnamed who chose to shy away from further exposing and further bringing accountability to the Church of Scientology.

The right thing to do is to come out clean and provide all the details of what wrongs were done in the name of the Church of Scientology.

Not doing so benefit handsomely the Church of Scientology, it is the one which has to gain the most from not adding to its historical track record, by exposing the dirty tricks performed in its name.

This was to be expected. In a policy letter (which is Scientology scripture) of February 1966, Hubbard wrote:

… Don’t ever tamely submit to an investigation of us. Make it rough, rough on attackers all the way. You can get “reasonable about it” and lose. Sure we break no laws. Sure we have nothing to hide. BUT attackers are simply an anti-Scientology propaganda agency so far as we are concerned. They have proven they want no facts and will only lie no matter what they discover. So BANISH all ideas that any fair hearing is intended and start our attack with their first breath. Never wait. Never talk about us – only them. Use their blood, sex, crime to get headlines. Don’t use us. I speak from 15 years of experience in this. There has never yet been an attacker who was not reeking with crime. All we had to do was look for it and murder would come out.

As per its prophet Hubbard, this is the only way the Church of Scientology is allowed to react to exposure, regardless of the truth behind the allegations. Hubbard made it simply impossible for Scientology to reform, as long as all of his writings are held as incontrovertible and absolute truth.

This is why the Church of Scientology published an issue of Freedom magazine “exposing” the St. Petersburg Times, following the St. Petersburg Times‘ landmark series of 2009 exposing the Church of Scientology and its top leader, David Miscavige.

This is why the Church of Scientology published an issue of Freedom magazine “exposing” BBC’s Panorama, following its Scientology and me episode, which exposed the creepiness of the Church of Scientology.

So for those who keep a close watch on Scientology, the latest issue of Freedom magazine “exposing” Anderson Cooper is nothing to be surprised: It’s expected, since it’s mandated by Scientology scriptures.

But let’s go back even farther in time.

Australia, 1965: A thorough inquiry into Scientology resulted in a scathing report, possibly one of the best and most accurate when it comes to understand why Scientology is dangerous. This was the Anderson Report. In its prefatory notes, the Report stated:

Scientology is evil; its techniques evil; its practice a serious threat to the community, medically, morally and socially … Scientology is a grave threat to family and home life. As well as causing financial hardship, it engenders dissension, suspicion and mistrust amongst members of the family. Scientology has caused many family estrangements.

All of the above has always held true, nowadays included, and this shows the excellent quality of the analysis of Scientology by the Australian inquiry of 1965. Mike Rinder, one of the top officials who recently defected, is currently suffering from the same disconnection practices which were exposed by the Anderson Report, 45 years ago.

What was Hubbard’s response to the Anderson Report back then? Here is an excerpt:

The foundation of Victoria consists of the riff-raff of London’s slums … Robbers, murderers, prostitutes, fences, thieves. …

The insane attack on Scientology can best be understood if Victoria is seen for what it is—a very primitive community, somewhat barbaric, with a rudimentary knowledge of the physical sciences.

In fact, it is a scientific barbarism so bigoted that they know not and do not know they are ignorant …

[Ref.: Scientology: Sex, hypnotism and security checks | Sunday Mirror (UK) | 28 July 1968]

United Kingdom, July 1968, in the House of Commons: Regarding Scientology, Minister of Health Kenneth Robinson said:

The Government are satisfied, having reviewed all the available evidence, that scientology is socially harmful. It alienates members of families from one another and attributes squalid and disgraceful motives to all who oppose it. Its authoritarian principles and practices are a potential menace to the personality and well-being of those so deluded as to become its followers; above all, its methods can be a serious danger to the health of those who submit to them. There is evidence that children are now being indoctrinated.

[Ref.: House of Commons // Official report // Parliamentary debates (Hansard)]

What was the Church of Scientology response? In the fall of 1968 published an issue of its Freedom magazine, with “extravagant allegations … which were of a gravely defamatory nature”:

Put shortly, it was alleged that Mr Robinson had instigated or approved of the creation of what were called “death camps”, likened to Belsen and Auschwitz, to which persons (including mental patients) could be forcibly abducted and there killed or maimed with impunity. It was further alleged that Mr Robinson had abused his position as a minister in relation to government grants made to the National Association of Mental Health.The broadsheets containing these grave allegations were each distributed to about 100,000 persons, including people in public life (such as MPs) and editors of newspapers and journals.

[Ref.: Church of Scientology to pay libel damages to former Minister | The Times (UK) | 6 June 1973]

Mr. Kenneth Robinson successfully sued the Church of Scientology for libel.

Just goes to show: Scientology today, just the same as Scientology 45 years ago.

In that spirit, I will collect here questions which I believe should be answered by Michael “Mike” Rinder in order to help adding to the historical record.

I will update this entry as new questions arise from reading historical archives related to Scientology. Hopefully, key historical information re. the Church of Scientology will not be lost to the memory hole.

Was the Church of Scientology really unaware of Chuck Anderson’s “knowledge report”?

On June 2, 2002, the St. Petersburg Times published an article, entitled “The CEO and his church”, which main topic was about Bryan Zwan and Digital Lightwave. Excerpt:

[Chuck Anderson] wrote an 11-page, single-spaced knowledge report to Scientology leaders and Zwan, detailing all he had seen the last few months. Anderson wrote that [Denise Miscavige] Licciardi was out of control … Church officials say there is no record they ever received Anderson’s report. “We could spend hours and hours and hours going and checking this to say with absolute certainty that nobody ever got any copy of that,” said Scientology official Mike Rinder. “We can’t guarantee that there may not be a person out there that may have seen something.”

Question: Was the Church of Scientology, and/or you, really unaware of the existence of Chuck Anderson’s knowledge report re. Digital Lightwave/Denise Miscavige prior to the reporter interviewing you, prior to the media becoming aware of the alleged fraud?

Update: In mid-July of 2010, a Declaration of Mark “Marty” Rathbun, in the case of Claire Headley v. CSI, RTC, was released on the internet. Paragraph 27:

… RTC in fact serves to cover up the criminal activity of David Miscavige. For example, Miscavige once ordered me to keep his sister’s involvement in a stock market fraud out of the press. Miscavige’s sister, Denise, had partnered with a Scientologist named Brian Zwan in a company called Digital Lightwave in Clearwater Florida. A whistleblower from the company disclosed to the media and SEC that Denise Miscavige and Brian Zwan conspired to defraud the public by falsely reporting Digital’s production on Wall Street. Zwan made hundreds of millions of dollars by manipulating the stock in that wise. When I investigated and briefed Miscavige on these facts, he ordered that I keep his sister out of the way of SEC subpoenas. I complied. A year later, having successfully evaded SEC prosecution because of his own perjury and because of my work on behalf of David Miscavige, Brian Zwan …

I suppose I can make a reasonable guess that the “whistleblower” was in fact Chuck Anderson. But it doesn’t answer the question on whether the existence of Chuck Anderson’s “Knowledge report” was known by the Church of Scientology prior to the media reporting it, as Mike Rinder told the media.

Where did Lisa McPherson died?

On May 9, 1997, the St. Petersburg Times published an editorial piece, entitled “When did she die?”, in which it is reported that you told a German reporter that Lisa McPherson died in a room at the Fort Harrison, while the official version of the Church of Scientology was that she died on her way to the hospital:

The television interview with Rinder was conducted by German broadcast journalists Mona Botros and Egmont Koch.

During a segment concerning the McPherson case, Rinder said: “The entire subject has become a sordid, sensationalistic media event which is capitalizing on the tragedy of the death of a woman who died in a hotel room.”

Realizing the statement’s implications, Botros asked for a clarification: “In a hotel room?”

Elliot Abelson, the church’s general counsel, responded: “Uhm hum,” indicating the statement was correct.

Rinder heads Scientology’s Office of Special Affairs, which is responsible for public relations and legal affairs.

Question: Where did Lisa McPherson died?

Update: Found a video excerpt of Mike Rinder’s statement, on this site (I converted to FLV format):

In that spirit, I will collect here questions which I believe should be answered by Mark “Marty” Rathbun in order to help adding to the historical record.

I will update this entry as new questions arise from reading historical archives related to Scientology. Hopefully, key historical information re. the Church of Scientology will not be lost to the memory hole.

Re. Margery Wakefield

Excerpts from the St. Petersburg Times, Oct. 21, 2009, “Chased by their church”:

Morehead said he worked with Rathbun to develop a “blow drill,” a plan the church followed when someone left without permission, which he said happened maybe once a month.

… Rathbun oversaw and participated in staff recovery missions.“It all had to do with the hierarchy of how close you were to Miscavige, how much you knew about him and how damaging what you knew might be,” Rathbun said.

From the Orlando Sentinel, August 2, 1989, “Ex-Scientologist risks jail to speak against church”:

Scientology leaders feared that she was a suicide risk, Wakefield said, and feared she could bring bad publicity.

They locked her in a room for two weeks, she said, with guards outside the door at all times. Finally, they took her to the airport, told her to pick a destination and put her on a plane. She went back to her family in Madison, Wis.

In 1981 three Scientologists tracked her down. They took her to a motel and held her there for three days, she said, forcing her to sign an agreement promising not to sue the church in exchange for a $16,000 check. She used the money to repay her father, who had lent her money for “auditing” sessions. …

… However, she now says that she believed the money was for damages, not for her silence.

Question: Were you one of these “three Scientologists” who tracked down Margery Wakefield? If not, did you oversee the operation to coerce Margery Wakefield into signing an ‘agreement’ to not sue and keep silent regarding Scientology?

Re. Digital Lightwave’s stock fraud

In mid-July of 2010, a Declaration of Mark “Marty” Rathbun, in the case of Claire Headley v. CSI, RTC, was released on the internet. Paragraph 27:

… RTC in fact serves to cover up the criminal activity of David Miscavige. For example, Miscavige once ordered me to keep his sister’s involvement in a stock market fraud out of the press. Miscavige’s sister, Denise, had partnered with a Scientologist named Brian Zwan in a company called Digital Lightwave in Clearwater Florida. A whistleblower from the company disclosed to the media and SEC that Denise Miscavige and Brian Zwan conspired to defraud the public by falsely reporting Digital’s production on Wall Street. Zwan made hundreds of millions of dollars by manipulating the stock in that wise. When I investigated and briefed Miscavige on these facts, he ordered that I keep his sister out of the way of SEC subpoenas. I complied. A year later, having successfully evaded SEC prosecution because of his own perjury and because of my work on behalf of David Miscavige, Brian Zwan …

Question: You say accountability — that is, “SEC prosecution” — was successfully averted thanks to Bryan Zwan’s “perjury”, and thanks to your “work on behalf of David Miscavige.” Given that this “work” of your contributed to evade “SEC prosecution” and consequently to have justice being served for the sake of all the investors in DL’s stocks, I am really curious: What were the details of that “work”?

Re. The 1982 plot to entrap Judge Krentzman

In your July 2010 declaration submitted in the case of Claire Headley v. CSI, RTC, you state (my emphasis in bold):

… in summer of 1981 I was appointed to an operation called Special Project. Headed by David Miscavige, our job was to attain an “All Clear” for Scientology Founder L. Ron Hubbard. An All Clear was defined as a state of legal affairs wherein it was safe for L. Ron Hubbard to return to the International Management Base near Hemet, California with no danger of being dragged into ongoing litigation. For the next five and one half years I worked around the clock coordinating the defense of litigation across the United States and world. The successful termination of said litigation would amount to an All Clear. …

As per the above statement, between the Summer 1981 and Winter of 1986, you worked around the clock to shield Hubbard from being accountable in the courts.

On January 22th, 1984, a news article was published in the Clearwater Sun, detailing a plot to “entrap and compromise a Tampa federal judge”, Judge Krentzman.

Selected excerpts from the article (my emphasis in bold):

… [the 1982 plot] involved an attempt to lure U.S. District Judge Ben Krentzman aboard a boat off the Pinellas Suncoast where prostitutes and drugs were to be used to put the judge in a compromising position …

… confidential sources have told the Sun that federal investigators have been in contact in recent weeks with a former high-ranking Scientologist, a witness whose identity is a tightly guarded secret. …

The witness reportedly was ordered by Hubbard — through another sect official — to use $250,000 to execute the plan to compromise Krentzman because Scientology officials anticipated an unfavorable ruling in the trial, according to sources. …

… One of Krentzman’s more controversial cases was Tonja C. Burden vs. the Church of Scientology, a long and complicated trial which began in July 1980

Miss Burden, then 20, filed a $ million suit against the sect to compensate her for alleged mental abuse, brainwashing, imprisonment and fraud, according to public records. Miss Burden said she entered the Church of Scientology with her parents at age 13 and was for a time a “personal slave” to former pulp science fiction writer and Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard. …

… During the trial, Krentzman ordered the sect to reveal the whereabouts of the reclusive Hubbard, who had not been seen in a number of years.

Question: Do you know anything about this alleged plot to “entrap and corrupt” Judge Krentzman? If yes, who was involved in it? Who planned it? Who relayed orders? Who participated in it? All the details would be appreciated in order to ensure an accurate historical record of Scientology.

More from Scientology library: Judge Ben Krentzman.

Re. The missing Lisa McPherson logs

On June 22, 2009, the St. Petersburg Times published an article entitled, “Death in slow motion”, regarding Lisa McPherson’s death. The article contains this passage:

In early 1997 as investigators closed in, Rathbun met with church staff at Scientology offices in Hollywood, Calif. They combed the daily logs that McPherson’s caretakers kept during her 17 days at the Fort Harrison.

Three entries particularly troubled Rathbun.

One contained a bizarre sexual reference McPherson had made. Another revealed that no one thought to remove the mirror from the room of a psychotic woman bent on harming herself. The third was one caretaker’s opinion that the situation was out of control and that McPherson needed to see a doctor.

Rathbun concluded the notes had to go.

“I said, ‘Lose ’em’ and walked out of the room,” he recalled, adding that the decision to destroy the records was his own.

Question: Did the logs contain any information indicating that Lisa McPherson was dead hours prior to be transported to New Port Richey Hospital?

Re. “drugs on them that had been planted”

On May 30, 2010, Steven Hassan posted a video entitled, “Megaraid 5-30-10 Hotel meeting”. The video features Larry Brennan, Nancy Many and Steven Hassan talking freely about Scientology, the Moonies, and mechanisms used by cults in general.

At the 17-minute, 20-second mark, Nancy Many says (while reminiscing of her days in Scientology):

… there was a conjunction, in which one of the groups I was spying on, was run by a European group, and Marty did set up some [?] various stings to be done across the border, get people stopped at the borders with drugs on them that had been planted, other nasty things, but he would never listen to my information …

Question: Did you really entrap, or participate in plot(s) to entrap people, by planting drugs on them, so that they would be busted on drug possession charges?

If yes, I am curious about:

• The names of people who were entrapped;
• Time of events;
• Location(s);
• All people involved in the plot(s) to entrap (Who ordered whom? Who designed? Who executed? Etc.)

What happened to Ed Brewer?

First from an anonymous source:

Ed Brewer is involved in a car accident. Several other Sea Organization or Scientology staff members are in the car with him. He is left in the car, bleeding, while the others go back to the Scientology building to talk to the people in the intelligence division, because they don’t know what to do. They “didn’t want to create a public relations flap for Scientology”. They fail to call for medical help. Brewer literally bled to death pinned in his car.

[Ref.: http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/ed-brewer-death.htm]

Second, from Jesse Prince (my emphasis):

What I heard about Ed Brewer was he was out ethics, and he was with some car accidents and bled to death. It was a problem that he bled death. They didn’t believe he bled to death or something. I know it came up as a big problem when Ed Brewer died. It’s really bad that he died, the guy bled to death, he was in a car, people walked away from him. I remember hearing this story, the Ed Brewer story. I remember hearing Marty talk about it.

[Ref.: Factnet: Jesse Prince interviews – Tape 4]

Question: What really happened to Ed Brewer?

Janette Lang, who worked for the church for seven years, says the most she was paid in a year was $3,114 in 2001.

She was second in charge of the Church of Scientology in Canberra at the time.

Ms Lang says she had to go on welfare to get by. She says this practice was widespread in the church.

The Church of Scientology official statement regarding the above:

the Church denies any widespread use of welfare by its staff members. Her allegations are unfounded and false.

However, a news article dated May 31st, 1974, published in The Albertan, provide insights on the practice of encouraging staff members to be on welfare while working for the church. This is described in a Scientology policy letter entitled “MOONLIGHTING,” as per news article:

In a further document, entitled HCO Policy Letter of October 6, 1970, Issue II, Personnel Series No. 10, MOONLIGHTING, the organization says “Moonlighting on the government would be quite permissable. With governments anxious to hand out welfare, in some depressed areas it would be quite all right to go on the dole or relief and work as a church volunteer in the org. (anization). Org Staffs under such duress can even live as monasteries for food shelter and pocket money. . .”

Now, all (non-fiction) writing by founder L. Ron Hubbard are considered “scriptures” by the Church of Scientology, which means that taking advantage of welfare while working for the church is encouraged by Church of Scientology’s scriptures, as seen above.

Also, another statement from the Church of Scientology which deserves attention:

Our Church staff are volunteers and understand this and are not helping for the purpose of financial gain

The above statement runs contrary to the Church of Scientology’s practice of remunerating its staff member proportionally to the total income of an organization (“org”), here again, as mandated by church scriptures. All this is neatly detailed, along with policy letter references, in an excellent post by Mark Plummer, former Sea Org member and a walking encyclopedia on Scientology inner working:

It is a basic policy of Scientology, based upon Hubbard’s writings to “reward up statistics and punish [also called penalize] down statistics”. When a Scientology organization’s stats are down [and not just the "GI" (gross income)], the org is punished in the form of a decreased financial allocation.  It’s a matter of simple mathematics.

Financial reward/punishment is certainly a strong incentive for staff members to perform (increase income of the org) in their duty on behalf of the Church of Scientology. This is even further highlighted by the use of commissions to reward staff members:

From the revenue generated by the sale of books, tapes, E-Meters and other such items handled through the HCO account, the Org pays a commission to the seller. In this instance, SCIENTOLOGY pays the commission whether the seller is a staff member or not, this commission is paid even if the staff member makes a sale during post hours. The person who sells the book or other item receives a 15% commission for the sale. These commissions are paid on weekly basis to the seller. This system of commissions encourages the staff member, with a low number of units allocated to his post, to sell more and more such items, due to the fact that these commissions are paid on a regular basis. …

Another method of motivation used by SCIENTOLOGY is to offer a commission on auditing and training. This also encourages members to sell more of these services which generates a greater revenue for SCIENTOLOGY and staff members. …

These commissions are also paid to regular staff members who recruit new members during their off post hours. …

This pyramid system encourages those in SCIENTOLOGY to constantly sell SCIENTOLOGY. …

[Source: INFORMATION TO OBTAIN A SEARCH WARRANT.]

Here again, the Church of Scientology’s statements is diametrically opposed to its practices.

More info re. ABC’s piece at whyweprotest.net.

Related, from the library: Salary.

… she suggested church members would drift off to independent Scientologists who, she claimed, can provide the same service for a fraction of the price.

“The church is losing tons of people tired of paying $3,500 for 12 and a half hours of auditing,” she said.

Her husband agreed. Contrary to Hubbard’s teachings, members are now encouraged to take out loans to cover the cost of auditing, Chuck Dean said. …

… “They’re moneymongers,” he said of church leadership. “They want to amass as much money as possible for themselves.”

These excerpts come from an article dated June 2nd, 1984.

Isn’t it amazing how the above claims fits exactly some of the accusations leveled recently at the Church of Scientology by a new wave of ex-members?

Isn’t even more amazing that many of these recent ex-members were themselves high-ranking members back in 1984, about 25 years ago, at the time the accusation of “money mongering” were made?

“Money mongering” does seem to be a natural outcome of L. Ron Hubbard (the founder) doctrines and policies — which are Scientology ‘scriptures.’

I wonder what kind of stories we will hear 25 years from now.

Full article: Youngsters expelled from school in Church of Scientology storm | Seattle Post-Intelligencer | 2 June 1984.

I just want to add a little background materials to this.

Recorded ‘confidential’ auditing sessions is something that made the news back in 1993, in an article titled, “Scientologists concealing cameras while counseling,” in the Tampa Tribune, on September 18th, 1993:

Church of Scientology officials are installing concealed cameras and microphones in at least 69 counseling rooms where church members reveal their innermost thoughts, a church spokesman confirms.

Also, the allegations of David Miscavige using parishioners’ private life to entertain people around him was also in the news in the early 90s, as reported in an article titled, “The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power,” in Time magazine, May 1991:

Screen star Travolta, 37, has long served as an unofficial Scientology spokesman, even though he told a magazine in 1983 that he was opposed to the church’s management. High-level defectors claim that Travolta has long feared that if he defected, details of his sexual life would be made public. . . . The church’s former head of security, Richard Aznaran, recalls Scientology ringleader Miscavige repeatedly joking to staffers about Travolta’s allegedly promiscuous homosexual behavior.

In, 2005, Billy Bush of Access Hollywood, questioned Tom Cruise regarding the controversy surrounding the Church of Scientology. Tom Cruise’s answer was:

Those are lies… you know… and… and really when you get down to it… It’s like there is people… you know… there is bigots… There is people that just want to hate, period, Billy.

Well, really when you get down to it, Tom Cruise — or any Church of Scientology member for that matter — would have been well-advised to not dismiss those former Scientologists who spoke out.

Related, from Scientology library: “Confidential preclear (PC) folder”, “Blackmail”.

Here is an excerpt from the article:

“Materials on Scientology by Ron Hubbard have been found extremist and will be banned from distribution in Russia,” the Russian prosecutor general’s office said in a statement.

About the first part of the sentence:

Materials on Scientology by Ron Hubbard have been found extremist

Fine.

Hubbard’s “suppressive person” doctrine is a cancer on individuals, family, communities and even society as a whole. In case you don’t know yet, in Scientology, a “suppressive person” is anybody antagonistic to Scientology teachings, or anybody impeding Scientology’s (silly) “ideal scene” of a whole planet run according to Scientology principles.

You don’t like Scientology’s policy of “disconnection” and say so? You’re a “suppressive person.” You don’t like Scientology’s policy of lying and deceiving in order to further Scientology goals (which include getting as much money as possible from people)? You’re a “suppressive person.” You found out the Scientologists are misrepresenting themselves and expose it? You’re a “suppressive.” Etc.

Now, the second part of the sentence:

and will be banned from distribution in Russia

Fail.

The Russian prosecutor general’s office should have stuck to express its opinion regarding Hubbard’s writings, and explain succinctly how they came about to this opinion.

However to go so far as banning is so wrong.

Actually, so utterly wrong that the Scientologists are going to run with this one, I can see the Church of Scientology spotlighting their strawman arguments that critics want Hubbard books burned, while its rather the opposite.

I want all of Hubbard’s writings to be freely available, confidential policies and upper levels included, without having to go through expensive “required” levels, so all can make an informed decision before jumping in.

It’s about full disclosure, censoring more on top of Scientology teachings and its built-in censorship is so fail.

Censoring materials from an organization built on doctrines of censorship is the wrong way to go.

… part insane asylum, part forced labor camp … paint a picture of a … man in absolute control of the people around him; a man who is given to violent outbursts and eccentric behavior … real egocentric … severe temper tantrums … always swearing …very moody, and had a temper like a volcano. He would yell at anybody … screaming … “You are trying to kill me!” … had everyone convinced his … two dogs were “Scientology clears” who could tell if someone was dishonest or disloyal to him … In rebuttal … I have always found [him] warm and considerate … Punishment ranges from shouting repeated insults at the offender to making them run laps around … ordered a young woman to clean out a septic tank pool for three days straight … Dozens of workers, mostly young Scientologists, were brought in last spring to remodel the mansion … concerned solely with making money … If the sales figures dropped below a certain level, [he] became furious … went in to a fit, saying the church wasn’t making enough money and it was all my fault … was stripped of her duties as marketing secretary and assigned to “Rehabilitation Project Force,” … was “forced to do slave labor” planting trees and weeding the golf course in temperature reaching 120 degrees … were locked up for days at a time inside their rooms … were locked inside a shed which had no electricity, water or toilets … Before I got very far, the guards sent a truck for me. I was ordered to get in …

Sounds familiar?

It sure look as a description of current life at Gilman Hot Springs, as reported by the numerous recent whistle-blowers who came forward to speak up about their life in Scientology at Gilman Hot Springs. With passages such as…

• “guards sent a truck for me”, which sounds very much like Marc Headley’s dramatic escape from Scientology compound;
• “man in absolute control of the people around him”, “always swearing” and “very moody”, which sounds like how David Miscavige has been described by many recent whistle-blowers;
• “dogs … who could tell if someone was dishonest or disloyal to him”, sounds like Amy Scobee’s account of David Miscavige using his beagle to spot “out-ethics” people; [ref]
• “always found … warm and considerate”, which sounds like Tommy Davis describing David Miscavige;
• “clean out a septic tank pool for three days straight”, which sounds like Mike Rinder or Amy Scobee describing their treatment under David Miscavige. [ref]

Sure sounds like life in Scientology under the tyrannical ruling of David Miscavige, as described by the current flock of whistle-blowers, doesn’t?

The fact is, the above excerpts are from an article published in the Riverside Press-Enterprise 30 years ago: “Defector describes Scientology // Scientology at Gilman”, dated April 14, 1980.

Since this article from historical archives is about L. Ron Hubbard, are the facts reported in it less reprehensible than if the article was describing David Miscavige?

Suppose one take all occurrences of Hubbard in the above article, and replace with Miscavige, does this suddenly make the reported facts more reprehensible?

Suppose one take all the occurrences of Miscavige in the recent media exposing his abuses of people, and replace each occurrence with Hubbard, does this suddenly make the reported facts less reprehensible?

Of course, these questions I direct to those who, despite having left the “Scientology, Inc.”, still defend L. Ron Hubbard and his “teachings” as benevolent.

Apparently, Mike Rinder won’t talk to Gerry Armstrong, hence Gerry Armstrong’s open letter to Mike Rinder.

According to a post by Mike Rinder on April 4th, entitled “WHERE IS HEBER?”, and published on Marty Rathbun’s blog, Mike Rinder decided to quit the Church of Scientology because of him “having to lie to the BBC about Miscavige beating people.” (In relation to the May 14th, 2007, BBC Panorama’s special report on Scientology.)

As per Mike Rinder, him “having to lie to the BBC about Miscavige beating people” was the “the straw that broke the camel’s back”.

Gerry Armstrong has been exposing the lies of the Church of Scientology and that of its founder, L. Ron Hubbard, for nearly three decades now. He was key in exposing L. Ron Hubbard’s lies to the world. Scientology, as designed by Hubbard, mandates lying, in order to further the goal of his founder (to convert everybody to Scientology, and eventually dispose quietly and without sorrow those who just won’t accept Hubbard’s worldview.)

As of now, it looks as if Marty Rathbun and Mike Rinder are only interested in exposing David Miscavige’s lies. L. Ron Hubbard’s lies, or the Scientology doctrines of using lies to further Scientology seem to be of little interest to them. But then, they still see themselves as faithful Scientologists.

In asserting that lies are only an intrinsic trait of Church of Scientology leader David Miscavige, and not an intrinsic trait of Scientology teachings, Marty Rathbun and Mike Rinder are, unfortunately, first and foremost, lying to themselves.

In my opinion, the Church of Scientology pre-Miscavige era was even more lying to its members and to the outside world, as it was more easy to do so and get away with it back then, because information about the Church of Scientology was not as easy to find as it is nowadays. It is easier to get away with lies when the information is more compartmentalized, which was the case in the pre-internet era.

I have little doubt that Marty Rathbun and Mike Rinder wish to “reform” the current Church of Scientology. But I really question the result of such “reform” if the only lesson they got from their experience in the church is that Scientology is benevolent, and only David Miscavige is to be blamed.

The problem is that David Miscavige hasn’t always be at the helm of Scientology, and there was always of culture of lies in the Church of Scientology.

Now, why would it make sense for Mike Rinder to talk to Gerry Armstrong, among all exes out there?

More than 25 years ago, Gerry Armstrong and Mike Rinder were talking to each other.

While Gerry Armstrong was out, and Mike Rinder was in the Church of Scientology, they were talking to each other about reforming the Church of Scientology.

More than 25 years ago, Gerry Armstrong said to Mike Rinder, “I think both of us want the organization to be transformed into something decent . . . I put my whole life into [Scientology] . . . I have a higher commitment to truth than I do to some label.” [Ref. "Court hears final Scientology tape", The Oregonian, April 17, 1985]

Today, Mike Rinder is out, and as per his own words, unwilling to lie anymore (for David Miscavige at least), and really wishes to see the Church of Scientology reformed, just like Gerry Armstrong expressly wished over 25 years ago.

Back then, Mike Rinder was lying to Gerry Armstrong when he convinced Gerry Armstrong of his good faith in trying to reform the Church of Scientology. He was talking to Gerry.

Now, Mike Rinder is likely not lying when he expresses the wish to reform the Church of Scientology. However, he won’t talk to Gerry Armstrong.

Go figure.

It’s unfortunate, as I am pretty sure Mike Rinder (and Marty Rathbun) could provide useful information re. the Church of Scientology’s nearly 30-year “war” against Gerry. Incidentally, Gerry and Caroline also did suffer from Scientology’s doctrine of “disconnection”, just like Mike Rinder does today.

Something for Mike Rinder to ponder: Nearly 30 years ago, Gerry Armstrong found himself not willing to go along the lies. You decided the same three years ago. What else did Gerry Armstrong understand way before you did?

Stacy Brooks did talk to Gerry after she left the Church of Scientology. As an example of the useful information she provided, here is an excerpt from Stacy Brooks’ “A classic example of the fair game policy at work” (1998), my emphasis:

[David Miscavige] ordered an intelligence sting operation against Gerry [Armstrong]. Gene Ingram got an LAPD officer, Phillip Rodriguez, to sign off on a bogus authorization to wiretap or videotape Gerry secretly. It was not actually authorized by the LAPD and Rodriguez later got in trouble for it. Then Mike Rinder and Dave Kluge (one of OSA’s intelligence operatives at the time) both set up meetings with Gerry Armstrong, pretending to be disaffected Scientologists who were considering going to the authorities with incriminating information about the church. Mike’s role was important because he was a high-level management staff member whom Gerry knew very well. He met with Gerry and basically said he was extremely dissatisfied with the way the church was being run and wondered if Gerry could hook him up with anyone in the IRS or FBI. Gerry had, in fact, been contacted by investigators from the IRS Criminal Investigation Division, because at that time the IRS was seriously investigating LRH and Scientology for criminal fraud. So Gerry gave Mike the names of the agents he had spoken to.

But DM wanted more than this. DM wanted evidence that Gerry was a paid informant of the IRS, because this would show the judge that Gerry’s testimony was tainted. The only problem was, Gerry wasn’t a paid informant. So no matter how Rinder and Kluge asked their questions, they couldn’t get Gerry on videotape saying he was being paid to attack the church. Rinder and Kluge asked him all kinds of leading questions, trying in every way possible to get Gerry to say what they had been ordered to get him to say. But to no avail.

So DM called me in and ordered me to edit the transcripts of the videotapes to make it look like Gerry was admitting to being a paid informant, even though he never had admitted any such thing. I was to edit out Rinder’s and Kluge’s leading questions so it looked like Gerry was volunteering information, when in fact all he was really doing was answering a hypothetical question that had been posed to him.

I went through the transcripts and pulled the “best” parts I could find, doing my best to comply with DM’s orders to make Gerry look like a paid informant. Privately I thought it was obvious, even after the editing, that Gerry was being set up, but I dutifully turned in my doctored transcript to DM, who then turned it over to Ted Horner, a Gold staff member in charge of film editing, to use my edited transcript to do the final edit on the videotapes.

Then I went back to editing FREEDOM Magazine and my other normal duties and thought no more about it.

One night about a month later I was called over to the OSA Int conference room along with several other key OSA US staff. DM and Norman were both there, looking extremely morose. DM told us that they had taken the videotape into court and demanded to show it to the judge, saying it would prove conclusively that Gerry Armstrong was a paid liar. The judge agreed to see the videotape in camera (meaning in his chambers, not in open court). But the judge did not have the reaction DM and the others had expected. After seeing the videotape, the judge was enraged and told the Scientologists, “I have heard about these dirty tactics that you use against your perceived enemies, but now that I have seen it for myself I think you are much, much worse than I had ever imagined!” And kicked them out of his chambers.