The Lies and Deceit of the Church of Scientology

[RogerB]

Hi Roger, it was a pleasure meeting you at the FZ convention.

I was staff at the NY org in the late 1970's to mid 1980's, first in Div 6 and then as lead HGC auditor, and I knew Ron Haugen and Pedro Bossio, and to some degree, most of the Sea Org and G.O. (and then OSA) staff.

Mostly I knew Pedro before he was trained to do that suppressive "ethics" stuff, in fact I remember auditing Pedro one time. I thought he was a nice guy, right up until I found out that he's routed my teenage stepson out of the CLO and onto the streets of New York City without ever bothering to inform myself or his mother, both of us staff at the time. I mean, we found out weeks later, and didn't know where he was or how he survived. I don't know what Pedro might have said or done to make this child not come to us when this happened. When I confronted Pedro about this, he just smiled rather insanely and told me the young boy was "a crim" (SO slang for "criminal, I found out". Bizarre and psychotic.

Ron Haugen was a strange bird too, always seemed to have an uncomfortable forced smile, and the few times I heard him speak, his remarks tended to be non-sequitor and off-color. I remember him routing out and (unsuccessfully) demanding a few intensives of auditing for the time he put in as staff.You've got a hell of a story there Roger, and I'm afraid I believe every word of it.

Best, Dex

Dex, it was a pleasure meeting you too, my friend.

You are one of the famous names one hears of, and wonders what sort of person, etc., etc.

After meeting you I now see why you are so well thought of and have the reputation you deserve.

On the believing my every word thing . . . . you'd better! Enthetan above will beat you to death with minutiae if you don't. He was there and privy to a lot of what went on

Rog

 

[mountainpeak]

Fascinating account, Roger. I recall the insanity of the Finance Police days. That insanity has continued, in one form or another, to this day.

 

[Gadfly]

The Church of Scientology, now, is a sick organization totally introverted into “finding enemies” but which enemy situation is a fantasy of its own delusion and making. It does not and cannot apply its technology in a manner that produces optimum results, but only produces more upsets, problems, difficulties and duress for its people. It is totally fixated on making others wrong, and “handling” them as enemies after it itself has fantasized that enmity into being. And it does this with its own people. And hence, it is declining and losing its supporters and believers.

RogerB

Now? It has ALWAYS behaved that way. It is LRH policy, going as far back as you want to go, to ATTACK and DESTROY any and all critics and enemies.

It is also IMPOSSIBLE to apply the technology in a way to get consistent "optimum results".

Your comment makes it seem that you imply that there was a point when it didn't operate as it does now. If so, I disagree. Paulette Cooper? Gabe Cevarez?

Part of the nature of the subject and practice of Scientology involves having "boogeymen". The manipulation requires the concepts of some sort of "bad guy" - suppressive persons, PTSs, DBs, critics, enemies, etc. The notion of a great eternal WAR between GOOD and EVIL is vital to the charade. I don't doubt LRH knew that when he "created" his subject. The concepts of "good" and "bad" are KEY, just as they are in other modern religions of control. The good/bad dichotomy is a convenient tool to ensnare the minds of people. It is used to much success within the Church of Scientology.

And yes, I agree, the Church of Scientology has been CREATING enemies (since the very beginning), enemies that largely didn't exist, through their own actions of labeling people and groups as suppressives AND then by the ever-growing reaction caused by such consistently stupid behavior of fabricating previously non-existent enemies.

 

[Veda]

-snip-

1981-82 was also when David Miscavige was plotting his takeover of of the Church. One rather huge obstacle would be Mary Sue. In any contest between DM and MSH among public scientologists and org staff, MSH would win. MSH had been trusted for decades as LRH's wife and second-in-command. People would say "Who is this Miscavige joker?"

For any takeover of Scientology to be successful, MSH would need to be eliminated from the scene.

Putting her in jail for a long time would be an effective way to remove her from the scene, take her off the lines, and allow her reputation and memory to be discredited.

-snip-

Are you saying that the then 21 year old David Miscavige was responsible for Mary Sue being sent to jail?

Or that Miscavige, without the nod from his boss, LRH, would have engaged in a "takeover" of Scientology? Or that Hubbard didn't want his wife deposed and "erased" as "damaged goods"?

Where was LRH the OT at this time? In hiding while receiving a million a week in cash, and he "didn't know"?

See Larry Brennan's legal declaration, see accounts by major Mission Holders at the time, see reality.

Mary Sue Hubbard deserved to go to jail, as did her husband.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3020827931130963516

 

[Enthetan]

Are you saying that the then 21 year old David Miscavige was responsible for Mary Sue being sent to jail?

Or that Miscavige, without the nod from his boss, LRH, would have engaged in a "takeover" of Scientology? Or that Hubbard didn't want his wife deposed and "erased" as "damaged goods"?

Where was LRH the OT at this time? In hiding while receiving a million a week in cash, and he "didn't know"?

See Larry Brennan's legal declaration, see accounts by major Mission Holders at the time, see reality.

Mary Sue Hubbard deserved to go to jail, as did her husband.

At 21, a certain Alexander of Macedonia had done quite a bit.

Consider the environment around 1982. Miscavige was CEO of Author Services, and effectively doing much of the day-to-day running of Scientology (in LRH's name as his representative). LRH only knew what DM and Pat and Annie Broeker chose to relay to him.

I'm thinking that the inner clique (DM, the Broekers, Norman Starkey, and others) was anticipating LRH's demise, and planning ahead, and that this clique had a vested interest in seeing that MSH was gotten out of the way.

As of 1982, DM, as detailed in the Larry Brennan statement you referrence, was effectively running Scientology:

Additionally, as covered below, Miscavige was the very person I had to take that corporate planning to for approval in late 1981. He was the final approval point. Both of the above statements from or about Miscavige are false. He was involved in the reorganization and he did not “author” it.

Most particularly, he was in charge of the operation to neutralize any entity or entities who could be a threat to the power of the CMO faction. Thus, his role in getting Mary Sue to step down. His role in eliminating "uppity" Mission holders. His role in the reign of terror of the Finance Police.

As of LRH's death in 1986, Pat and Annie Broeker plus Norman Starkey may have thought they were the inheritors of Scientology, but DM outmaneuvered his rivals one by one, just like Stalin took out his rivals after the death of Lenin, until he was the only one.

I see many parallels between LRH/Miscavige and Lenin/Stalin. Lenin created the USSR, and used his charisma to motivate people to support him. Lenin had to be charming and charismatic, because he started at a time when people had to be motivated to support him voluntarily. Stalin's talent was in ruling by terror, in seizing the mechanisms of terror, and dividing his opponents to more easily eliminate them.

 

[RogerB]

Now? It has ALWAYS behaved that way. It is LRH policy, going as far back as you want to go, to ATTACK and DESTROY any and all critics and enemies.

It is also IMPOSSIBLE to apply the technology in a way to get consistent "optimum results".

Gadfly,

I can see you were not there in the days when all the operational basis of Scn was based on the red on white tech issues. In the 1950's we had no "policy"; and it was not until I hit London in 1965 that I believe I collided with "policy."

It is well recorded on ESMB that processing tech went negative in early 1963, and administrative/policy things went dark and negative from mid-1964.

Church policy and behavior you cite got going after the DC raids by the US government in 1963?

That's the history of it.

It does not excuse the insane behavior, but critics need be more accurate if they are to have credibility.

RogerB

 

[Veda]

At 21, a certain Alexander of Macedonia had done quite a bit.

Consider the environment around 1982. Miscavige was CEO of Author Services, and effectively doing much of the day-to-day running of Scientology (in LRH's name as his representative). LRH only knew what DM and Pat and Annie Broeker chose to relay to him.

I'm thinking that the inner clique (DM, the Broekers, Norman Starkey, and others) was anticipating LRH's demise, and planning ahead, and that this clique had a vested interest in seeing that MSH was gotten out of the way.

As of 1982, DM, as detailed in the Larry Brennan statement you referrence, was effectively running Scientology:



Most particularly, he was in charge of the operation to neutralize any entity or entities who could be a threat to the power of the CMO faction. Thus, his role in getting Mary Sue to step down. His role in eliminating "uppity" Mission holders. His role in the reign of terror of the Finance Police.

As of LRH's death in 1986, Pat and Annie Broeker plus Norman Starkey may have thought they were the inheritors of Scientology, but DM outmaneuvered his rivals one by one, just like Stalin took out his rivals after the death of Lenin, until he was the only one.

I see many parallels between LRH/Miscavige and Lenin/Stalin. Lenin created the USSR, and used his charisma to motivate people to support him. Lenin had to be charming and charismatic, because he started at a time when people had to be motivated to support him voluntarily. Stalin's talent was in ruling by terror, in seizing the mechanisms of terror, and dividing his opponents to more easily eliminate them.

See post 10, do a search on "1983":

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=2398

This was the template for Scientology since the late 1960s/early 1970s:

http://warrior.xenu.ca/Brainwashing-front.jpg

Virginia Downsborough, interviewed by Russell Miller in 1986. Downsborough recalls conversing with Hubbard while taking care of him in Las Palmas in early 1967:

"He [Hubbard] talked alot about Sara Northrup and seemed to want to make sure that I knew that he was never married to her. I didn't know why it was so important to him; I never met Sara and I couldn't have cared less, but he wanted to persuade me that the marriage had never taken place. When he talked about his first wife, the picture he put out of himself was of this poor wounded fellow coming home from the war and being abandoned by his wife and family because he would be a drain on them. He said he had planned every move along the way with Mary Sue to avoid being victimized again."

 

[Veda]

Now? It has ALWAYS behaved that way. It is LRH policy, going as far back as you want to go, to ATTACK and DESTROY any and all critics and enemies.

-snip-

"I can make Napoleon look like a punk." L. Ron Hubbard, 1938

"I can make Captain Bligh look like a Sunday School teacher." L. Ron Hubbard, 1969

In the early days, there was no formal written policy about many things. The organization was small and it wasn't needed. Later, when the organization grew larger, formal written policy, including confidential policy, became necessary.

 

[Veda]

-snip-

In the 1950's we had no "policy"

-snip-

There was private LRH policy which later manifested as formal written policy. Hubbard didn't write it down for others to use on others until the 1960s, although his 'Manual on Dissemination of Material' of 1955, and his 'HCO Manual of Justice' of 1959 were early hints, as was his 1955 'Textbook on Psycho-politics', and that Hubbard used the latter on his own loyal followers is still too much for some to confront.

 

[Enthetan]

See post 10, do a search on "1983":

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=2398

This was the template for Scientology since the late 1960s/early 1970s:

http://warrior.xenu.ca/Brainwashing-front.jpg

Virginia Downsborough, interviewed by Russell Miller in 1986. Downsborough recalls conversing with Hubbard while taking care of him in Las Palmas in early 1967:

"He [Hubbard] talked alot about Sara Northrup and seemed to want to make sure that I knew that he was never married to her. I didn't know why it was so important to him; I never met Sara and I couldn't have cared less, but he wanted to persuade me that the marriage had never taken place. When he talked about his first wife, the picture he put out of himself was of this poor wounded fellow coming home from the war and being abandoned by his wife and family because he would be a drain on them. He said he had planned every move along the way with Mary Sue to avoid being victimized again."

From the Brennan Declaration:

(v) from December 1981 through 1983 I initially worked on further actions to implement the new corporate planning under a group known as “Special Unit”, then became part of Special Unit itself with a post title of “Special Unit Corporate Execution”. After that I was promoted to run Special Unit as “Special Unit In Charge” until I was removed in or about early 1984 and then left staff in March 1984. Details of Special Unit will be covered below. During the approximately one and one half years that I was Special Unit In Charge I also held the position known as “Watchdog Committee X” (“WDC X”), The Watchdog Committee has been listed in organized scientology promotion as the senior most body within the “church” that oversees all major operations of organized scientology. There were approximately ten of us in this body but we were not at the top as organized scientology states. Secretly we were run by both Miscavige and Hubbard as covered below.

During the period where Roger was being attacked, the real command line was via Miscavige, via Broeker, to LRH. LRH would only know what DM and PB chose to relay, and the rest of the Sea Org would only know what DM and PB chose to relay as being "LRH's orders".

Getting back to the Finance Police "reign of terror", Lenin said "the purpose of terror is to terrorize", and that's what was going on. The purpose of the Finance Police was to go into an area, intimidate those who could be intimidated, and eliminate those who showed any resistance to intimidation, with the end product being a field which would accept arbitrary orders from uplines without question. We had a long series of eliminations of those who might serve as centers of questioning, both from the Sea Org and from the public, until only the sheep were left.

 

[Dulloldfart]

Hubbard wrote policy in the 50s. It just wasn't issued in the form of green-on-white HCO Policy Letters. Dig up the red and green volumes. It's in there.

Paul

 

[Veda]

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=338224&postcount=70

Hubbard didn't care about the well being of the Mission Holders or about Mary Sue. He cared about himself, his money, and his self-aggrandizing monument-building plans.

David Miscavige was his number one henchman. He got the money to Hubbard.

I hope you're not going to blame Miscavige for implementing the 'Brainwashing Manual' on Scientologists in the 1960s, or for writing and implementing the 1965 Fair Game Law. If so, Miscavige was one diabolical and clever 5 year old.

 

[RogerB]

Hubbard wrote policy in the 50s. It just wasn't issued in the form of green-on-white HCO Policy Letters. Dig up the red and green volumes. It's in there.

Paul

Yes, that's relatively true. "Policy" existed, often in the form of Exec Directives and usually as published in Red on White HCOB's . . . but all was benign and concerning admin procedures.

The negative shit Gadfly and I are discussing came into being with the advent of the Org Board, the Dept of I&R and ethics reports and the subsequent conditions tech. This change began in 1965 with the creation of the Org Board et al, including Hubbard organizing his retaliation against perceived enemies via specially created GO departments and activities.

We never had, nor saw Eth Reports while I was in Oz. We simply happily got on the job!

Rog

 

[Enthetan]

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=338224&postcount=70

Hubbard didn't care about the well being of the Mission Holders or about Mary Sue. He cared about himself, his money, and his self-aggrandizing monument-building plans.

David Miscavige was his number one henchman. He got the money to Hubbard.

I hope you're not going to blame Miscavige for implementing the 'Brainwashing Manual' on Scientologists in the 1960s, or for writing and implementing the 1965 Fair Game Law. If so, Miscavige was one diabolical and clever 5 year old.

I'm not saying that Hubbard wasn't ruthless. I'm not saying that Hubbard hadn't screwed a lot of people along the way. I'm not saying that Hubbard didn't enjoy having power over others.

What I'm saying is that various people were making plans for who was going to be top dog after LRH was gone, and that getting MSH out of the picture was essential to those plans, because MSH would be the logical heir to the power.

What I'm saying is that, whatever legal angles they had to seize control of Scientology, all MSH would have had to do was issue a statement that control of Scientology had been usurped, and that she, Diana, and a few other old-timers were starting over according to LRH's intentions. I think in that case most of the old timers would have gone with MSH and DM would have lost that one.

 

[Veda]

I'm not saying that Hubbard wasn't ruthless. I'm not saying that Hubbard hadn't screwed a lot of people along the way. I'm not saying that Hubbard didn't enjoy having power over others.

What I'm saying is that various people were making plans for who was going to be top dog after LRH was gone, and that getting MSH out of the picture was essential to those plans, because MSH would be the logical heir to the power.

What I'm saying is that, whatever legal angles they had to seize control of Scientology, all MSH would have had to do was issue a statement that control of Scientology had been usurped, and that she, Diana, and a few other old-timers were starting over according to LRH's intentions. I think in that case most of the old timers would have gone with MSH and DM would have lost that one.

She was removed in July 1981, a year and a half before (after much stalling) being sent to Federal prison for the commission of multiple felonies. She could have served a much longer sentence, as could have her cowardly husband.

A husband who had painted a bright red target on her back.

Usurped? You are saying that her power was usurped by David Miscavige.

If her power, and LRH Intention, had been usurped by David Miscavige, then why didn't she issue a statement? anyway?

After all, the future of Mankind, life throughout the universe, and everything depends on Scientology, right?

Or is that only for the playing pieces, the Scientologists, to believe?

 

[lookmanohead]

Veda,

I want to say that I've enjoyed reading your posts, and that I agree with 99.9% of everything you've written re: the 'true motivations' of things. I did want to take my chance to throw in an observation re: Mrs. Hubbard, as I think it's a factor not often considered when trying to reconcile her position in it all.

And that is this: she may not have believed in Scientology, but it's highly likely that she believed - body and soul - in Hubbard.

Because the subject of Scientology itself is so often linked with Hubbard, it can sometimes be difficult to remember that someone could exist who cared not one whit for Scientology, but cared more than life itself for Hubbard, the husband.

I bring to bear, as a suggestion of credibility for my argument, this sobering consideration: if Hubbard could exert control of such depth and integration over people who'd never even met him - what kind of control could he exert over his wife?

This is a subject that's been studied in general outside the confines of a discussion on Scientology. When you have a dominant, destructive male in a power-imbalanced relationship with a female, you get unhealthy results. Worship can occur.

No one can know for sure, of course, but I think the argument can be made. Perhaps Mrs. Hubbard had only one, true cult - that of Mr. Hubbard himself, above and beyond Scientology. This would seem to me to be most amply and simply demonstrated by the action of placing her above the Guardian's Office. Her job, assigned by Hubbard, agreed upon by her, was - above all else - the defense of Mr. Hubbard. If so, I would guess that such defense would go beyond the mere 'legal' definition, but would extend to his name, reputation, and place in history. This would possibly give an explanation for the conundrums of her involvement and later complete lack of participation on any visible level, Scientology or otherwise.

Even accounting for a true belief on her part in Scientology, the above still plays a part in consideration of her state of mind. The depth of that 'true belief' in Scientology when combined with her unique relationship to Mr. Hubbard must have been quite different from anything experienced by anyone else involved in the subject of Scientology, past, present or future.

Conjecture, I know, but so much of this fascinating subject is, of necessity.

 

[lookmanohead]

Forgive me, but a catchy phrase came to me after that is a much better summation of my primary point above:

Imagine being married to your god.

 

[Blue Spirit]

The "Finance Dictator"

Fascinating account, Roger. I recall the insanity of the Finance Police days. That insanity has continued, in one form or another, to this day.

I recall Wendell Reynolds being up on stage at the Hollywood Palladium and

announcing in a full Nazi valence that he was the "Finance Dictator". That rang some major alarm bells.

Boy was I STUPID for not doing a major Doubt formula right then and also not leaving the CO$.

 

[Blue Spirit]

BIGAMY

Virginia Downsborough, interviewed by Russell Miller in 1986. Downsborough recalls conversing with Hubbard while taking care of him in Las Palmas in early 1967:
"He [Hubbard] talked alot about Sara Northrup and seemed to want to make sure that I knew that he was never married to her. I didn't know why it was so important to him; I never met Sara and I couldn't have cared less, but he wanted to persuade me that the marriage had never taken place. When he talked about his first wife, the picture he put out of himself was of this poor wounded fellow coming home from the war and being abandoned by his wife and family because he would be a drain on them. He said he had planned every move along the way with Mary Sue to avoid being victimized again."

Not to defend, at all, but technically I think he was never married to Sara has

he'd never divorced his first wife Margaret before "marrying" Sara.

Bigamy that is called I think.

 

[Blue Spirit]

Reminds Me Of........

"I can make Napoleon look like a punk." L. Ron Hubbard, 1938

"I can make Captain Bligh look like a Sunday School teacher." L. Ron Hubbard, 1969

In the early days, there was no formal written policy about many things. The organization was small and it wasn't needed. Later, when the organization grew larger, formal written policy, including confidential policy, became necessary.

...my 11th grade Geometry teacher who the first day said: "I'm chairman of the

'Ways and Means Committee', I'm mean and I know all of the ways !"