Because of my years inside the cult in several places and positions, my possession of Hubbard’s archive, researching his life, my post-Scientology studies, almost 30 years as Scientologists’ fair game target and victim, and observation of Scientologists’ attacks on similarly placed victims, I have acquired considerable experience and a working knowledge of psychopathy and its manifestations in Scientologists. I believe psychopathy, hopefully Scientology-generated, makes sense of the statements about me on Rathbun’s blog by Karen de la Carriere and “Barney Rubble,” two Scientologists and members of the Scientology entity known as the “Independents” or “Indies.” And it is these three Scientologists’ statements that have brought me to write this.
[…]
I knew Karen de la Carriere, of course, on the “Apollo” in the 1970’s. I was legal, PR and intel, and she was an auditor. I would have seen her around a few times at the FLB during a couple of years in the later 1970’s. I don’t believe that our paths crossed again or that I ever had a memorable interaction or communication with her.
Heber Jentzsch had been my stepfather-in-law until his wife and my then mother-in-law Yvonne died, I think in January 1978. So he now is and will forever be my ex-stepfather-in-law. Yvonne’s daughter Terri is and will forever be my ex. Because of my relationship to Heber, at some point I had become aware that he had married Karen.
I don’t know who Barney Rubble is, but somewhere I think I saw some reference to him or her knowing Mike Rinder in Curaçao in the 1970’s. So maybe we know each other from the “Apollo.”
De la Carriere and Rubble went on, or off, about me in reaction to a recent comment on Rathbun’s blog by ex-Scientologist Allen Stanfield. I don’t believe I’ve ever met Allen, although I have read quite a few things he’s posted different places on the Internet, and I appreciate his depth of thought and good writing. Earlier this year, he wrote a kind and actually courageous article, “History of Scientology Criticism: Who is Gerry Armstrong?”[3] that meant and means a lot to me.
[3] History of Scientology Criticism: Who is Gerry Armstrong?”: http://alanzosblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/history-of-scientology-criticism-who-is.html
Allen’s point that triggered the reaction was that I was like Rathbun when he set up his blog and started writing in that we both knew what we were in for and did it anyway. Allen apparently felt that both Rathbun and I did whatever we did not to gain personally, and we knew we would be attacked if we did it, but went ahead regardless. It isn’t clear in Allen’s comment what I did that he is equating with Rathbun setting up his blog. This theme of me doing what I did despite knowing I’d be fair gamed, however, is also present in Allen’s article about me on his own blog, so what he had in mind about me in his comment on Rathbun’s blog can probably be ascertained from there: essentially that I had dared to tell Scientologists, and wogs I suppose, the truth I knew about Hubbard and Scientology. And part of what I told was the truth about their lying.
It’s fairly clear that Allen got the idea of communicating to the world about the similarities between Rathbun and me from seeing Rathbun’s e-mail to me that listed what he called “critical differences” between us. These claimed differences were “critical” to Rathbun because they were what he used to justify his refusal to help me correct ongoing injustices he had helped perpetrate. One of his critical differences between us was:
Rathbun said:
You sold out twenty-three years ago – and are apparently still mad at yourself for the indelible taint it left. I will never sell out.
De la Carriere repeated Rathbun’s claimed critical difference, although for her merely a huge difference, in her response to Allen:
Karen #1 said:
There are huge differences between Gerry Armstrong and Marty Rathbun.
I will name one of them.
Gerry Armstrong took some $800,000 settlement /hush money to be quiet and go away.
Marty Rathbun under no circumstance would take hush money or be silenced for cash.
Barney Rubble gave de la Carriere his stamp of approval:
Barney Rubble said:
+1, Karen you nailed it on the head. Gerry Armstrong never really had his Strategic Plan and look at him now. Wonder what he did with his payoff $.
“Strategic Planning” is a Scientology religious rite, and a “Strategic Plan” is the Scientology religious canon that results from the Strategic Planning rite. Hubbard defined “Strategic Plan” in scripture in HCOPL 31 July 1983 “Basic Management Tools.”
Hubbard said:
A STRATEGIC PLAN is a statement of the intended plans for accomplishing a broad objective and inherent in its definition is the idea of clever use of resources or maneuvers for outwitting the enemy or overcoming existing obstacles to win the objective. It is the central strategy worked out at the top which, like an umbrella, covers the activities of the echelons below it.
It’s true I haven’t been a Scientologist in almost thirty years, and for all that time have not practiced that Scientology rite, or accepted, written or possessed the canon or fatwah that constitutes a Strategic Plan. So in that sense Rubble’s right. But it’s like saying I never really had my adult baptism, my black mass, or my brit milah, and look at me now. I do understand that because Scientologists have their strat plan rites and constant clever maneuvering against enemies as religious expression, they view wogs who don’t constantly plan strategically, or maneuver or scheme, as inferior and degraded – look at him now.
De la Carriere responded to Rubble expanding on the huge difference she postulated between Rathbun and me:
Karen #1 said:
Barney ~~
To be fully accurate here, Gerry Armstrong took an $800,00 settlement from the Cult.
WHEREAS when DM sent a bunch of Lawyers to descend on Mike Rinder in Colorado after he fled offering him megabucks ~~ high six figures~~~
Mike Rinder could not be bought for cash.
None of the Indies whom Gerry via Caroline regularly attack as filthy liars, indeed attacking us as the scum of the EARTH wretched, deluded souls for using LRH tech ~~ none of the Indies have taken hush money $$$$ $800,000 to shut up and be quiet.
Gerry reneged on his $800,000 settlement with CoS and thus began his long and protracted legal war with the Cult. Gerry has tried to universalize his legal problems by arguing that all people in the entire world are either “beneficiaries” or “victims” of Scientology v. Armstrong. Worse, the very Indies whom Gerry believes can extricate him from his self-created legal Hell will apparently not give him the help he needs –
He daily screams for Marty’s help while screaming on OCMB how vile Marty is ~~
It is almost a dementia ~~
Having never taken a big payday from the Cult, Marty and Mike Rinder are free and say and do whatever they want.
Unlike recent departures from INT Base, being paid huge sums of money to shut up and not go to Law Enforcement, Mike and Marty will never be bribed.
I respect that.
That Caroline and I regularly attack Indies as filthy liars and scum of the earth wretched, deluded souls for using LRH tech, or whatever they call Scientolopathy training or the dramatization of the Scientolopathic state, is clearly untrue. I do say that Indies, in fact all Scientologists whether Indies or Innies, are liars; and I say that because it’s true, because their lying hurts a lot of people, and because they should stop lying for everyone’s sake. I realize that lying is a core Scientology sacrament, and essential for retaining the gains of the Scientolopathic state or condition. The state in reality, however, is not valuable, and certainly is not the state Scientolopaths will attest they’re in.
Scientologists call their group and personal psychopathic state different things at various points or in certain situations in their lives; for example, “Insouciance,” “On-Sourceness,” “In-Ethics,” “Ethics Presence,” “Using LRH Tech,” “Clear,” “Homo Novis,” “Operating Thetan” or “OT,” “Tone-40” “Effectiveness,” “At Cause,” “Responsibility of Leaders,” or just plain “Responsibility,” and “Greatness.” Hubbard invented all these neologisms for his Scientolopathic state, and presented them all as positive or pro-survival. He made them all not only highly desirable, but optimum or ideal, and he sold the path to that state and how to maintain it once gained, for gargantuan sums of money. The Scientolopathic state inarguably can appear desirable and positive for Scientolopaths, but it is undesirable and negative for everyone else. The therapeutic goal for the rest of us is to get the Scientolopaths to see that their state is not in their best interests either.
I don’t think I’ve ever called anyone the scum of the earth, and don’t consider Indies, Innies or anyone the scum of the earth. I’ve never seen or heard Caroline attack anyone as scum of the earth for any reason, and that she regularly attacks Indies as scum of the earth is a ludicrous lie. We consider Scientologists in every essential way equal, and no better and no worse, than wogs. This philosophic and real position, unfortunately, is anathema to Scientologists because it is also the position that Scientology doesn’t work. The whole effort in Scientology, and the reason that Scientologists call themselves Scientologists, is to be better than wogs. This is, of course, an impossibility. Scientolopaths work to make the impossible real by lying and getting agreement with their lies. I recently wrote about lies versus truth in Scientology from a psycho-philosophical perspective in an answer to a question John Peeler asked.
[4]
[4]Why Mike and Marty won’t tell the truth: http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/5059
A number of people on OCMB where Caroline posts have used the idiom “scum of the earth,” but Caroline has never written it that I can find. “J. Swift,” for example, called Scientology a “scum-of-the-earth Master Race Cult.” He also wrote that, “People who make meth are the scum of the earth.” Gary Weber is quoted as writing about how he felt when leaving the cult, “I believed I was the scum of the earth, and totally useless to mankind.” It was Scientology and Scientologists making him feel that way, not wogs. A poster “CJK” provided the Scientologists’ definition for RPF’s RPF members: “RPFs RPF=scum of the earth, not allowed to talk to anyone and not allowed to leave.” “Free for Real” wrote of being a Scientologist and doing “all the things a good little cult member is supposed to do but then out of nowhere, I was the scum of the earth because I ran out of money.” It was fellow Scientologists making the broke Scientologist feel that way.
John Peeler confirmed the same thing about how Scientologists treat Scientologists, “When you’re a broke $cientologist, you’re treated like the scum of the earth.” John also described the Scientology group viewpoint about Scientologists at Gilman who wanted to live off the base, “These people were considered to be the scum of the earth for the next couple of months.” And John observed about ecclesiastical head Miscavige’s treatment of Scientologists generally, “David Miscavige gets off on treating those beneath him like the scum of the earth. He thrives on it.” It makes perverse sense for de la Carriere to be falsely accusing Caroline and me of regularly attacking Scientologists as scum of the earth, because Rathbun and his Indie Scientologists’ black PR on us is that we’re just as evil as Miscavige. In fact Rathbun and the Indies refer to the Scientologists’ victims like us as Miscavige’s best friends.
I don’t think Caroline or I ever called Indie or Innie Scientologists “wretched,” although I might have said that RPF conditions were wretched, or that RPFers at times looked wretched. The assertion that Caroline and I regularly attack Scientologists as wretched souls for any reason is just not true. I could have said that I felt wretched at times in Scientology, and not just in the RPF, because I did. So I do understand that Scientologists could still have their moments of wretchedness. A recurring thought I have is about Scientologists’ willingness to exist in wretched conditions in order to continue to support the effort to reduce the enemy to wretched conditions. One way to do that is to falsely accuse the enemy of some wretchedness, for example that he sold out or regularly attacked Scientologists as scum of the earth or wretched souls.
I did a quick search of OCMB and found that several people had used the word “wretched,” but couldn’t find where Caroline had used it. Some people called the RPF wretched, some called Scientology wretched, what Scientologists do to detractors and defectors wretched, the tech wretched, courses wretched, the scam wretched, and the religion wretched. Poster “Prufrock” surmised that, we are witnessing Scientology’s “wretched descent into the dustbin of stupid ideas.” J. Swift titled a thread, “THOU WRETCHED AND MOST FOUL SCIENTOLOGY!” He also called poster “Suzanne Marie” wretched, which was, I think, the only instance I saw where the word described a specific Scientologist. Michael Pattinson, writing as Hubbard, called his staff and the Sea Org “the wretched zombie group.” Somebody quoted Crowley from The Book of the Law, which is interesting because of its similarity to Hubbard’s “men are my slaves” philosophy:
We have nothing with the outcast and the unfit: let them die in their misery. For they feel not. Compassion is the vice of Kings: stamp down the wretched and the weak: this is the law of the strong: this is our law and the joy of the world. But nothing “wretched” from Caroline or me.
I also searched our own sites, and found that Caroline had webbed the dramatic leaving Scientology story by “Nefertiti,” who characterized a woman on the RPF’s RPF in Clearwater as looking “so wretched,” and described the scene of RPF sections mustering in columns as “a wretched sight.” Caroline did use the word once in a June 2003 letter to Miscavige:
That is what you depend upon — that good people, as Hubbard said, cannot confront Scientology’s evil. What must be done to stop this wretched evil, however, is to get good people to confront it, and even to rise up against it.
[5]
[5] See Caroline’s letter to DM of June 6, 2003. http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/writings/letkeman-ltr-miscavige-2003-06-06.html
She is, of course, writing about the whole wretched evil of Scientology, a small and uncertain percentage of which even Rathbun, de la Carriere and their fellow Indies say is destructive, or criminal, or evil, or similar. The task for people in my position is to lay out for the Indies the rest of the Scientology evil that they’re not confronting, and instead are, unconscionably, defending, promoting and selling. The task with the Innies for people like me is to lay out as much of the entire Scientology evil as possible, which includes the portion that the Indies say they’re confronting. I am obviously in multiple positions or classes in relation to Scientology and Scientologists, but I am considering here the position or class of unwilling victims of Scientologists’ application of their Suppressive Person doctrine. And the SP doctrine and the SP class are essential for the generation of the Scientolopathic state in Scientologists.
The SP doctrine is common to both Indies and Innies, and identical in every part of Scientology. Scientologists’ application or execution of the doctrine — the dramatization of Scientolopathy — is directed at people who lay out Scientology evil for confronting — real SPs. Yet real SPs have no other real and reasonable choice but to continue to present Scientology evil for confronting. It is obvious that for the care and safety of the SP class, and for the protection of everyone, it is wogs that must confront the Scientology evil. It’s nice when a Scientologist confronts the evil they’re involved in and gets out, and, of course, ex-Scientologists are the only people who can testify to certain facts about that evil; but it is vital that the evil be made available for wogs to confront.
Scientologists like Rathbun, de la Carriere and Rubble, and in fact all Scientolopaths are dedicated to preventing this evil from being confronted, and one of their key Scientolopathic modi operandi is black PRing the real SPs who present the evil for confronting.
What Scientologists, virtually universally, have done and are doing to prevent me from telling the truth, and even persecute or fair game me for telling the truth, about what must be confronted – the times, places, forms and events comprising the Scientology v. Armstrong war – is a terrible iniquity. It manifests in a gargantuan, still pulsating public injustice that Caroline and I have made available for anyone with eyes to confront. It is a key case, the confronting of which can bring wogs everywhere to better confront the whole Scientology evil, and even set Scientologists free from Scientology and the Scientolopathic condition. This naturally makes Caroline and me targets of the Scientolopaths who don’t want their co-cultists or -conspirators to be free.
I do believe that delusion is a quasi-factor in Scientologists’ mental state or condition, and in its generation and maintenance. I do not believe, however, that de la Carriere is communicating how I actually consider delusion relates to “using LRH tech,” or otherwise acting Scientolopathically. I probably view Scientologists both generally, and very knowledgeable Scientologists like Rathbun, de la Carriere and Miscavige specifically, as less deluded than most of their critics and even their wog collaborators view them. Scientologists, of course, are trained in conning or deluding others, and have to appear deluded no matter what else they think. Miscavige himself, a supremely cynical psychopath, has to appear completely deluded at times, such as when speaking at his grandiose public events. Feigned delusion is expedient, quite clearly, to Scientolopaths to justify their Scientolopathic actions toward their victims, otherwise why feign it.
Feigned delusion is not actual delusion, just as pretended ignorance, a very common pose or “beingness” among Scientologists, is not actual ignorance. Rathbun, de la Carriere and Miscavige are aware when they lie. They are aware of originating black PR to harm someone, and aware when they’re forwarding black PR. They are aware when they attack real SPs. They know that real SPs are people who present the Scientology evil for confronting, and that real SPs are telling the truth. Rathbun, de la Carriere, Miscavige, et al. know that Hubbard and Scientology’s victimization tech is antisocial. They know what the evil is to be confronted. They deny telling lies and doing evil to SPs, and they justify their evil acts, as any psychopaths justify their acts, with more lies, pretended ignorance and feigned delusions, such as the feigned delusion that I deserve the psychopathic treatment or handling they give me.
[…]
The following are a few more comments that are instructive in the thread on Rathbun’s blog that got into the sell-out issue. At the end I will address one more point.
The Count” wrote on August 11, 2011 at 6:00 am:
The Count said:
That’s right Karen. There is a huge difference. Gerry Armstrong (and Caroline Letkeman) shoot at the wrong target. They attack LRH, the tech and Scientology as a generality. From what I’ve seen, I think they are both truly SP’s. Marty and Mike on the other hand are shooting at the CORRECT target, which is David Miscavige. They both know that the tech works, whereas Gerry and Caroline don’t.
“RJ” wrote on August 11, 2011 at 8:58 am:
RJ said:
+1
Karen.
Comparing Marty or Mike to Gerry and his sock puppet Caroline who spend most of their time trying to invalidate the subject and character assassinate the Ol’man is an invidious connection in my opinion even though Allan may think otherwise.
“Fellow Traveller” wrote on August 11, 2011 at 12:47 pm, quoting Karen about her respect for Rathbun and Mike Rinder for not being “bribed” like me.
Fellow Traveller said:
I respect that.
So do I. Immensely.
Bruce Pratt
“Barney Rubble” wrote on August 11, 2011 at 3:07 pm:
Barney Rubble said:
Karen,
So true. And in final thought, in a youtube video of Gerry Armstrong I saw (shot in Vancouver with Anon’s) a few years ago, Mr. Armstrong looked like he was a meth victim. When one takes bribe $ from the DM cult one will get very bad kharma.
I might have actually seen methamphetamine once in my long ago youth. I might even have seen someone mainline it, but didn’t know what he was shooting up. I’ve never touched it or had any desire to do anything about it. I don’t know anyone that I know to be a meth victim, although a Google Images search for “meth victim” made it clear what Rubble had in mind.
[31] The way ironies work, I now see I’d stumbled onto “J. Swift” in 2009 declaring meth makers, of all the planet’s humanoids, “the scum of the earth.” Rubble has his item.
[31] Google image search>meth victim: http://tiny.cc/2wp3l
It is true that I’m lean, and I suppose that leanness is a possible condition for some meth victims. Really good runners, except for the shortest distance sprinters, are frankly all lean. I’m a runner, and black PRing good lean runners about looking like meth victims sounds like the thought and work of either the absolute paragon of physical health and perfection, or a psychopath who might not really be in the best of health at all. Rubble throws his crap from in hiding, of course, so his physical form can’t be examined for its flawlessness. Rathbun knows it’s crap and lets it stick. It helps fulfill his postulate that because I sold out – to him and his fellow Scientologists – I’m indelibly tainted on a dwindling spiral in a dark, dank dungeon and mad at myself. One would expect that an indelibly tainted guy on a dwindling spiral in a dark, dank dungeon and mad at himself could look like a meth victim.
Armstrong, G. (2011, 3 September). Who or What Sold Out? gerryarmstrong.ca. Retrieved on 6 August 2012 from http://www.gerryarmstrong.ca/archives/5
