Bob Adams - Church of Scientology International Vice-President -- April 2014

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Since Bob Adams' name has come up on other threads/posts here @ ESMB, I did a simple Google search to try and learn if he is still an active member of Co$.

Here's a link that popped up near the top of Google's simple search results page - it provides a short, but informative, historical sketch: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~./dst/Stop-Narconon/Bob-Adams/index.html

The very short video clip below was filmed in September 2012 in/near Sandy Springs, GA. (A Zoning Board meeting re: Narconon.)
Bob Adams introduces himself as, "...Vice-President of the Church of Scientology International".
Does this video prove Bob Adams is Vice-President of CSI in 2014? Nope; but then I only did a simple Google search.

[video=youtube;co5B2sXW7-w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co5B2sXW7-w[/video]

Away from Google, there are quite a few posts here @ ESMB that identify Bob Adams as being an executive staff member of Co$; some mention his specific assigned department as OSA, either working in the PR or Legal section therein.
I've read most of the posts but can't seem to find any that link directly to an original document that says definitively: Bob Adams = OSA.
YMMV...and I do encourage others here to search and find more/more current info on this individual so we'll all be better informed.:yes:

There is one 'leaked' email purportedly sent by Bob Adams prior to his visit to the Melbourne, Australia org on/near November 28, 2009.
The email is 'signed': "Much Love, Bob Adams, Vice President, Church of Scientology International".
It can be found at this ESMB post: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...t-coming-to-Oz&p=335255&viewfull=1#post335255

After reading quite a bit about the management structure of Co$, it doesn't seem as if the title of VP is given to just anyone.
Further, given the Co$ policy NOT to permit on-camera interviews with their spokesreps in this post-Tommy Davis world,
having Bob Adams appear at a public meeting on behalf of Narconon with cameras rolling, identifying himself as VP of CSI,
implies he has the confidence & full support of upper-echelon Co$ management.

So.

If anyone now or in future obtains current info on Bob Adams and his work for and/or on behalf of Co$/CSI, this thread is a good place to post it.

JB

(I'll pull-up other threads with "Bob Adams" in the title and add them in a few minutes.)
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
If anyone now or in future obtains current info on Bob Adams and his work for and/or on behalf of Co$/CSI, this thread is a good place to post it.


Maybe if anyone here happens to be a friend of Bob they could just phone him and ask? :coolwink:
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
This is taken off a CoS website as of a few minutes ago.

Here's the link: (WARNING: THIS IS AN OFFICIAL COS WEBSITE!)
http://www.scientologynews.org/contact

My understanding is that the "Human Rights" organizations he is a spokesman for fall under OSA.

Is that correct?

bob1_zps1940eca0.jpg

bob_zps6abd4ae9.jpg
 

Leland

Crusader
Companies like to hire X-Pro ball players. They kind of add a macho panache to their corporate and public image. So as usual Scientology copies the "wog" world.

You figure a pro ball career ends around age 35 or so. ( if you don't get injured to bad.) So what are they going to do with the rest of their lives?
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Here's the link to Dana Goodyear's January 14, 2008 article in The New Yorker: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/01/14/080114fa_fact_goodyear?currentPage=all

"Letter from California: Chateau Scientology - Inside the Church's Celebrity Centre"

Excerpt:

The Church of Scientology bought the Château Élysée for a million dollars from a group affiliated with the First Congregational Church of Los Angeles, which had been using it since the nineteen-fifties as a retirement home. The building was run-down, with rebar poking through its shell, and, as studios moved to the valley and stars moved to Bel Air and the beach, the neighborhood, too, was becoming increasingly desolate.

The Church used volunteers and staff for the restoration. Stephen Kent, a sociologist at the University of Alberta who specializes in alternative religions and has interviewed many former Scientologists, told me that “much of the labor that renovated the Celebrity Centre was performed by people on the R.P.F., or Rehabilitation Project Force, who often worked dangerously long hours for almost no pay.”

(Bob Adams, a former N.F.L. tight end who is the vice-president of the Church of Scientology International, said that the R.P.F.—which is sometimes characterized by critics as a punishment for Church staff members who get out of line—is a volunteer program for self-improvement. “They get frequent breaks, eight hours of sleep, and three healthy meals,” he said. “The principal part is auditing, but the physical activity is very extrovertive for the individual and is found to be very therapeutic in itself.” Besides, he said, the R.P.F. furnished only a portion of the labor for Celebrity Centre and worked alongside professional contractors.)

(When I asked Bob Adams about Xemu, he said, “A small fraction of our scriptures are confidential, and I don’t want to allude to something confidential.”)

So...

Bob Adams was VP of CSI in 2008, even before his Melbourne, Australia trip in/around November 2009.

During 2008 & 2009, Co$ actually tasked people with serving as their official media spokesreps (Mike Rinder - Tommy Davis) so I wonder why Bob Adams served as a point-of-contact* for this article? (Perhaps because it was mostly about the building itself?)

(*Also quoted in the article is Hilary Royce, Community Affairs Officer for CC Int'l., Greg LaClaire and Art Medeiros, building manager.)

JB
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
This is taken off a CoS website as of a few minutes ago.

Here's the link: (WARNING: THIS IS AN OFFICIAL COS WEBSITE!)
XXXXXXX <----Deleted by JBWriter.

My understanding is that the "Human Rights" organizations he is a spokesman for fall under OSA.

Is that correct?

bob1_zps1940eca0.jpg

bob_zps6abd4ae9.jpg

Thanks, Type4_PTS! :thumbsup:

Okay, Ex-scientologists, is "spokesperson" higher or lower than "Vice-President of CSI" in the management pecking order?
Or is it possible that "spokesperson" for certain Co$ front groups is simply an additional duty for the VP of CSI?

JB
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Here is a thread from 2008 entitled:
Bob Adams, Vice President of CofS Int, coming to Oz

In a letter to scientologists posted in the OP of that thread Bob says:
"Join me and the officers and staff of the Melbourne Org for an in depth OSA International briefing and an evening of fun and excitement."

Yes, I saw that Type4_PTS, but I wasn't sure if it meant that Bob Adams was inviting people to come attend the "OSA International briefing" along with him or if he was giving the "OSA International briefing".
The email isn't signed: Bob Adams, VP of CSI and OSA Int'l. Briefer, so the OSA connection isn't definitively nailed down in this 2009 email.
It's close, though. :)

JB
 

freethinker

Sponsor
Vice President and Spokesperson would be the equivalent in the Scientology pecking order. OSA is department 21 of the Executive Division there is a PR Section within OSA. The Vice President would be the equivalent of spokesperson/ PR .

Their job is to gain acceptance of Scientology by speaking highly of it in the public arena. Spokeshole and VP are one in the same.


Thanks, Type4_PTS! :thumbsup:

Okay, Ex-scientologists, is "spokesperson" higher or lower than "Vice-President of CSI" in the management pecking order?
Or is it possible that "spokesperson" for certain Co$ front groups is simply an additional duty for the VP of CSI?

JB
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
Yes, I saw that Type4_PTS, but I wasn't sure if it meant that Bob Adams was inviting people to come attend the "OSA International briefing" along with him or if he was giving the "OSA International briefing".
The email isn't signed: Bob Adams, VP of CSI and OSA Int'l. Briefer, so the OSA connection isn't definitively nailed down in this 2009 email.
It's close, though. :)

I do believe that (as Freethinker said) that the spokesperson would be posted in OSA.

It's a PR function which is handled by that department. :yes:
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
I do believe that (as Freethinker said) that the spokesperson would be posted in OSA.

It's a PR function which is handled by that department. :yes:

Yep - Division 6. Its possible that Bob Adams is just the front man and may not be fully aware of the various Network Orders which underpin the wider role of OSA. Not many Scientologists are aware of the hidden-data line, although in Bob's case he has most likely come across . . .


B O A R D T E C H N I C A L B U L L E T I N

OF 10 DECEMBER 1969
REISSUED AS BTB 21 JUNE 1975

CANCELS
HCO Bulletin of 10 DECEMBER 1969
SAME TITLE

PRO COURSE
Not for distribution

CONFIDENTIAL

REPORTER TRS

1. Answering non loaded questions

Purpose: To train a PRO to answer such questions with confidence and
simplicity, as are often asked by reporters. EG., What is Scientology
(R)? What's Clear, OT? How does an E-Meter work?

Method: The PRO and 'reporter' sit across a table facing each other. The
'reporter' asks the questions and the PRO must answer, without a long
communication lag and in a way which readily communicates to the
reporter. The drill is coached as in the TRs.

The drill is passed when the PRO is confident he can answer the basic
questions asked about Scientology.

2. No Answer

Purpose: To train a PRO to give a 'no answer' to questions he has no
wish to answer directly.

Method: To begin with the reporter reading the questions asked LRH by
'The Sun' reporter Victor Chapple - and the PRO reads LRH's answers.
This is just to accustom him to the idea of 'no answer'.

Then using different questions, the PRO gives 'no answers'. The trick is
to appear to answer the question by giving generalized statements in
simple terms so that the reporter doesn't realize his question hasn't
been answered.

The PRO should be completely causative over the communication and end it
with certainty, so that the reporter gets this and goes on to the next
question.

3. Non sequitur events

Purpose: To enable a PRO to practice getting his "message" across and
tag it on to any current event. Also a preparation for the day when our
PROs will be asked to comment on current events.

Method: One person has a newspaper in front of him and reads out a
headline (and perhaps a line or two of the story if necessary for the
PRO's understanding of it). Ask the PRO what comment he would like to
make on it. The PRO should comment briefly and lead from this into his
message.

The drill is passed when the PRO can tack a message on to virtually any
event, smoothly and with reality.

4. Handling a suppressive T.V. interviewer

Purpose: To train a PRO to get his message across in spite of the
'interviewer', in the few short minutes usually available on television.
This is so that .... million people have no doubts after the programme
what the Scientologist stands for and what he is against.

Method: The PRO and interviewer face each other and the interviewer asks
questions. The PRO attaches his message in varying forms to as many
answers as possible. If the interviewer is SP he must be introverted as
in the hat write up, and then the PRO has his "say". The interview has
been successful when the PRO has got his message across to his
satisfaction.

5. Handling an SP

a) By overwhelm

Purpose: To train a PRO to be able to establish Ethics presence over an
SP reporter if the occasion arises, by such things as shouting, banging,
pointing, swearing. To do this completely causatively until the poor
reporter is 'caved in'.

Method: The reporter and PRO sit across a table facing each other and
the reporter asks SP questions. The PRO overwhelms without judgement in
answer to the SP question until he does it with reality, causativeness
and the overwhelm really reaches the reporter. TR 1 is a part of this
drill - there is no point saying the words if they don't reach the other
guy.

b) By being knowingly covertly hostile

Purpose: To train the PRO to handle an SP reporter by word alone without
the use of force as in (a). He uses the word as a rapier and plunges it
in at the reporter, so that the reporter introverts and drops the
question.

Method: The PRO and reporter sit across a table and the reporter asks SP
type questions.

The PRO observes what would be a button in relation to the question asked
and throws this back with good TR 1 so that it reaches home. If the
reporter is introverted the PRO is successful. If the reporter persists
with the same question the PRO should not re-press the same button - it
obviously didn't work. He should drop it and use another one. If the
PRO cannot think of a snide reply the reporter should just say "flunk,
you haven't handled me. Start" - or some such remark - but should not
tell the PRO what to say. When the confusion has come off the PRO will
be able to handle and have a big win.

The drill is completed when the PRO is willing to create a cave in with
an accurate snide remark, question or statement.

c) By stalling for time

Purpose: To train a PRO to maintain his confront and composure when
given some SP sensational news by a reporter, of which he has no prior
knowledge.

Method: The reporter asks the PRO for his comments on an entheta
situation involving a Scientologist.

The PRO maintains his ethics presence and duplicates the reporter's nasty
angle to his satisfaction. He then stalls for time and gets the
reporter to wait a few minutes or hours or so (whatever is necessary)
while he checks his facts.

The drill is passed when the PRO is confident that he could not be taken
off guard by a reporter by being presented by an unknown situation.

d) By handling the reporter in front of you (verbal Karate)

Purpose: To train a PRO to handle the reporter in front of him, with
judgement in present time.

Method: The PRO and the reporter sit across a table facing each other.
The PRO is asked a miscellany of questions. If it is a genuine
question, he can answer it, if possible tacking his message on to the
reply. If the question puts him the least bit at effect, he takes this
flow and turns it towards the reporter with an even greater velocity.
He does this either by a snide remark, question or comment, or by
physical overwhelm, whichever seems the right action to establish ethics
presence.

He should never allow himself to be put at effect, and should not
tolerate it even for an instant, but immediately attack back.

The drill is passed when the PRO no longer uses a machine or method to
handle the reporter - but he is totally there, confident and handling.

_Comment_ If your student experiences difficulty on these TRs one of two
things are out: a) Scientology TRs 0 - IV are not flat or b) he slipped
through a previous Reporter TR without a weakness or button on him being
found and flattened.

_History_ These drills have been evolved by PRO WW to train anyone on a
gradient scale to handle any situation a reporter could pose. They are
based on the HCOP/L 3.2.69 Public Image which states "Don't defend Scn,
attack bad conditions and bad hats!"


By Sheila Gaiman
PRAWW

From the hat write up of

David Gaiman
PR Chief WW

Reissued as BTB by
Flag Mission 1234 I/C
CPO Andrea Lewis

for the
BDCS:AL:DG:SG:al
Copyright (c) 1969, 1975 BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF THE
by L. Ron Hubbard CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
 

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Yep - Division 6. Its possible that Bob Adams is just the front man and may not be fully aware of the various Network Orders which underpin the wider role of OSA. Not many Scientologists are aware of the hidden-data line, although in Bob's case he has most likely come across . . .

Thanks, Infinite, for providing your excellent insight :thumbsup: and, too, for the written policy.:ohmy:

Here, then, as pared down from the complete policy, are the only available response options a Co$ spokesrep, such as Bob Adams, is authorized to use when dealing with reporters/journalists:

1. Answering non loaded questions
Purpose: To train a PRO to answer such questions with confidence and
simplicity, as are often asked by reporters.
2. No Answer
Purpose: To train a PRO to give a 'no answer' to questions he has no
wish to answer directly.
3. Non sequitur events
Purpose: To enable a PRO to practice getting his "message" across and
tag it on to any current event.
4. Handling a suppressive T.V. interviewer
Purpose: To train a PRO to get his message across in spite of the
'interviewer', in the few short minutes usually available on television.
This is so that .... million people have no doubts after the programme
what the Scientologist stands for and what he is against
5. Handling an SP
a) By overwhelm
Purpose: To train a PRO to be able to establish Ethics presence over an
SP reporter if the occasion arises, by such things as shouting, banging,
pointing, swearing. To do this completely causatively until the poor
reporter is 'caved in'.
b) By being knowingly covertly hostile
Purpose: To train the PRO to handle an SP reporter by word alone without
the use of force as in (a). He uses the word as a rapier and plunges it
in at the reporter, so that the reporter introverts and drops the
question.
c) By stalling for time
Purpose: To train a PRO to maintain his confront and composure when
given some SP sensational news by a reporter, of which he has no prior
knowledge.
d) By handling the reporter in front of you (verbal Karate)
Purpose: To train a PRO to handle the reporter in front of him, with
judgement in present time.


What I see is how, when dealing with a reporter/journalist, a Co$ spokesperson may only:
(1) bluff, (2) avoid, (3) evade, (4) ignore, (5a) physically intimidate, (5b) verbally abuse, (5c) feign ignorance, and (5d) bicker.

But I don't see anything about how a Co$ spokesperson is supposed to tell the truth.
Or how to best present factual information.
Or which 'tech' should be used to befriend a reporter/journalist.
Or how to 'handle' a non-SP reporter/journalist. (<---Although I suppose there is no such thing in the Co$ literature.)


Bob Adams is a spokesperson for Co$/Co$-related groups, and the policy for Co$ spokespeople doesn't authorize telling the truth to reporters/journalists, so... __________? <----YMMV.

JB
 

cakemaker

Patron Meritorious
On the org board, the posts of 'President or 'Vice President' are mostly PR posts and are not involved in planning or management. The real authority and power resides with RTC reps, CMO messengers and WDC (although I don't believe WDC is functional anymore). I'm also not sure how active the Flag Rep network is. Maybe someone can fill in the current state of management lines.
 
If the interviewer is SP he must be introverted as in the hat write up, and then the PRO has his "say".
Really? Maybe that's why they failed to handle Anderson Cooper - he wasn't wearing his hat as an SP.

But I don't see anything about how a Co$ spokesperson is supposed to tell the truth.
Or how to best present factual information.
Or which 'tech' should be used to befriend a reporter/journalist.
Or how to 'handle' a non-SP reporter/journalist. (<---Although I suppose there is no such thing in the Co$ literature.)
Well truth in Scientology is an "acceptable truth" (shore story), so that would be #1 - non- loaded questions. The policy that Hubbard espouses regarding (all) reporters is this: their editors give them the story, and they just go looking for "facts" to flesh out the editor's canned story, so it follows, there is no good reason to try and establish ARC with what amounts to a rattlesnake that is ready to strike.

I was talking with the head of the Hollywood Literacy project once and asked a similar question about the press, and she said "a win is getting a reporter to print nothing - they never print a good story" ( it is a Scio based tutoring business that was across the street from the HGB)


Handling an SP

a) By overwhelm

Purpose: To train a PRO to be able to establish Ethics presence over an
SP reporter if the occasion arises, by such things as shouting, banging,
pointing, swearing. To do this completely causatively until the poor
reporter is 'caved in'.

Method: The reporter and PRO sit across a table facing each other and
the reporter asks SP questions. The PRO overwhelms without judgement in
answer to the SP question until he does it with reality, causativeness
and the overwhelm really reaches the reporter. TR 1 is a part of this
drill - there is no point saying the words if they don't reach the other
guy.

That makes me angry, really angry!!!

Mimsey
 
Last edited:

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
On the org board, the posts of 'President or 'Vice President' are mostly PR posts and are not involved in planning or management. The real authority and power resides with RTC reps, CMO messengers and WDC (although I don't believe WDC is functional anymore). I'm also not sure how active the Flag Rep network is. Maybe someone can fill in the current state of management lines.

Thanks, Cakemaker, for providing a bit more guidance on this topic. :thumbsup:

The thing is, when someone like Bob Adams addresses a group of non-scientologists (as he did in the video in Post #1 of this thread) and he tells them he is the "Vice President" of CSI, the people in the group already have a working definition/understanding of what a vice-president is, so they don't ask for the Co$-approved definition of what a vice-president is, does, or where that title is positioned within the Co$ managerial infrastructure.

And when Bob Adams doesn't volunteer the Co$-approved definition for "Vice President" to a group of non-scientologists,
he is relying upon the group's 'ignorance'.
That's
objectionable to all fair-minded, decent people.

But is Bob Adams authorized to provide non-scientologists with the Co$-approved definition of any title/job?
No, I don't think he, or any other Co$ spokesperson, is.
Certainly not if he's following the policy Infinite kindly posted earlier.

"John Johnson, VP General Motors" is understandable. John is a big shot.
"John Johnson, VP Cadillac Division, General Motors" is understandable. John is a semi-big shot.
"John Johnson, VP General Motors" is dishonest if John is actually only VP of Cadillac Division, not all of General Motors.

"Bob Adams, VP of CSI" is a dishonest representation to 99.9% of the public-at-large who read/hear it.
It would be far less dishonest if it was written/stated:
"Bob Adams, VP OSA Division 6, PR Dept., CSI" <---If that's truly his position; I'm just using it to better illustrate the point.

"Bob Adams, Ex-scientologist, Newest ESMB member" is, of course, a future option, too. :rock:

JB
 
Last edited:

Rene Descartes

Gold Meritorious Patron
(Bob Adams, a former N.F.L. tight end who is the vice-president of the Church of Scientology International, said that the R.P.F.—which is sometimes characterized by critics as a punishment for Church staff members who get out of line—is a volunteer program for self-improvement. “They get frequent breaks, eight hours of sleep, and three healthy meals,” he said. “The principal part is auditing, but the physical activity is very extrovertive for the individual and is found to be very therapeutic in itself.” Besides, he said, the R.P.F. furnished only a portion of the labor for Celebrity Centre and worked alongside professional contractors.)


BULLSHIT!!!


Rd00
 

Udarnik

Gold Meritorious Patron
Thanks, Cakemaker, for providing a bit more guidance on this topic. :thumbsup:

The thing is, when someone like Bob Adams addresses a group of non-scientologists (as he did in the video in Post #1 of this thread) and he tells them he is the "Vice President" of CSI, the people in the group already have a working definition/understanding of what a vice-president is, so they don't ask for the Co$-approved definition of what a vice-president is, does, or where that title is positioned within the Co$ managerial infrastructure.

And when Bob Adams doesn't volunteer the Co$-approved definition for "Vice President" to a group of non-scientologists,
he is relying upon the group's 'ignorance'.
That's
objectionable to all fair-minded, decent people.

But is Bob Adams authorized to provide non-scientologists with the Co$-approved definition of any title/job?
No, I don't think he, or any other Co$ spokesperson, is.
Certainly not if he's following the policy Infinite kindly posted earlier.

"John Johnson, VP General Motors" is understandable. John is a big shot.
"John Johnson, VP Dodge Division, General Motors" is understandable. John is a semi-big shot.
"John Johnson, VP General Motors" is dishonest if John is actually only VP of Dodge Division, not all of General Motors.

"Bob Adams, VP of CSI" is a dishonest representation to 99.9% of the public-at-large who read/hear it.
It would be far less dishonest if it was written/stated:
"Bob Adams, VP OSA Division 6, PR Dept., CSI" <---If that's truly his position; I'm just using it to better illustrate the point.

"Bob Adams, Ex-scientologist, Newest ESMB member" is, of course, a future option, too. :rock:

JB

Yes. This is like me (a Ph.D.) representing myself as "Doctor Udarnik" in a medical setting. It is my right to be addressed as "Doctor" if I'm teaching in a University setting. Elsewhere, I avoid the honorific because of the confusion it would cause in my line of work.
 
Last edited:

Leland

Crusader
Yes. This is like me (a Ph.D.) representing myself as "Doctor Udarnik" in a medical setting. It is my right to be addressed as "Doctor" if I'm teaching in a University setting. Elsewhere, I avoif the honorific because of the confusion it would cause in my line of work.

I think you are missing the point JB is making. I know what you are saying, my sister is a Phd. But Scientology takes real world words like Church, Minister, confessional, for example , that people have an understanding of, but in Scientology they mean something entirely different. They fool people.
 
Top