What's new
By:
Filters

War crimes: Are exes accountable for things they did when they were in?

Dont worry meglamaniacs always think theyre invincible.

Even if they are sickly little smaller than average hormonally challenged dictators.:dieslaughing:
 
Bottom line, in the Trials after WW2 at Nuremberg, those who claimed they were only following orders still went to the gallows.

It's a tough choice: go with the flow and hope you side comes out on top - then you are a hero, but lose the war and you are executed, and go down in history as a despicable war criminal. Or fight internally and face an instant bullet in the back of the head, or the SP room.

I'm just happy I'm out and have no such dark shadows to haunt me.

Regards, Allen
 
I've just been posting on this issue on my forum, see below.

The Nuremburg defence, " just following orders" dosn't cut it.

But those in COS are told, repeatedly, " This is a trust and a crusade"
and the mission was to save not only the planet but the universe, and this is generally taken as gospel, This gets a lot more tricky. But really justice, if it has to be dispensed, has to be done so on a case by case basis.

The laws of the land will carry on working regardless. Mostly. With
COS that gets difficult. Someone like Marty who seems to be trying to rectify that is worth listening too IMO.

------------------------
So Marty had a top job, one over OSA and presumably knew about or ordered questionable actions. Like it or not he was running part of the organisation LRH put

in place and one might find any number of LRH quotes on how one does such
posts with full harsh intention. Fair game was public, but then there are all the hidden data lines in advices, and GO hat packs and so on. I think Marty was an idealist, like almost all scientologists. A post in an org can be done from a humane point of view, or a suppressive one. His boss was a major SP who currently has all top execs locked up, imprisoned. Marty has said he thought critics FZers whatever were mostly best left alone. That would have course been better for the organisation, but he was overuled.


That one person can gather the power comm lines and rule and organisation or a country has happened many times. On my own website you will find eloquent pleas by LRH to help make sure this dosn't happen to scientology, as it has happened to all such groups before.


I'll give an example, China under Mao. Jung Chang wrote about this in her massively best selling book " Wild Swans", and I was her friend during the time she was writing it. Can't differentiate what's in the book or what she told me. Her mother and father became the prime execs of Sechuan province. On the long march, her mother was pregnant, but her father wouldn't let her ride in a cart, he didn't think it right to show favoritism. Such idealism! They were both idealistic communists trying to build a country and take it away from rule by despotic warlords. She lost the baby I believe.

Years later after ruling Sechuan, come the cultural revolution, her father was tortured, imprisoned, lost a leg and died. It was only then that her father before dying said to his children that they should forget communism as it wasn't working. Far more emotionally stated than that but I can't remember all the details. This was just some political philosophy, like a quarter of a green vol full of MU's, false data and interpret that with whatever political beliefs one has. Even if it was a great political statement, it in no way measures up to the majesty of Scientology. Her mother had to kneel on broken glass to plead for help re her husband.


Even the best and most idealistic can be and have been used to further the wishes of a despot.


Mao's China had much in common with DMs COS. For example professors made to work in fields. The " RPF" for the bourgiuos, capitalist roaders, splittests, and all the other terms I've forgotton. A sort of A-J for those not in favour. :)


Then there was " Let a hundred flowers bloom" and once they did Mao chopped off their heads.


DM grabbed the reins of power of COS. Mao grabbed those of quarter of the worlds population.


In both all men of goodwill had a very tough time, and it was very difficult to survive.


As an example, Chou En Lai once said publically " what does it matter what colour a cat is as long as it catches mice?" He was imprisoned.


I'll let you work out how deeply subversive this was in the context.


bb
 
I don't think it is a question of others holding an individual responsible for what they did or not, exactly. Instead it is a question of whether that individual is seen to hold themselves responsible for their actions. This may seem like hair-splitting, but I don't believe it is.

Personally, I am required to make amends to those I have transgressed against. If I feel I have caused harm, then my conscience will dictate my consequent actions. This is true even if I am not fully responsible for what I have done. I could have been coerced, or out of my mind in some way, but that will not allow me to escape responsibility. The circumstances surrounding my actions simply do not make a bit of difference. I believe this is more or less the same for most people.

People who do not appear to have this mechanism of conscience make us uneasy. Consciously or not, we perceive them as a threat. If they feel no remorse for doing X to someone else, what would they do to us? To someone we care for? There is no trust there. There is suspicion.

IMHO, this is why Marty makes a number of people uncomfortable..even angry. We believe he has done things that our own consciences, our internal justice systems, would say require a certain amount of amends and contrition. His behavior is inconsistent with what we we would consider appropriate.

I do not trust Marty. His history, in combination with his recent remarks (buried under a mountain of rhetoric), say to me that he does not consider what he has done to people like Gerry and others hurtful. Whether that is because his conscience is broken or overridden, his values are terribly different from my own, or there are variables unknown to me does not particularly matter. I suspect that he has dehumanized certain people, and that wrongs against them are not truly wrongs because they do not have "human" status, but that is just my suspicion. The long and short of it is that I see something wrong though I cannot precisely identify that something. The resulting level of distrust is such that I feel the need to warn people who put themselves at risk by placing their trust in him, just as I would warn people about to take a stroll in a mine field.

There are other exes that I have seen express regret and contrition that appears genuine to me. They are human, as I am human. They make mistakes, as I make mistakes. Where they have made them, they make the effort to correct them, to transcend baser calls, and improve upon themselves by learning from their errors. There, I feel no distrust. I have no suspicions. Instead, I feel empathy and a level of affinity and respect. I do not voice concerns about them(except on occasions where they are inappropriate in the other direction) because I have no concerns to voice.

tl;dr I don't feel it is my job to "put ethics in" on someone else. I wouldn't want to see some form of justice forcibly extracted from MR or anyone. It is for them. I do reserve the right to evaluate trustworthiness based on the outward manifestations of their internal ethics systems. This is an integral part of protecting one's self and others from harm.

p.s. Thank you for creating this thread, Lulu. I have been worrying at this question for weeks. It is the reason I came here.
 
Mick Wenlock said:
There are differences of course - there are morally reprehensible acts that are not technically illegal - regging someone into gross debt and bankruptcy would qualify for example.
Click to expand...

I am wondering about what degree of responsibility one should place on an individual who was on the front lines, placing hundreds or thousands of people onto the "Bridge", or someone who did reg people into gross debt and bankruptcy.

To me it seems that if the individual in question KNEW WITH CERTAINTY that what he was doing was HELPING, this does in actuality relieve much of the moral responsibility. Many of us bought into what Hubbard said like this KSW excerpt:
"The whole agonized future of this planet, every man, woman and child
on it, and your own destiny for the next endless trillions of years
depend on what you do here and now with and in Scientology.

This is a deadly serious activity. And if we miss getting out of the
trap now, we may never again have another chance.

Remember, this is our first chance to do so in all the endless
trillions of years of the past. Don't muff it now because it seems
unpleasant or unsocial........."
If you believed as a reg that the package you were selling them was going to dramatically change their life for the better and put them on the road to "Total Freedom", it is not the same thing as intentionally scamming someone, selling them a huge package when you know it's a bunch of BS.
As a Div 6 staff, you may have placed hundreds of public onto the road to total debt and slavery, but at that time you KNEW that you were putting people onto the only path that leads to real OT.
Personally, I don't hold those staff accountable more than any other staff
IF they were themselves deceived and blindly trusted Hubbard, knowing
he was the greatest being on the planet, or any planet for that matter. ;)
I personally was never a reg or on Div 6 lines but rather more usually in support type positions. But I don't consider myself any more or less responsible than those who were reg'es or executives. I do feel though since I contributed in some way to helping create the monster (Co$) that even though It's not what I believed I was creating that I have a responsibility to take the monster down. We who were directly involved with the Co$ understand more than almost all others how destructive the organization can be. So I feel we do have a special responsibility to make the rest of the world aware of what we know. If we don't do it, who will?
 
Type4_PTS said:
If you believed as a reg that the package you were selling them was going to dramatically change their life for the better and put them on the road to "Total Freedom", it is not the same thing as intentionally scamming someone, selling them a huge package when you know it's a bunch of BS.
As a Div 6 staff, you may have placed hundreds of public onto the road to total debt and slavery, but at that time you KNEW that you were putting people onto the only path that leads to real OT.
Click to expand...
If somebody did this to hundreds of public, surely there would have been observation as to how it turned out. I'm not buying into the "I thought it was for their own good" over a long period of time.

Initially, fair enough. But not over a period of years or more.:grouch:
 
I agree with Lulu Belle!!!

Lulu Belle,

Reading your posts I think we were in the FCB in the same time period.

When I saw Mariette Lindstein's name on Marty's blog I was shocked! While she was in the FCB she made it into a policy to send one person to the RPF everyday and this went on for weeks. People were humiliated, sp declared, degraded while under her rule of the FCB. I was there in 1988-90. It was terrible. Pure terror for the staff.

Now here is she, all cleaned up and "cleared" through Marty's blog: the new breed of "Independent Scientologist". She didn't, to may knowledge write a single apology. Yet she made life miserable to hundreds. She split couples, sp declared people, held hostage a whole base of SOM.

I have to say I am magnetized by Marty's plans but did I get concerned when I saw Mariette's name on his blog...

Even though I differ with Mick on his view of the tech of scientology (some of it, from my viewpoint, can be saved) I agree with him 100% when he says that "You had the option to say NO".

I personally, as a chairman, stalled a couple of comm ev's just to get them cancelled for slow justice because I knew the guy comm'ev'd was good and I had no chance of getting light recommendations approved by the Convening Authority, I "lost" documents that were to be used for SP declares that I felt unjust and when I couldn't stand it anymore I just left.

But even that wasn't enough. I still was an accessory to many morally degraded activities and for that I feel sorry and I apologized. I even started to post here and somewhere else to sort of "make up the dammage".

But here comes Mariette and she was all good and fine and a great exec. No apology, all business as usual.

I think DM is crazy but I have to say it loud and clear: IT WASN'T JUST DM'S FAULT.

To brush it all off on him is not AS-ISNESS.

Sp Declared
 
Last edited:
Lesolee (Sith Lord) said:
If somebody did this to hundreds of public, surely there would have been observation as to how it turned out. I'm not buying into the "I thought it was for their own good" over a long period of time.
Initially, fair enough. But not over a period of years or more.:grouch:
Click to expand...

I can assure you I'm not trying to give a free pass to anyone in this position who was even partially aware that they were deceiving people. I'm referring to the "true believers". If after a period of time you begin to see that the Co$ is'nt delivering what's promised and you continue to reg prospects into heavy debt/bankruptcy then your responsibility level would dramatically increase.
 
Thorny issues- but good to think and talk about...

Type4pts, I would add that some were guilty of committing financial fraud, anyone who falsified loan documents, falsified income statements to procure fraudulent loans, misled folks who were putting their homes on the line as to the actual terms of the debts they were incurring, etc. That did happen in California and is being investigated by the State Attny General's Office. Others did not disclose that they were earning a "commission" (kick-back) from the amounts regged from public, and that was part of the "cost" of services. I don't think "the ends justified the means" of being a true believer trying to save everyone's souls rationalization will cut it in the California justice system. I don't mean to imply that all registrars participated in these practices, at all. For those that did, and where it can be legally proven, I think they should be prosecuted. Sorry if that seems harsh to anyone, but the fallout from these actions is pretty harsh, too. Financial fraud is financial fraud, even when committed in the name of a religion.

Of course, everyone is responsible for their own actions, and lack of action in any given circumstance. Yes, there are sometimes mitigating circumstances.

It is an important step in any recovery process to own your past actions and the results of said actions, even when unintended, to disclose this to others in a safe setting, and to offer and try to make amends, where doing so will not cause any further harm.

Sometimes you cannot make amends directly to the people or groups involved, but must do so in a more general fashion.

It's still worth the attempt, even when done imperfectly, (who here is perfect?) and an important step in the healing and recovery process. :)

Those of you who escaped from the COS without committing any real crimes or overts against others, consider yourselves to be very lucky indeed.
 
Last edited:
Type4_PTS said:
FCB = Flag Command Bureaux What would FLO be?
Click to expand...

Flag Liaison Office.

New name same business: rpf'ing people, harassing org staff trying to make things go right, giving absolute and robotic compliance to every Int Management whims.

All in all, from my viewpoint the purpose of the FCB/FLB was to produce the following VFP's:

1) Telexes sent out
2) Compliance Reports to unreal programs that were devised thousands of miles away from the place where the real business went on
3) Issues sent uplines for approval that would always be rejected by International Management
4) False compliance reports produced for DM's unreal targets

I feel the FCB/FLO should be preserved and used as a wonderful case study in Human Resource Mismanagement.

SD
 
OK youre a new recruit to the gestapo, youre told to take these bars of soap and get people stripped for the shower. So then youre not guilty that they all get gassed. But at some point you would notice that truckfulls of dead bodies are being taken out of the showers. Then you are at the moment of realisation guilty if you carry on. If you stop and shoot your boss you become a hero. Not straight away but only when the russian army has taken the camp over. Dont forget that everyone knew that the conspiracy of the jews had stopped our great nation from surviving, they had sucked our country dry together with eating our babies and the only solution to these jews gypsies gays thieves and commies was anhialation, they had been living in their ghettos causing inflation and your childs mumps, it was scientifically proven you just had to read the latest book on Eugenics. They were not people anyway they were subhuman degenerates.

No I cant see that belief is an excuse. 'I believe that pig eating infidels must die', no you have to take responsability for your beliefs. Your political party or religion could tell you to rape rats, they deserve it, its your duty. You dont have to take on an insane viewpoint, and if you do then youre insane!

There were many people who helped people into trains, told the gestapo where Moischa lived told them they thought their maths teacher was a bit of a bender, and they never went to trail, they probably felt aweful afterwards, or if they were too week they never admitted to themselves what theyd done.

It takes a certain amount of guts to realise that you sold a sponsorship to someone you liked, but knew he really couldnt afford it. It takes a lot to realise that family money, put asside after a lifetimes hard work is out of someones bank and passed through the IAS coffers because you took someone to see a reg. But weve all done stuff like that, we have been part of a team that did some nasty things. However we did not all stand by while someone died from lack of food and medicine.

If you do not realise the effect youre causing by getting someone to remortgage their house again then you are not guilty, but you should know their finances if you really care. If you do realise but believe that the stars will stop twinkling if you dont then youre partially innocent? No no one has the right to be stupid, well not if your IQ is above 75 anyway.

So yes they are guilty, and so am I and so are you. But its taken me years to come to that conclusion. At the same time I dont feel a need to do an ammends project, I feel that the suppressed depressed state I was in for so many years has paid for the aweful crimes of regging (very badly). But when I see people who were close to the top, knew what was happening and live in nice villas with no remorse just one long garden party after another, I do feel queezy. A bit like watching chemical Ali waving at the jury, winking at a pretty girl barrister and sitting in the dock with a big grin on his face, picking his teeth with a gold tie pin.
 
La La Lou Lou said:
So yes they are guilty, and so am I and so are you. But its taken me years to come to that conclusion. At the same time I dont feel a need to do an ammends project, I feel that the suppressed depressed state I was in for so many years has paid for the aweful crimes of regging (very badly). But when I see people who were close to the top, knew what was happening and live in nice villas with no remorse just one long garden party after another, I do feel queezy. A bit like watching chemical Ali waving at the jury, winking at a pretty girl barrister and sitting in the dock with a big grin on his face, picking his teeth with a gold tie pin.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup: I feel the same way La La Lou Lou. We were all guilty but those at the top IMO knew what was going on and didn't stop.

Where are those people apologies? Where is Mike Rinder's apology? Where is Mariette Lindstein's apology? Those people knew what was going on, yet they are just blaming it all off on DM.

Honest to God, I am attracted to the project of getting "new scientology" going, but on the other hand I am starting to have some dilemma: even though I like the tech, is it right to support people who did not even apologize for what they did?

SD
 
Last edited:
sp declared said:
:thumbsup: I feel the same way La La Lou Lou. We were all guilty but those at the top IMO knew what was going on and didn't stop.

Where are those people apologies? Where is Mike Rinder's apology? Where is Mariette Lindstein's apology? Those people knew what was going on, yet they are just blaming it all off on DM.

Honest to God, I am attracted to the project of getting "new scientology" going, but on the other hand I am starting to have some dilemma: even though I like the tech, is it right to support people who did not even apologize for what they did?

SD
Click to expand...

I think these people have yet to get to the point of public apology - it takes a lot of "confront" to see how much you willingly forwarded a suppressive system knowing deep down there was something wrong but keeping on with the program.

My personal belief is that continual application of "You Can Be Right" will result in all of us getting to the point of taking our own personal responsibility for the rise of Miscavology from Hubbardism and the perpetuation of the abuses.

Rathbun, Rinder, Koon, Lindstein, etc etc are all good people and are doing their utmost right now to help those they helped victimize.

The only way they know how to - using the best of their training and experience to help get people out of the mess that the system got them in.

I don't know enough about the methods they use or their plans or intentions to criticize them.

I do know that I see good people rushing to make better a great wrong in whatever way they can - and that to me is commendable considering it has and will continue to bring them grief from Miscavology's dwindling army of lawyers, PIs and Dwarfdroids.
 
I just want to thank everyone who has contributed to this thread.

This subject somehow....

It's the heart of recovery.

At least for me.

Can I forgive them?

Can I forgive myself?
 
Tricky. I know I did wrong and I've gone to extraordinary lengths to undo any harm I did as a dedicated 'tone 40' scientologist.

I decided to get every single person I ever FSMed as well as recovered enough data to make their own informed decision about the CofS, and whether or not they should continue.

I felt I had to right my wrongs, but it was my personal decision, I'd hate to see a committee decide who was OK and who was an incorrigible turd. Imagine personally having to answer for everything you did in the Cof$ to a tial by message board? Brrr....

I know others don't feel any responsibility for what they did, they were ordered so had no choice...blah blah blah.

I don't understand that but if they're that way I'd better fix their share too.... if I can. At least that way it might allow me to redeem my self for my woeful judgment in becoming a scientologist with a dedicated glare who would rather see you dead than incapable.
 
Lulu,

youre right, thats the two questions...



Can I forgive them?

Can I forgive myself?



I think really in the end you have to.

Sorry!
LaLa
 
sp declared said:
Lulu Belle,

Reading your posts I think we were in the FCB in the same time period.

When I saw Mariette Lindstein's name on Marty's blog I was shocked! While she was in the FCB she made it into a policy to send one person to the RPF everyday and this went on for weeks. People were humiliated, sp declared, degraded while under her rule of the FCB. I was there in 1988-90. It was terrible. Pure terror for the staff.

Now here is she, all cleaned up and "cleared" through Marty's blog: the new breed of "Independent Scientologist". She didn't, to may knowledge write a single apology. Yet she made life miserable to hundreds. She split couples, sp declared people, held hostage a whole base of SOM.

I have to say I am magnetized by Marty's plans but did I get concerned when I saw Mariette's name on his blog...
Click to expand...

Yeah.

Pisses me off too.

It isn't actually any of this.

It was when she was AVC Int.

You don't even want to know how much of a hell she created for people on promo lines.

:angry:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top