An Observation and a Beef

VaD

Gold Meritorious Patron
I just got a message from someone who in the past was very important on certain lines of Scientology and even has family at the Int Base who have disconnected. Even this person has tried to get in contact with several of the people I was referring to in the OP via Facebook - ex Int's hanging out at the Shack. He was asking them if they knew anything that was done against him behind his back. His questions too were followed by silence.

John,
keep stayng here! It helps a lot!
 

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
For anyone who hasn't read it yet, I strongly recommend reading the testimony of Robert Vaughn Young in the 'Dandar Disqualification Hearings'.

http://whyaretheydead.info/lisa_mcpherson/bob/

Especially this day of testimony;

http://whyaretheydead.info/lisa_mcpherson/bob/_06_17_PM.htm

since in it, RVY makes the case for David Miscavige being in complete control of Lisa McPherson's 'case' from at the very least the decision to recover her from the hospital following her traffic accident.

According to Marty, however, David Miscavige was directly involved much earlier, even in overseeing her auditing leading up to her breakdown.

In RVY's testimony, he explains how DM would *have* to have known even the smallest details of Lisa's 'handling' and that her death was *directly* due to a deliberate lack of 'orders' to do anything but let her die.

It may sound far-fetched to suggest that her death was deliberate, but, RVY makes a very good case that was the only possible outcome, since no-one at the scene could operate without orders and *no orders were forthcoming*.

I suspect that the last days of 'logs' show an increasingly frantic group of people watching her die and begging for instructions to do something to save her.

But, of course, that's just my suspicion and the people who know either aren't talking or, in some cases, are lying.

Zinj

This is the link to some of Lisa McPherson's "Baby Watch" logs: http://www.lisamcpherson.org/watd_backup/lisam.htm

This is not all of the information, however. A lot of it was missing.

A year ago, Marty confessed to destroying evidence in the Lisa McPherson criminal case. I wonder if part of what he destroyed were the missing baby watch logs?

Only Marty knows.

And he ain't talkin'.
 
Last edited:

Zinjifar

Silver Meritorious Sponsor
A year ago, Marty has confessed to destroying evidence in the Lisa McPherson criminal case. I wonder if part of what he destroyed were the missing baby watch logs?

Only Marty knows.

And he ain't talkin'.

No, Marty 'confessed' to having told *others* to 'lose' (not destroy) the logs, and, yes, it's at least the last days of logs he and we're talking about.

So, they may not be 'destroyed' and *there are other people* who know about it, but, Marty hasn't revealed who they are. Also, it seems important to stress that even what Marty *does* say doesn't have to be true, even if he said it, and, even when it is 'true' it would be naive to think it was the 'whole truth'.

Zinj
 
No, Marty 'confessed' to having told *others* to 'lose' (not destroy) the logs, and, yes, it's at least the last days of logs he and we're talking about.

So, they may not be 'destroyed' and *there are other people* who know about it, but, Marty hasn't revealed who they are. Also, it seems important to stress that even what Marty *does* say doesn't have to be true, even if he said it, and, even when it is 'true' it would be naive to think it was the 'whole truth'.

Zinj

Marty admitted he destroyed evidence to help cover up a homicide
 

Wisened One

Crusader
I can't emphasise enough how valuable the data is from ex Int base staff, and those who were involved in the secret side of scientology that the majority of scio staff and public didn't have access to.

I used to hang out (and still do) for posts from BFG, Mr Peacock, Little Bear Victor, Dart Smoen (and many more) - and you John! This info fills in the picture, gives the missing puzzle pieces and brings to light the hidden crimes that need to be exposed. It helps the rest of us make sense of the twisted concepts we had been living with, and I for one am very grateful for their courage.

I understand that for some ex Int staff the process of feeling safe enough to go public, including considerations of family safety, are vitally important. Sometimes this takes time. It also depends on whether that person actually can face talking about what they did, and what was done to them. There can be so much hidden guilt, confusion and thought stopping concepts that still need to be addressed.

I agree that parking halfway out with a severely moderated blog is still a step out, we can only pray that each individual involved realises it is only a step outside the walls - and there is still a way to go....!

Each time someone speaks out it HELPS A LOT OF PEOPLE.

Something worth remembering. :)

What FTS said! :yes: (and I love Jeff's posts, too!).

I hope MORE Ex-Int's come forward and share their stories!! It's safer now than ever to do so and will HELP A LOT of PEOPLE WAKE UP!!!
 

Mick Wenlock

Admin Emeritus (retired)
Scientology thrived because the Church of Scientology et al. often succeeded in shuddering people into silence (through various threats), or convincing them that to keep silent was in everybody's best interests ("poor little Scientology/LHR will get needlessly hurt if you talk" or whatever rationalization.)

But people trying to fully document Scientology are not trying to keep any information under a lid, quite the opposite, and nobody is threatened into talking.

So I don't see how we can "force" people to talk by merely asking for details about the icebergs under these tips sticking out. I can see that some questions might be uncomfortable, but we can't possibly blame the questions being asked, and seeing this as "forced."

Edit: Maybe my point will become more clear... If we want to use the word "forced" here, then I will use it too: "nobody can force me to not ask questions"

I think we are arguing past similar points here. Let me put it this way - I think we are on the same side on this.

I think that in order to get out of the mind set and the whole mind fuck one has to be willing to take responsibility (in the real sense, not the scientology HUbbardian sense) and be willing to help those one has hurt, be willing to expose what one has hidden as part of those duties. And until a person is willing to do that - then I consider them to still be part of the problem - and I do not give a rats arse that people seem to think its a good idea for them to sit around and not do anything. I do not. These people set out to hurt people.

But I wont scream at them or argue with them about it. If they don't see it then I don't care to waste my time on them.
 

Mick Wenlock

Admin Emeritus (retired)
I just got a message from someone who in the past was very important on certain lines of Scientology and even has family at the Int Base who have disconnected. Even this person has tried to get in contact with several of the people I was referring to in the OP via Facebook - ex Int's hanging out at the Shack. He was asking them if they knew anything that was done against him behind his back. His questions too were followed by silence.

I think you and I had a similar conversation a few weeks ago when I asked you almost the same question. I have always been surprised that I have never heard from either of the M&Ms.
 

Zinjifar

Silver Meritorious Sponsor
I think you and I had a similar conversation a few weeks ago when I asked you almost the same question. I have always been surprised that I have never heard from either of the M&Ms.

I bet you get a real start at jack in the boxes :)

Zinj
 

Ned Kelly

Patron
Hi Ned,
Thanks for giving us an idea of the different opinions and feelings of some of the ex's and Indies.

We need some info, though. Some hard, solid info on a few subjects that some of them have.

Not for the media, not for lawsuits and not even for the forums. We need the info for full exposure of abuse and corruption in order to change laws and help the law with investigations so these crimes and abuses will be stopped.

This would be completely confidential and their names are not even needed. You don't have to even be personally involved. And the info could not possibly be traced back to them, either, since at this time there must be at least a hundred people out of the SO that can supply similar info. Who would know who supplied it? The C of S would have no way at all to find that out.

Please give it some thought. Get some opinions of other Indies and ex's and please PM me privately and don't even answer this on here. You are not the only person I am presenting with this and I expect there are Indies and other ex's out there who would be very interested in a trustworthy snitch line without their names that would get justice. Because some of them want justice. They don't want the risk. Fair enough. I'm willing to take that risk.

Sheila Huber

Thanks for your post. Maybe I have I have not been too clear on my position. I am fully supportive of people speaking out and providing their stories. I am even supportive of them doing it publicly if that is what they want to do.

But it is their choice if they decide to play ball or not and if they decide not to, then so be it.

In the majority of cases, telling ones stories would not have any legal repercussions for a person and so that is not something they would need to be concerned about. However there are many other reasons that may be sufficient for them to decide not to talk.

If they have first-hand knowledge of criminal activity, that could involve them in a legal fight, then as I have said previously, my advice is for them to get professional legal advice before they speak to anyone.

I realise that you may intend to keep a person’s anonymity and that from your view this would be sacrosanct. However, that is far easier said than done, especially if the information provided is crucial to some sort of legal process. You may be forced into disclosing a person’s identity or, as mentioned before, it could become evident who the person is through further investigations of the material provided. In which case the person’s identity would be known.

Is it morally or ethically right that a person who has committed crimes stay silent and not fess up? No it is not. It is not the “right thing to do” but in this world it is the person’s choice. Even if the person was to appear in court that person can decide to be in contempt and not say anything and there is nothing anyone can do about it. I am NOT saying this is the right, just pointing out the fact.

I have no grudge with you approaching people and asking them to speak out.
 

i'mglib

Patron with Honors
John, great thread and great post.

Read John's post again, Ned. He never says the word "force". He's just disappointed that people who have info aren't speaking out. Can't argue with that, I don't think. It IS disappointing.

For people who haven't reads John's and BFG's and LBV's and Mr. Peacock's posts on OCMB, please do. I think this is what John is talking about. As these stories trickled out, it was just astounding. Being chased around the Int Base property in the dark by motorcycle-riding guards? Being pushed in the pool while DM stood and watched, smiling? Being forced to sleep under desks for days and weeks at a time? Being made to play musical chairs for their jobs? I believe this is what John is talking about, and for crying out loud if that's what John and others saw, imagine what some of the people at the very top saw.

Obviously no one can be "forced" to tell these stories. And there is no "legal" reason they should. But there are other reasons. Pulling back the veil of secrecy of what happened at Int (and most likely is still happening) will help people still in understand what is wrong with the Church and why people need to ask questions and do some research, and STOP these abuses from continuing.
 

Ned Kelly

Patron
Wikileaks:



They all should talk. They all should lay it bare, the way they saw it. We will never fully know Scientology if they don't say all that came out of applying Scientology. I don't want to be told what is and what is not Scientology. I want to form my own opinion from all the accounts of the application of Scientology. I want as much as possible historical materials in order to provide as accurately as possible a picture of Scientology for the coming generation, if only to clue in other generation about totalitarian worldviews disguised as "the only salvation for mankind." That's my opinion.

Good luck with that.
 

Ned Kelly

Patron
Funny you say that. I published have my own set of questions to Mike Rinder/Marty Rathbun. I will add more as I keep reading materials.

Now, do you think I think the "other person will comply"? If your answer is "yes", then you are quite mistaken. I never expected to personally have an answer from them.

I put these questions up so that whoever is interested in Scientology history can be reminded that there is a lot of stuff still not said about Scientology. That's why I do this, to remind people that there is still a lot we don't know. And I'm not about to feel bad to point out this.

I have never said or inferred in any way that you should feel bad about pointing out the stuff you have blogged. Go for it, more power to you etc.
 

Ned Kelly

Patron
Bingo.

I say it's okay to ask questions of those who have answers. There's no enforcement here, only questions. Out here in the real world, you will not be RPF'd for speaking your mind and telling your side of the story. People will listen and people will be helped.

The full picture of what happened in Scientology and especially at the upper levels needs to be made known by as many sources as possible. The CoS wants ex members to be silent. I say, the more people who speak out and make the truth known, the harder it is for the CoS to keep a lid on it.

The truth is owed to all of those people who were swindled out of millions of dollars; people who lost loved ones and had their families torn apart; people who were Fair Gamed; people who were enslaved; and people who should be warned.

So, I'm guessing some people think we should all just sit back, shut up, twiddle our thumbs and wait for the next card that Marty's going to throw on the table against DM over at the Shack? Are we supposed to just "hope" that law enforcement is actually doing some sort of investigation behind the scenes and that's why people are being silent? Are we supposed to think that just because ex-players (who are being silent) are hanging out at the Shack, and pledging allegiance, that everything's gonna be okay now because real LRH Standard Tech is back? Are we just cool now because we know DM was responsible for everything gone wrong in Scientology and that Hubbard really had nothing to do with any of it at all. Really?

Sorry, I don't buy it. But, that's just my opinion.

That's right, you are guessing. I for one don't think people should sit back and do nothing. You want to ask people to give you data? Go for it.
 
Top