24. The idea of giving away my house, TGAC [The Gerald Armstrong Corporation] stock and other assets, and forgiving all debts owed me, came to me in August, 1990. This idea, which I consider Divinely inspired, came, I believe, in answer to my prayer during that period requesting guidance concerning humanity's condition, and specifically the then developing Middle East crisis following Iraq's August 2, 1990 invasion of Kuwait. I was moved by media reports of the invasion, the global tension, and the daily events of Desert Shield, and I sought to know what, if anything, God wanted me to do. The idea of renunciation of worldly wealth, although coming at that time as a surprise, and unclear as to the details for its accomplishment, was not altogether illogical because I had long recognized that money, greed and power motivated much of the madness that made human beings war against each other.
[…]
26. During my years inside the Scientology organization I was subjected to L. Ron Hubbard's very different philosophy and practices concerning treasure, value and his brand of ethics. In the few times he mentions God in his writings, Hubbard attempted to mock Him, and he ridiculed the thought of Heaven. In his "upper level" secret directives Hubbard wrote that Christ is an implant, a Scientology term meaning a fixed idea electronically installed by force and pain to control and suppress its human victim. In exchange for money paid for his pricey psychotherapy Hubbard promised the worldly treasures of increased IQ, better communication skills, power, physical health, and the ability to make even more money. Unable to deliver on these secular promises, however, Hubbard and his organization, in response to the thousands of people who have been defrauded and requested refunds pursuant to his "money-back guarantees," have employed an army of lawyers to con our courts with the idea that these representations are "religious" and the ill-gotten and often extorted payments "donations." Hubbard stated as his organization's financial "Governing Policy," MAKE MONEY....MAKE MONEY. MAKE MORE MONEY. MAKE OTHER PEOPLE PRODUCE SO AS TO MAKE MONEY. The United States Tax Court thought this policy so noteworthy it quoted it in its official reports in Church of Scientology of California v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 83 TC 381 (1984) at 422. Hubbard and his organization justified their uncharitable policies and nature with a concept he called "rewarding downstats," which meant that the unable, infirm and poor should not be helped because helping such persons only rewarded them for being unable, infirm or poor. A related Hubbardian "truth" which permeated the organization was that people "pull in" the bad things which happen to them; that is, they bring upon themselves, or deserve, their difficulties or tragedies. This concept is used not only to excuse Hubbard and his organization's disregard for human suffering in all its forms, but to extol the suffering they have heaped on their "enemies." The attack on, for example, writer Paulette Cooper to ruin the woman (the organization's intelligence bureau under Hubbard's direction, in a scheme called "Operation Freakout," which had as its stated purpose to either get her imprisoned or driven insane, obtained through trickery her fingerprints on sheets of paper which were then used to send "anonymous" bomb threats to political figures) was right, "pro-survival" and ethical, because Ms. Cooper pulled it in. While this idea supports the Scientological group psyche in its organization, and in the entity it presents as plaintiff and defendant in our courts, its policy, philosophy and psychology do not allow the application of the same idea to L. Ron Hubbard or to the power structure that replaced him after his death in January, 1986. It is forbidden inside the organization even to think a critical thought about Hubbard or Scientology, and grounds to be declared "fair game" to expound either the idea that perhaps he may have done something to pull in some of the names he's been called; e.g., bigamist, bully, charlatan, cheat, liar, megalomaniac, swindler, wife beater; or that just maybe some of the persons the organization attacks do not deserve it. This double and twisted standard that Hubbard implanted in the Scientological mind keeps the organization's employees and customers ignorant of wisdom and blind to the madness of their actions, words and appearance. But reasonable and rational non-Scientologists are not blind to these things, as shown herein in the Breckenridge decision (Ex. B) and the Ideman declaration (Ex. F). Hubbard was shrewd enough to understand that even to the brainwashed a persona of "egoism, greed [and] avarice" (Ex. B, p.9, l.2) would trigger rejection; thus in public and in the legal arena he applauded his generosity and flatly denied the suggestion of inurement, In a public relations piece that went to every Scientologist in the world, and to any non-Scientologist who wanted one and many who didn't, he wrote that for all his work in saving mankind he was paid less than an average organization staff member. I was an average staff member during this assertion's international dissemination and I was paid between $4.30 and $17.20 per week. Hubbard paid himself untold millions. He had complete control of the organization and all organization bank accounts, and concocted amazing schemes for international money laundering; all while having his organization's personnel swear in civil litigation, criminal cases and official investigations that he had resigned as Scientology's director in 1966 and from that date had played no part in the organization's management. In keeping with his secret affirmations that "all men are my slaves," and "I have the right to use men's minds as I please," by which he programmed himself in the early days of his "development" of Dianetics and Scientology, he kept his workers impoverished while he ripped off millions illegally from the "charitable" corporations in which they labored. The new power structure has embarked on a glossy PR campaign in which it laments that all Scientology services aren't free and that it needs to charge what it does to "help create a safe and pleasant environment for everyone." A more accurate statement of the organization's fiscal philosophy is the article in the May 6, 1991 Time magazine, on the cover of which over an erupting octopodous monstrosity is blazoned "Scientology - Cult of Greed." I know personally a great number of people who have been victimized, abused, ripped off and discarded for no other reason than to satisfy the power structure's avariciousness. It is my knowledge of this cult of greed and the threat its leaders think I am to their shaky house of fraud that has brought them and their attorneys to attack me so relentlessly. I acknowledge that it is possible to view the giving away of my possessions in 1990 as a reaction to the years of inculcation with Hubbardian greed and meanspiritedness; but I do not see it that way. Hubbard and his organization were never able to destroy in me my God-given nature. Even inside the organization, in circumstances which made charity, compassion and understanding dangerous activities, Hubbard and his enforcers were never able to achieve total suppression. They were not successful with me, and I believe it will be ultimately shown that they will not have been successful with anyone; nor is suppression of anyone by any regime, state or entity entirely successful. It is our God-given nature that brought every person into Scientology and the Sea Org, and willing to live, work, fight for a cause, and endure terrible abuse, without thought of profit, bank accounts, investments or retiring. In his abuse of that divine nature Hubbard proclaimed it a "high crime" to even discuss retiring with one's fellow Scientologist workers. My analysis is that the use of our highest nature by an individual or organization for purposes not in our best interest; that is to say, suppression, is not merely not religion, it is irreligion; and as irreligion it should be stood up to and seen for what it is. My position in the litigation is that, by justice, law, this country's constitution, and God's Will, I am free to communicate that analysis in all the ways it can be said and by any means and media there are to say it.
[…]
33. Even though I was aware of Jesus's admonition to his disciples to not be troubled by wars and rumors of wars (Mark 13, 7; Luke 21,9), I was undeniably affected by the media images of Desert Shield as it built into Desert Storm and the international diplomatic drama that accompanied the military operations. I had already been moved, I felt, to enter the political and sociological landscapes, as I believe is shown by the letter to the captors, "Crash Course" and their recipients lists. I had also considered and argued in these other political matters - the hostages, the economy - that something could be done about them, and that what I thought could be done was, at least on paper, a better idea. It was not out of the ordinary or out of character, therefore, for me to consider that I could do something about Desert Shield, Desert Storm or the whole blessed Middle East. It was at that time that the idea came to me to give away my worldly possessions and to give myself to the cause of peace. After some thought, I transferred my interest in Fawn to Mr. Walton, divided my one hundred percent ownership of TGAC equally between my friends Nancy Rodes, Michael Douglas, Lorien and Mr. Walton, and forgave all debts owed to me. I knew by this time that our Source is also the source of everything, including money, and that He would provide for me all that I would need to carry out His work. I also was fully aware that I was engaged with the organization on the legal battlefield, and although I was confident of the outcome, I had no idea what would happen on the road toward that day. I recognized that the organization's ruling clique was motivated by the same forces of money, greed and power that made men war against each other and that my renunciation was spiritually directed at bringing peace for the organization no less than the rest of the world. And, as I stated above, I accepted the fact that should my legal battle with the organization continue I would more likely than conceivably litigate indeed in forma pauperis. I communicated my decisions to everyone directly affected by them, took care of the paperwork needed to make the decisions legally effective, and tied up various loose ends. It became clear to me that the renunciation had left me unattached and free to travel wherever I was called should I be. I gave my car to Lorien, but she returned it, and we took a trip together during September through the western states and British Columbia to develop a sociological concept that had come to me. When we returned to California Lorien moved to Santa Cruz and I, not then being called to go elsewhere, stayed at Fawn where I worked on some house and grounds projects, continued to maintain TGAC's office, and kept picking up trash. I also came up with what I thought was a good plan for resolving the Middle East crisis and I communicated this plan to various media and certain leaders or envoys I thought were in positions to do something about it. In my letter to Saddam Hussein of November 1, 1990 I offered, as I had with the Lebanese captors in 1987, to exchange myself for the hostages then being held in Iraq; but I did not sweeten the deal with my interest in a house, as I had done in the earlier offer, because I had already conveyed it to Mr. Walton. Copies of this letter, my November 7, 1990 letter and list of addressees to which they went, my December 10, 1990 and January 10, 1991 letters are appended hereto as Exhibit .
[…]
55. TGAC, defendant in Armstrong II, III and IV, possesses, cares for and commercially develops my products and is in the business of peace. Appended hereto as Exhibit [PP] are pages from Pacific Bell's Marin yellow pages for 1992 and 1993, wherein TGAC is listed in the category "peace organizations." TGAC also provides philosophic services in a number of other areas of human endeavor and understanding, such as law, religion, health and economics. It is a unique company with unique, both banausic and beneficent products. It has not yet become financially profitable, but I believe that is merely a matter of time, and I am not unhappy that TGAC's buildup toward profitablity has taken the form, route and time that it has. It has also become apparent to me that the litigation in my life may very well require resolution before TGAC is free to tackle the problems and projects for which it was created. But no matter what conspiracy theories the organization and its lawyers fabricate, TGAC was not created to have anything to do with it, its litigation or its philosophy. TGAC's founder, owner, president, manager, senior baker and vice president for questions and loopholes, just happened to be a person with a long, intense history with the organization, which has its own long, intense history. No matter what kind of business I had gotten into I would have brought with me the same history; which is now, six years and three more Scientology lawsuits later, even longer and no less intense. No matter what kind of business, or enterprise, profession, career or club I had gotten into the organization would have carried out the same set of post-settlement fair game sillinesses to keep me involved with its litigation and its leaders. I happen to have been given certain talents, knowledge and identity by my Creator. I am a writer, thinker and artist, and thus my words, art and ideas exist, and some of them TGAC happens to own and possess, and, God willing, will develop commercially.
56. When I activated TGAC at the beginning of 1988 I transferred to the corporation all my writings, artwork, files and office equipment and supplies that I had previously owned in my sole proprietorship. At that time I owned all TGAC stock, TGAC owned all my archive materials, and I had an arrangement with TGAC whereby my products and acquisitions of an artistic or literary nature passed to the corporation as I produced or acquired them. Because the organization had continued to attack me following the December, 1986 settlement, because I am connected to many people with an interest in the resolution of the organization's war on justice and innocence in our society, and because I have been placed in a position to do something to bring about that resolution, a certain quantity of my literary acquisitions have been organization-related materials. In the fall of 1989, after the series of threats from organization attorney Heller, I made a determined effort to acquire whatever organization-related materials I could, sensing that they would be needed in the attacks I also sensed were coming. In August, 1990, at the time of my renunciation, I split TGAC's stock into four shares and gave them away with the rest of my assets as described in paragraph 33 above. I had the hope and belief, which I still retain, that TGAC would be a commercial success, and that the four owners, all close friends of mine, would benefit monetarily and have a lot of fun with the corporation. I continued as TGAC's president, continued to produce, and TGAC continued to care for its growing archive. From the organization's actions and statements in the Yanny II litigation, wherein it had taken my deposition on several days in late 1991 and early 1992, and its actions and statements in the Armstrong II litigation, where it had served a subpoena duces tecum on the corporation, it became clear that the organization was going to try to get its itching mitts on TGAC's archive, invade its privacy and attack it as a way of attacking me. On June 22, 1992, at a special meeting of TGAC's directors, it was therefore decided, in order to remove any reason for the organization to attack the corporation, to transfer to me, Gerald Armstrong individual, everything in TGAC's archive which related to the organization or my litigation, and this transfer was effectuated the same day. I still sensed that the organization was not going to be dissuaded from its kamikaze course, and I still wanted to protect TGAC's owners, whose only crimes were being my friends and accepting my gift of stock certificates. I knew as well by this time that the organization's leaders are paranoid, schizophrenic, proudly describe themselves as "ruthless," and would destroy any innocent person if it served their purpose in attacking me. On June 23, therefore, I met with each of the four who each decided at that time to give back to me his or her shares. In that way these people would not become targets in the organization's mad litigation war, and I would have the freedom, as TGAC's major stockholder and president, to fight the war on behalf of the corporation as I was called. Two of the four, Michael Douglas and Nancy Rodes, had signed settlement agreements similar to mine with the organization in December, 1986, so were particularly vulnerable and worried in the organization's attempt to make TGAC its litigation enemy. In August, 1990 each of the four had received one share. In early, 1991 by agreement between the shareholders, the four shares were split into one hundred, and each shareholder had given 5 shares to the corporation to sell to finance its operations. Thus on June, 23, 1992, I received back eighty percent ownership of TGAC (see also para. 21, supra, and Ex. L, p. 556, 557). This proved to be a divinely timed move because on June 24 I was served with the organization's amendment to the Armstrong II complaint, naming TGAC as a defendant. Because of my financial condition and the stress of the organization litigation, which has rendered me over the past three years completely incapable of dealing with certain clerical tasks, which even ordinary people who are not fair game's targets can easily perform, TGAC owes the IRS and the Franchise Tax Board a couple of years' returns, but that is only a temporary situation, which I expect to resolve in the next few weeks. Yet even TGAC's failures to file seem to be divinely timed because it surely disproves Mr. Wilson's Armstrong IV attack line that " [T]GAC exists solely so that Armstrong may be "judgment proof" (Ex. A. p. 5, l. 7). Only a madman would, when assaulted by this organization's litigation machine and needing to be judgment proof, let his judgment-proofing corporation approach suspension. I am neither mad nor in need of any protection from any judgment the organization imagines in its wild dreams it might obtain. I own eighty percent of TGAC, and TGAC owns a body of literature and art with considerable present value and potential. It owns the rights to a number of my projects and products, including whatever can be owned of the formula for the Unified Field, which I was given not long after August, 1990. TGAC has a history and a lot of good will. TGAC did not invite the organization's attacks, and even urges the organization to dismiss all the litigation it has fomented against TGAC. Nevertheless, TGAC will undoubtedly garner more good will, good PR and societal acceptance as a result of the organization's attacks, because society often judges one's worth by one's enemies. Although no one should have to have enemies, the organization's power structure, being so villainous, is, in the minds of the vast decent human majority, the best kind of enemy to have. TGAC's present value is in the neighborhood of fifteen trillion dollars, so the organization's claim of four point eight million is monetarily insignificant. Nevertheless, and but for other reasons I will fight this battle.