Secret Lives interview (1997)

This interview was in Vancouver, BC in 1997. I had left the US earlier that year when I had discovered online a piece of what the Scientologists filed to get their 1993 IRS tax exemption, which included black PR on me. I’ve written about this a number of times.


Recently Caroline and I have assembled materials that show that the US Federal Government conspired with the Scientologists to violate public policy in the process of the grant of tax exemption.1

Lawrence Wright did not deal with the public policy issue in Going Clear, nor the content of the Scientologists’ submissions to the IRS that contain false statements and constitute public policy violations. I was not contacted for the Alex Gibney film, but assume per Joe Nocera’s NY Times piece that it follows the Wright plot and does not mention public policy. In his 1997 NY Times article Douglas Frantz provides very useful facts about the conspiracy, but also does not mention the public policy issue. Yet, public policy was central to the IRS’s dealings in and out of court with the Scientologists over decades. It is still central today.

If you are a smart person with a conscience, please study these materials. If you know of smart people with consciences, please tell them about the public policy issue in the Scientologists’ long war with the IRS. 2 This includes smart, conscienceful people in every country, because the Scientologists flourish their unlawfully obtained IRS tax exemption and seek undeserved advantages with this ill-gotten decision in every country.

“After the most thorough invest in IRS history,” my ass.

Anyone who begins to study about the public policy issue in the IRS matter will encounter an almost unfathomable depth of black PR on me, from the most unexpected sources. Please do not be dissuaded from understanding this incredible situation by the assaults on my credibility. In reality, the assaults on my credibility in the Scientologists’ submissions to the IRS are the most blatant examples of public policy violations. The Scientologists and their collaborators committed crimes against me, and a connected set of victims, to be able to commit crimes against everyone. A license from the IRS to criminals to commit crimes against citizens, especially the SP class who expose them as criminals, cannot but be against public policy. The post- submission smears are to reduce my credibility to beast level so no one will grant me an instant of credence.

I wrote Jesse Prince a note recently about the transpersonal factors and effects in my legal relationship with the Scientologists.3This balances the black PR that Scientology v. Armstrong is my personal battle and nobody should do anything about it because nobody is my personal army. Another black PR line is that the Scientology v. Armstrong war is a “grudge match.” Check out how it gets hidden away on ESMB by people presenting as the Scientologists’ opponents. Other common attack lines are that Scientology v. Armstrong is just about me selling out, or just about an injunction I’m sour grapes over, or that the injunction is legal, or that I’m just a scofflaw.

There is no one the Scientologists fair gamed more than me during the period Rathbun ran the fair gaming. If there is someone he had fair gamed more than me, he has never identified that person. The one person Rathbun fair gamed somewhat equivalently was my own attorney Michael Flynn. Yet the Scientology v. Armstrong fair gaming, including majorly the IRS conspiracy, is what Rathbun has done nothing about, except for further black PR and furtherance of his crimes against me, and Flynn, in his 2013 book Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior.

An astonishing recent attack on my credibility came from Chris Shelton, and it was directly on the issue of the IRS tax exemption.4Shelton did not deal with the facts or the content of my evidence or argument, just smeared me in relationship to Rathbun, and then would do nothing to support or correct his smear. Shelton presented as someone who had rejected Scientology, called himself an expert, claimed a high level of logic, had never communicated to me, and cheer-leading “Justice for All.”

One of the black PR lines on me is that,yes, I exposed Hubbard and that was good, but that was then, old history, and then I sold out, and now I’m seeing things, or some such putdown. But the history didn’t stop with me exposing Hubbard. The story became what the Scientologists did to prevent his exposure, which was mainly by destroying my credibility so that no one would listen to me exposing him. He has been exposed for a long time. The story therefore has become what the Scientologists and their collaborators have done to destroy my credibility so that no one would listen to me about what they have done and are doing to destroy my credibility. A key piece of what they did to destroy my credibility, and me, is in their submission to the IRS on which their tax exemption was granted.

The Scientology v. Armstrong conflict is not old, or lost, or unwinnable. Neither is Armstrong v. Scientology, US, et al. The Scientologists’ tax exemption is not irreversible, and in any case the coconspirators should be exposed for that crime.

Thanks for the many kind comments. It’s very encouraging.5


  1. See, e.g., the introduction to the Armstrong Op site: http://armstrong-op.gerryarmst…
  2. See article Public Policy:…
  3. See “For Jesse Prince: Who gets helped?”…
  4. See Chris Shelton: logic and loyalty, on the line:…
  5. Originally posted in the comments section on Tony Ortega’s blog article.