Tag Archives: David Miscavige

Scientology: A Monotheistic Religion

Apparently, only one of the four traditional biblical Gospels relates inarguably that Jesus Christ was God temporarily visiting earth.  The book of Luke could and has been interpreted to say that Jesus was an extraordinary man who ascended – or was ascended – from humble beginnings to develop the message that humankind has found so inspiring for 2000 years.  Only the Gospel popularly known as that related by John was definitive about Jesus’ other-worldly provenance.  As noted by religious scholar and bestselling author Elaine Pagels in her book Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas:

“Unlike Luke, who depicts Jesus as a man raised to divine status, John, as does the hymn Paul quotes, pictures him instead as a divine being who descended to earth – temporarily – to take on human form.”

Of course it is understood that all of the Gospels were written up to a century after Jesus strode the earth, all reporting their own interpretations of words Jesus purportedly spoke and deeds he had carried out long before.  In the past one-hundred and twenty years, more significant purported Gospels have been discovered – including those of Thomas and Mary Magdalene.  Those discoveries have added to the rich diversity of opinions, interpretations, and faiths of Christianity.  That includes the idea that Jesus communicated that every human potentially had within themselves the same abilities and divinity as Jesus.

In scientology no such plurality of interpretation is open to the worshipper.   That is because scientology’s messiah made it clear himself on more than one occasion that he did not ascend from humble beginnings, or any earthly beginnings at all, to develop a message with which to lift humanity.  Instead, scientology’s author L. Ron Hubbard explicitly stated that he descended to earth in human form in order to deliver its people from evil. He was so dead serious about being taken literally – and not interpreted – that he instituted penalties for any interpretation of his words whatsoever that were tantamount to permanent spiritual death.  And if that did not shut up the purveyors of interpretations, such heretics were to be mercilessly harassed to the point of personal and familial ruin. He created a corporate structure which directed hundreds of millions of dollars toward etching his words on stainless steel plates, sealing them in titanium capsules and placing them in vaults in deep veins of granite so that those words could never be altered.

One example of those sacred words comes from Ron’s Journal 1968:

“And please for my sake, don’t forget one thing, I am your friend. I am not from this planet. I am trying to do my best to do a job to bring tolerance and humanity to this planet in a very materialistic and often cruel age.”

That was the same year that Hubbard delivered scientology’s most sacred, secret and advanced liturgy – the Class VIII Course. On the course ‘deans of scientology’ were created by learning from Hubbard that humankind could not be brought to ‘respond to reason.’   That is why he commanded the scientology deans that  “You are the people the planet obeys. You are the people who own the planet.”  Whether any dean of scientology – or the group collectively – ever lived up to those dictates, two things remain scripturally clear (and will remain so apparently forever) from Hubbard’s apex year of discovery.  Those are, a) there is only one God in scientology, and b) the adherent will believe it because that God has commanded that it will never be appreciated by appeal to reason.

Australia’s 60 Minutes

Welcome to all the folks from Australia who have apparently been visiting this blog (visit counter just went off the charts) in the minutes since the 60 Minutes piece ran there.  If you are interested in learning more about Scientology you may want to visit the right hand column of the home page of this blog.  There are links to a number of books, sites, and other informative media pieces that have run in the past couple years.  There is also a search feature where you can explore the more than 1,100 articles published on this site.  For those not in Australia, I am informed that the show will appear at this link momentarily, 60 Minutes Australia.  Contrary to scientology’s published response to this show, like virtually all other media that have interviewed us Sixty Minutes approached us to ask for the interviews.

Scientology Preview – 60 Minutes Australia

Will be available to international viewers shortly after airing at 60 Minutes Australia.

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.”

ENEMIES OF SCIENTOLOGY DEPOPULARIZED TO THE POINT OF TOTAL OBLITERATION

Attached is a 2006 publication of the church of Scientology International.  It details the statistics of the Invest (Investigations) Bureau (the espionage and intelligence branch of Scientology’s dirty tricks and propaganda arm, Office of Special Affairs).   It carefully measures Scientology Inc’s accomplishment of the aims of Scientology as explored recently in several posts. The quality of the lives of the dozens of staff of OSA Invest are determined by whether these statistics are uptrending week to week or whether they are downtrending.  If the statistics are uptrending the staff member is not punished and is sometimes rewarded. If the statistics go downward, the staff members responsible can lose pay, lose eating or sleeping privileges, and be made to perform hard manual labor (in addition to a full work schedule) in order to make good with the group.  All of these statistics are carefully designed to add up to the ‘valuable final products’ of the Investigations Bureau, one of which is: ENEMIES OF SCIENTOLOGY DEPOPULARIZED TO THE POINT OF TOTAL OBLITERATION.

Note well that one of  the first Hubbard references that these statistics are based upon per the publication itself is ADVICE 27 Mar 1972 COUNTER ATTACKS TACTICS.  We have explored the implications of that publication before, e.g. ‘Standing one’s ground’,  and no doubt will do so again in the future.  It explicitly states that when you cannot shut up a whistleblower by costing him or her their job you then effectively attack that which he or she most values (in most cases, that means spouses, children and other family members of the target).  If there was any doubt that it is currently enforced, you see it here prominently highlighted in modern OSA context.

Investigations Statistics Issue

The Aims of Scientology: Part 2

Reference: The Aims of Scientology: Part 1

As promulgated by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard in 1969:

                                                         TARGETS

     The vital targets on which we must invest most of our time are:

     T1.  Depopularizing the enemy to a point of total obliteration. 

     T2.  Taking over the control or allegiance of the heads or  proprietors of all news media.

     T3.  Taking over the control or allegiance of key political figures.

     T4.  Taking over the control or allegiance of those who monitor international finance and shifting them to a less precarious finance standard…

-          L. Ron Hubbard HCO POLICY LETTER OF 16 FEBRUARY 1969  TARGETS DEFENSE

For Full Policy click hereTargets Defense

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.

Scientology Literacy and Blackmail

Scientologists take a great deal of arrogant pride for allegedly possessing the only effective technology for producing super literacy.  But is it super literacy or super literalness that it ultimately produces?  Try asking a dedicated Scientologist a simple question under oath where the honest answer might not make David Miscavige and Scientology out to be infallible, and you will understand the question I pose.  I have spoken to many journalists who have been driven around the bend dealing with Scientology’s form of super literalness.  Honestly review the  arumentation you have received, or even used yourself, from Scientology staff and field staff members, registrars, public and officials at mass events.  It is even omnipresent in the never-ending streams of publications spit out by Scientology organizations.

Here is an example of how this super literalness plays out in institutional behavior of Scientology organizations and how they interact with the world at large, from Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior:

“By way of example, until I just recently re-read the following Hubbard Guardian’s Office Order, I would have vehemently argued that Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard never countenanced blackmail.  Sure, they promote aggression, intimidation and fighting fire with fire, but just as surely not the commission of felonies as serious as blackmail. L. Ron Hubbard uttered the following on July 1, 1968, in a briefing to Mary Sue Hubbard about how her Guardian’s Office ought to be conducting itself:

We try to isolate who is creating the unrest and giving the orders. But even while we’re doing that, we try to collect “protective materials.” Archaeological and scientific and social studies might very well result in disclosing Mr. De Gaulle’s peculiar liaison with Hitler. That’s protective material.

All of a sudden somebody is jumping all over us in “Wango-bingo” and all it would take would be a quiet phone call. That’s one way to keep order. That is an intelligence method of handling things. It’s not blackmail, because blackmail is demanding money and that has nothing to do with it. “You jump on us, you’re dead”— that type of material…

…So, Mr. Big decides to knock us flat in Bongville. All of a sudden it cools by the simple reason that we already know that the head of the public health service at Bongville has three wives. What you normally do is leak it to him. Somebody goes out and has dinner with his daughter as a perfect stranger and says, “You know, I would be awfully careful of jumping on those Scientologists in Bongville if I were you. You know somebody ought to tell your daddy that there’s some wild rumor—of course, we don’t know what the truth of it is—that actually you have three mothers. And they know that over there.”

In the context of protecting the power of Simon Bolivar (read: L. Ron Hubbard) I understood this just as Hubbard said: “It’s not blackmail, because blackmail is demanding money and that has nothing to do with it.””