Category Archives: justice

Reality Check

Folks who have been following the journey I have been sharing on this blog and in my books over the past five years might want to know something about a subject that I have not mentioned in quite some time.  I probably will not mention it again.  But, I interrupt the flow of the discourse here for this brief message in the interest of giving a balance to the picture of the direction that I have been sharing.  When events of 2015 are in full roar I don’t want people to get the idea that all I have written over the past two years was some sort of diversionary ruse.

I have practiced what I have been sharing.  If one seeks equanimity and expansion of awareness, I continue to recommend it.  But, you might want to know that I have also drawn from other traditions on longer term work.  Those disciplines understand that in order to increase the ability to confront sufficient to truly face the unknown, one must exercise proficiency in overcoming major sources of oppression.  It has to do with ascendency of power over force and the art and science of critical point analysis application.

Work along that line must necessarily not be broadcast for the foreseeable future.  Thus, none of what I refer to here has been disclosed anywhere, not even to my closest friends.  It has nothing to do with any current legal proceedings and is unrelated (as am I) to the scientology infotainment lampooning industry (whose main useful purpose is attention distraction).  If you hear rumors or ‘inside skinny’ about what this parallel work entails, you are hearing lies or the imagination of someone still caught in the scientology hallucinatory cause syndrome.

In the interim, I inform you that nothing about any of this is inconsistent with what I have written over the past two years.  Just as certainly, many spectators will be sure that is not the case when they witness that 2015 and 2016 make 2009 and 2010 look like child’s play.

Scientology’s Code of Honor

I haven’t done any editorializing or analysis of the series of recent posts on the aims of Scientology (Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, OSA Statistics).  I have simply posted the words of L. Ron Hubbard directing his Scientology troops at various times towards what he considered vital objectives.  More books could be written on the hundreds of lives that were ruined (both targets and executors of the objectives) by execution of those directives – and the many more like them that were issued over the years.   Most of the commentary on those posts has gravitated toward two poles.  At one pole is denial, strained justification.  At the other pole is condemnation, wholesale and definitive.  What few have assayed to do is explain the behavior of those who adopted and carried out these aims.  Those people who really believed the future of humanity was won or lost on whether those directives were thoroughly complied to. I have some views to share on that score which are derived from subjective experience and objective observation.

If you want to change out rotting upholstery you need to get down to the brass tacks. One piece of fundamental ‘scripture’ that most Scientologists – corporate, independent and otherwise – tend to agree upon wholeheartedly is L. Ron Hubbard’s ‘Code of Honor.’   It is so popular amongst them that it could be said to in some ways serve to define ‘Scientologist.’   There is no doubt that the Code contains some sensible and lofty principles that could serve someone well at certain life crossroads.  Just as certainly, there are aspects of the code that could serve to suggest destructive, even sociopathic, behavior.

“2. Never withdraw allegiance once granted.”

I watched a documentary on Jonestown wherein the son of Jim Jones reflected on the single most powerful factor that led 900 people to follow his father’s directions to commit suicide – including some murdering their own children and authorities investigating the group.  After decades of therapy and soul searching he concluded that the common denominator of this mass insanity was an overriding concern on the part of each individual, ‘what would the rest of the group think of me if I withdrew allegiance now?’  That rang consistent with the Scientology experience to me.  It was the very moral question I grappled with for four years before deciding to expose the Jim Jones like behavior of David Miscavige at the international headquarters of Scientology.

I have investigated and studied organized crimes in several forms.  One common means to organize crime – from street gangs to white collar – is to establish the agreement early on to ‘never withdraw allegiance once granted.’  Usually, initially the vow is taken because the group somehow serves to protect the individual taking the vow or serves to give the individual a sense of belonging and empowerment. Over time, the crimes of the group and any member of the group become the crimes of each individual member to justify, glorify, and protect from outside exposure and accountability.  Ironically, but not surprisingly, throughout the history of Scientology that very cycle has repeatedly played itself out as it continues to today.

If folks feel the ‘Code of Honor’ is something too valuable to eschew wholesale, I think it would behoove them to replace item 2 with something along these lines:

“Only maintain allegiance as long as the recipient of it demonstrably remains true to those purposes and principles to which allegiance was granted in the first place.”

“12. Never fear to hurt another in a just cause.”

By Scientology’s own ‘technology’ nobody is ever hurt by another without just cause.  A being automatically manufactures just cause when he harms, or fixes to harm, another being.  If one credits Scientology ‘technology’ as infallible, as Scientology demands it be credited, then item 12 of the code encourages Scientologists to park their consciences at the thresholds of the homes they terrorize in the name of Scientology.

On death row of any prison you will find just about every cold-hearted murderer absolutely certain that the acts for which he was convicted and sentenced fit squarely within the advice of item 12 of the Code of Honor.

To fear to hurt another is not weakness, it is not unethical, it is not immoral. When that fear is real and consulted – most particularly when one feels he is carrying out a just cause – it has another name.  It is called conscience.   And so I see item 12 of L. Ron Hubbard’s Code of Honor as tantamount to an invitation to abandon or forfeit one’s conscience.

Again, to those wishing to continue following this code, they might be well served by replacing item 12 with something like this:

“Always give due consideration for the rights and well-being of another before doing something that might hurt that person, most particularly when you or another have pre-justified the act as being in pursuit of a just cause.”

Scientology Infiltrates Carnegie Mellon University

The following is a report from Invest Aide OSA INT (Office of Special Affairs International, the propaganda and dirty tricks arm of David Miscavige’s church of Scientology International) on dealing with Scientology critic David S. Touretzky – professor at Carnegie Mellon University.  Note that it is titled “DR”.  That stands for Daily Report.  There are dozens of these daily reports in OSA INT files on Touretzky.  There are hundreds of such reports on more effective critics.  There are thousands of these types of reports on those critics whom David Miscavige considers a threat to himself personally and who have withstood Scientology’s wrath over time.   Ask yourself: should United States taxpayers be subsidizing an organization that spends its considerable dollars on such hijinks?   And, what is with Scientology’s apparent predilection for inserting sex toys into their operations?

April 27, 2006

D/CO EXT OSA INT

CC: CO OSA INT

INVEST CHIEF OSA INT

DR – David Touretzky – 27 April

Dear Sir,

This is an update on Touretzky.

Feedback on Touretzky: Greenway claimed that the producer of the MSNBC show Touretzky was on a last week was impressed with Touretzky’s performance and wants to use him for any future shows on Scientology. Greenway said that she wants Touretzky to become the “voice of the critics” and not Lerma or Tory (she hates both of them). Greenway that the Church never leaves Touretzky alone.  She said that she never asked him about the dildo which some CMU students put up on a website. She thinks the Church made up the dildo invoice and sent it to Schwarz.

Greenway was told that it really looks like some disgruntled CMU student who has a bone to pick with Touretzky put up the website (a site by a “student” critical of DST).  Greenway insisted that it is done by the Church (Greenway is upset about the CMU students’ website and the dildo’s exposure). Greenway talked about how the Church has gotten numerous letters sent to CMU about Touretzky including one from Hillary Clinton asking that he be fired, but CMU still stands behind him because they don’t care what he does on his free time. (This is a falsehood as he does not perform all of his anti-Scientology activities during his free time and we have documented evidence showing that he is doing it from CMU).

Greenway said that every time Touretzky does something against the Church he sends the legal department at CMU a packet of information concerning his activities so that they are briefed when the Church contacts them about this.

Following are updates on the handling steps previously laid out:

1.           Get the NY PI to relay the article on Cohon and get the feedback from his media contacts about getting it printed.

The NY PI spoke with his contacts at UPI and AP. They have received the proposed article and said that they are going to research and then submit it to their editors. The PI reminded both of his contacts that Touretzky is [ deletion of salacious – quite apparently false – accusation], and then we are going to have another Columbine because of him. The contacts agreed and said they will get back to the PI about the story.

2.           The alumni to complete going through the records and find alumni they can trust to brief and activate on DST.

Another Scientologist alumnus was found. His name is Christopher Rath. He will be contacted and activated.

3.           Debug done on getting a resource on the chat room.

This prediction line has been debugged. We now have a person that is on IRC and he has set up a totally secure connection and the line is operational to log the chat sessions.  DST is still active on this chat daily.

4.           FOIA request project written and started with at least 2 FOIA requests filed.

Seven FOIA requests were filed with the NSF on people that are connected to Touretzky as they either worked with Touretzky in the past or are currently. The people are: Walter Schneider, Tai Sing Lee (CMU Computer Science Dept.), James McClelland (Psychology Dept & CNBC Director), Julie Fiez (Pitt Psych Dept), William Skaggs (Pitt Neuro Science Dept), Daniel Simons and G. Bard Emerntrout.

5.           Get out the new requests to NSF on the “desk audit” CMU did at NSF’s request on Touretzky’s grants and get out the new request for data on Scientology. (This is a follow up on a cycle that had been dropped earlier).

The new request was drafted and was sent to [deletion – attorney information] for ok. [deletion – attorney information] Two went out from the Church and the third one will go from a private individual.

6.        Get Freedom the rest of the briefing materials on Touretzky that is needed for them to put an article together about DST/CMU.

The materials were put provided to Tom Whittle who is researching and drafting an article on Touretzky and CMU.

7.        Get current students and parents of current CMU students located for the purpose of getting these parents briefed on Touretzky and willing to take actions.

No current CMU students or parents of CMU students have been found so far. The PI in Pittsburgh is checking with various contacts and comm lines he has to locate them. The PI has closed and started a resource who is a student at CMU who is doing a special training on computer systems at CMU. The resource is 43 years old and he will be used to befriend Touretzky, and find names of current CMU students who can then be surveyed to get their parents contacted and stirred up.

8.            Offensive postings continued.

BS continued to push her message about Jared Cohon condoning Touretzky.

9.            John Fisher (alumnus) meeting at CMU.

On Saturday alumnus John Fisher’s, was further briefed and prepped for his meeting this week with two CMU faculty members (Fisher was called to CMU to assist in so matters related to the university). Fisher was given a briefing pack about Touretzky and he would take up Touretzky’s actions with these faculty members and get them to agree to take action. John Fisher will be back in LA on Thursday morning and we will then get his debrief and work out the next action.

This is ok.

Ml,

Frits

Scientology Stalker

The individual in the photograph below was hired by Scientology Inc. to stalk my wife not too long ago.  I would appreciate it if folks would distribute this around interested forums asking that anyone who recognizes him to please provide me with the name and contact information for this individual, at rathbunmark57@gmail.com.  Thank you.

Scientology Stalker.  Identification requested.

Scientology Stalker. Identification requested.

The individual drives an old white Ford pickup truck (with red detail trim stripes) displaying the following decals:

IMG_1035

IMG_1031

IMG_1033

Rundown on Scientology Intelligence

The following is a firm corporate policy of all Scientology entities. It is applied invariably to those who criticize Scientology, its organization, or even its executives and staff who engage in unconscionable and even criminal behavior. It has been applied in this wise since the day it was issued in the year 1968 all the way to the present.  Note the requirement for regular, detailed reports.  A plethora of Scientology policy mandates that those reports are filed – and as noted in this one, cross-indexed – and retained for posterity (including for potential use in blackmail, see Scientology Literacy and Blackmail.)  There is no document destruction policy in Scientology, except unwritten (but firmly enforced) policy to destroy potential evidence when courts or law enforcement agencies indicate they might be interested in such evidence.

OSA Network Order                                                    16 October 1988

Execs

Invest Staff

Confidential

RUNDOWN ON INTELLIGENCE

(Originally written by LRH on 20 September 1968.)

I’m writing to you in the hope that by combined effort, we can bring some understanding into Intelligence.

First I’ll give you a quick rundown on how Intelligence works.

We have two main cycles as far as investigations go. The first is:

1. Some SP near an outer org starts attacking Scientology.

2. The Investigations Officer in that area cables or telexes his senior at International level and starts investigating the person behind the attack.

3. The Int level senior acks the report and expects to see regular reports on the SP being investigated.

4. A file is opened in both the outer org and Int level and the case goes on the CIC board as a project.

5. The investigation is carried on until the crimes are found and it is handed over to Prosecutions to get the SP put in a government accommodation.

Or:

5. The SP* gets scared and shuts up and the Int level senior directs the case to be dropped.

The second type of cycle is as follows:

1. The Int level senior, on going through the files, sees a possible source of future attack and directs an investigation to start on that person or group.

2. A file is opened and it goes on the CIC board.

3. Investigations Officer in that area starts investigating and we get the goods.

4. The whole thing is turned over to PR for action and exposure, or to Legal for prosecution.

Among these we have smaller cycles of action such as, “Get me a copy of such and such a book,” or “Was this SP ever trained in your org?”

At the same time all this is going on, Intelligence should be going through newspapers, magazines, etc., and taking clippings on medical, psychiatry, mental health, government, world finance and banking, oddball self-help groups and filing and crossfiling these to locate SPs. And cross-filing declared SPs in the area by connections and frequency of names, to see who the ringleaders are in that area so that they can be prosecuted for crimes. But an investigation is NEVER NEVER begun until

1) an SP attacks Scientology (threatens to sue, goes to his representative about us, etc.) or

2) the Int level senior orders an investigation to be started.

While Investigations Officers may investigate well, the main trouble is that sometimes they investigate the wrong things, such as:

a. Investigating someone who is not attacking us and who no one has ever heard of before, with no orders to do so.

b. Investigating public who have not attacked and who are more a job for Public Ethics, Registrar and ARC Break Auditor.

c. Investigating some nut who, for example, wanted to buy a meter to listen to Martians so he could pick up radio signals. This one would be a Public Ethics matter in the first place, as I can’t see a reason in the world why we should throw every nut we meet into jail.

d. Taking a request for information from an Int level senior, such as a request for a copy of a book, as an order to do an investigation.

e. Doing investigations on kooks and non-entities who are not attacking us.

Now, we are going in on psychiatrists and that IS a correct investigation so we expect to see reports on that. Reports would also be expected from an Investigations Officer when officially assigned to work on an investigation.

Although the above is all covered in policy, please get this straight with Investigations Officers.**

L. RON HUBBARD

Founder

* SP, or suppressive person.  A label applied to anyone critical of Scientology, its leaders, or organizations.

** Investigations Officers.  A position on the organizational chart of every Scientology organization across the world; responsible for using such means as this policy spells out to obliterate criticism in his or her zone of operation.

War on “Scientologists at War”

David Miscavige and his Scientology Inc picked yet another losing war against freedom of the press and of speech.  This one was an official complaint and proceeding launched against UK Channel Four and Roast Beef Productions for their documentary Scientologists at War.  Of course, only the finest and most expensive lawyers that could be bought in London took up the Scientology cudgel.  The results were published in the official publication of England’s official agency (Ofcom) tasked with upholding standards of fairness in media.   The Scientology case can be found at page 43 of OfComm’s latest journal.  It is an informative read.

Monique Rathbun vs. David Miscavige by the numbers

There have been published reports that seventeen lawyers have appeared in the Comal County courtroom on the Scientology side of the aisle in the case of Monique Rathbun vs. David Miscavige, et al.  In fact, twenty-two lawyers have made official appearances and/or physical appearances in the case for Scientology Inc.

Many of those lawyers have made multiple flights to Comal County from New York, Los Angeles, Washington D.C., or driven from Dallas, Austin and San Antonio to attend hearings on behalf of Miscavige and his co-defendants.

For some perspective consider these facts:

  1. The Scientology lawyer roster was roughly half of that for the nine-year, $30,000,000+ Lisa McPherson litigation. That litigation involved upwards of a half dozen lawsuits.  David Miscavige on many occasions lamented that McPherson constituted the greatest public relations disaster in Scientology’s history (including that created by 11 top Scientology officials being jailed for conducting the largest domestic espionage campaign in history against the United States government). Principal lawyers in the McPherson matter are visibly directing the big name lawyers recruited by Scientology Inc. to front in Rathbun vs. Miscavige.
  2. The Rathbun v. Miscavige Scientology lawyer roster is about double that employed to deal with United States v Hubbard (the aforementioned government espionage case).  That litigation involved at least a dozen lawsuits. Principal lawyers in the U.S. v Hubbard matter are visibly directing the big name lawyers recruited by Scientology Inc. to front in Rathbun vs. Miscavige.
  3. Scientology and Miscavige employed roughly half the number of lawyers he has so far in Rathbun v Miscavige during the take down by over-litigation and intimidation against the largest and most feared agency of the United States government, the Internal Revenue Service. That matter included more than twenty-two hundred lawsuits. Principal lawyers in the Scientology Inc. v IRS matter are visibly directing the big name lawyers recruited by Scientology Inc. to front in Rathbun vs. Miscavige.

I have come to learn through life experience that oftentimes the magnitude of force one musters to intimidate and overwhelm can serve as a fairly accurate measuring stick of the degree of the organizer’s cowardice.

 

Judge to Scientology…

Here is a balanced and accurate piece of journalism on yesterday’s proceedings in Monique Rathbun vs. David Miscavige, et al.:  The San Antonio Express News.

Scientology Ethics Deconstructed

For those who don’t frequent Tony Ortega’s Underground Bunker, there is an excellent series running on the scientology ethics system.  It is a series of interviews with Jefferson Hawkins.  Jeff deconstructs the system and exposes it as more of a means of control than an attempt to upgrade personal and organizational integrity.  I suggest you read the interview segments in order as Jeff analyzes the Introduction to Scientology Ethics book from beginning to end.

1.        Opening interview.

2.       The Optimum Solution.

3.       Honesty.

4.      Statistics.

5.     Conditions.

6.     Suppressive Persons.

7.     PTSness.

8.    Knowledge Reports – institutionalized snitching.

9.    High crimes and misdemeanors – the justice code.

10.  Justice proceedings.

 

Scientology Standard Operating Procedure

The following unalterable, senior policy of Scientology has been in continuous effect since March 1955 to the present.  It might help explain a few things you have observed.

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

The purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage rather than win. The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, well knowing that he is not authorized, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly.

L. Ron Hubbard, Manual on Dissemination of Material