I have not commented much on Monique Rathbun v. David Miscavige. I believe the case stands on its own merit.
But since David Miscavige has dictated and issued a public statement in response to Monique Rathbun v. David Miscavige that centers wholly upon me, I will briefly respond. The statement calls me a coward for supporting my wife’s effort to be free from Miscavige’s organized domestic terrorism operations.
I have investigated organized crime at all levels. My life has been threatened while investigating traditional La Cosa Nostra figures on the east coast, and while investigating local branches of national street gangs in South Texas. In both cases I stood my ground and lived to tell the stories. I have studied gang and organized crime activity and had extensive liaison with experts in the subject, from local law enforcement, to the Texas Attorney General’s Office, to the United States Department of Justice. I have learned a little something about the tactics and behaviors of organized crime members.
One thing I have learned is that the heavier and organized the threat manufactured by an organized crime member the deeper the cowardice of the manufacturer of the threat. Another thing I have learned is that if anyone stands his ground against organized crime, the automatic default strategy of organized crime cowards is to attack the loved ones of the person who stands his ground.
That in a nutshell, that is what Monique Rathbun vs. David Miscavige is all about. It is about bringing to halt the to-date unrestrained practice of a policy that Scientology Inc. applies relentlessly in the face of any criticism or defiance. That policy is the memorialization of the organized crime principles I have summarized above. It is the bible of David Miscavige. It states the following:
EVOLVED OPERATING PRINCIPLES:
A. COUNTER ATTACK TO OBTAIN THE REMOVAL OF THE PERSON with a product of DISMISSED ATTACKER.
B. If on test, A is not feasible, SURVEY TO FIND WHAT THE PERSON CONSIDERS VALUABLE AND USE IT FOR RESTRAINT.
C. AVOID WHERE POSSIBLE THE COMMOTION AND WASTED ENERGY OF PARALLELING AN ATTACKER’S OWN EVIL PURPOSE OF DESTROYING HIS OWN GOVT, AGENCY OR INSTITUTION AND INSTEAD DISCOVER THE ATTACKER AND OPERATE TO COST HIM HIS JOB.
D. Where A and C fail, use B.
PLAN:
(a) Wherever an attack is in progress (and even when being held off by counter-propaganda from PR or actions from Legal) at once swiftly draw up a precise program using Intelligence principles and cross filing to isolate the attacker.
(b) Identify the instigator.
(c) When identified or even suspected as the instigator, draw up a project which includes at least three channels to cost him his job.
(d) Draw up a second project at once to survey and discover what the person really is defending and threaten it effectively.
(e) Execute the projects rapidly.
(f) On achieving success inform PR so that PR can call off the PR counterattack and capitalize on any information gained if it does not expose Intelligence.
(g) Inform legal so Legal can replan and utilize the information also gained to mop up.
NOTE: Intelligence in these regards is not feeding PR and Legal as the only fruit of its endeavors. It is OPERATING INDEPENDENTLY of these two functions with ITS OWN PRODUCT: I.E. A DISMISSED ATTACKER or its secondary product: a totally restrained and muzzled attacker.
– L. Ron Hubbard 28 March 1972, COUNTER ATTACK TACTICS
This policy is the institutionalization of organized crime cowardice. It is intended to and directs the ruin, and has resulted in the ruination, of the lives of innocent, well-meaning people. It was implemented against Monique Rathbun because I stood my ground against organized crime. Now, the target of the domestic terrorism it calls for is standing her ground.
You are damn right she has my full support.
I have nothing else to say, at this point.
Moving On Up a Little Higher 