Blissing Out on Ignore Tech

Dear Dr. Introvigne:

Following is my email to Mike Rinder querying the veracity of his statement that you say is defamatory. He has not responded, and I cannot expect him to. He still serves the Miscavigeite sectists’ malign purposes in vital ways, was a paid liar for them for twenty years, and has maintained his scientologically-instilled hatred for me since claiming to have left Scientology.

A key weapon in the Fair Game arsenal, as you know, is “Ignore Tech,” and Rinder has visibly been running Ignore Tech on me for decades. Other fair game actions on multiple channels continue, but a public position is taken of Ignore Tech. It is part of all the Black PR Tech, conveying the message that the victim is so hateful, so worthless, so beneath the Ignore Techie, the victim only deserves ignoring.

Although Rinder has ignored me, or at least has been making a visible show of ignoring me, I’ve generated a substantial set of communications to him and I’ve discussed our relationship in various other writings or speakings. Ignore Tech really doesn’t work, even though it appears at first to save a lot of time. After all, actually dealing with legitimate challenges can take a bit of time, but ignoring them seems to take no time at all. It can, of course, happen that after depending on Ignore Tech for a long time, some challenge or some challenger, for one reason or another, can no longer be ignored.

Somewhat similarly, I have generated a small body of communications both with and about you. Because of the public interest in this matter, and in the hope that even if Rinder never responds someone else will read about you, Rinder and Scientology and speak up with their relevant experiences and knowledge, I will post this correspondence.

As I wrote to Rinder, whether you were paid with trunks of simoleons, or rewarded just with a golden opportunity to do something really demonic with your degrees and talents, it is what you have done and said that is important and is being challenged. It would not be much trouble for you to hide payments from the Scientologists or their collaborators or their collaborators’ lawyers. But it would be very difficult to hide all your public statements. Who paid you what to make them is relatively irrelevant.

I have been parsing or analyzing Hubbard’s communications, and Scientologists and their collaborators’ relevant communications for many years in light of my experiences, knowledge, beliefs and documents. My article “Masterminds, Sidekicks and the Bear, Oh My!” is obviously an initial and limited analysis of your article black PRing Russia, Alexander Dvorkin, me, the ICSE Paris conference, etc. In 2019, I analyzed and countered your false narrative about Hubbard’s Affirmations and the attendant attack on my credibility. I emailed you the same day I published my analysis:

From: Gerry Armstrong
Sent: July 15, 2019 4:45 PM
To: ‘editors[at]cesnur.net’; ‘maxintrovigne[at]xxx’
Subject: The Affirmations: What was L. Ron Hubbard thinking?

Dear Dr. Introvigne:

I just posted an article that begins with the following:

Recently, a person alerted me to some Facebook comments academic Scientology collaborator Massimo Introvigne had posted that mentioned me and my legal history with the Scientologists in relation to L. Ron Hubbard’s Affirmations. Another person then asked me if I could respond in some way. Since these are matters of public interest and controversy that have been written about for decades, and they occur within a greater public and legal controversy that also directly involves me, and for others reasons, I am making Introvigne’s comments and my response public.

…which I did:  http://gerryarmstrong.ca/the-affirmations-what-was-l-ron-hubbard-thinking/

Sincerely,

Gerry Armstrong
[Contact info]

You didn’t respond to my serious challenge, and I thought you probably were running a little Ignore Tech yourself.

I will copy Rinder at the address I have for him, and hopefully he will speak up, even though, as I said, who paid you what to do what you’ve done for the Miscavigeite sect and its sectists is unimportant.

Sincerely,

Gerry Armstrong

From: Gerry Armstrong
Sent: April 7, 2021 1:11 PM
To: Mike Rinder
Subject: Masterminds, Sidekicks and the Bear, Oh My!

Dear Mike:

Please see below my 6 April email to Massimo Introvigne, and his April 7 email response.

Please also see my 5 April article in which I refer to your statement that Introvigne says is defamatory: https://gerryarmstrong.ca/masterminds-sidekicks-and-the-bear-oh-my/

And your statement:

Rest assured, every one of the “experts” scientology touts is paid. Massimo Introvigne of CESNUR., Gordon Melton, Brian Wilson and many, many others. I know, I did the original program to find “religious experts” who would write “expertises” on the subject of scientology. Every single one of them was paid for their “work,” though that fact was not made public.

When I first read this, I thought you were BSing about doing “the original program to find “religious experts” who would write “expertises” on the subject of scientology.” After all, the GO had done this. Frank K. Flinn had submitted an “expertise” and testified in the Armstrong 1 trial. I am sure he was paid divinely. In any case, Introvigne has now challenged you on your fact assertion that he was paid for his work, whatever it was.

The fact that the “Church of Scientology” is not the named payer on any payment, does not mean the Scientologists did not pay. The cult has used front organizations, cutouts, fake persons, etc. throughout its history. The US Federal Government is allied with Scientology, and they could be rewarding him for his recent anti Russia, anti Alexander Dvorkin, anti Gerry Armstrong piece. Where key money transfers happen, where intelligence ops are run and protected by attorney-client privilege, are through their network of law firms and lawyers. And Introvigne is, inter alia, an attorney.

You were on Scientology’s payroll for many years, during twenty of which you were paid to silence or destroy “enemies,” like me.

Where Introvigne’s money comes from is really unimportant, but of public interest at this time. If he really is knowledgeable about Scientology and Scientologists, having followed them as a “sociologist” for 25 or 30 years, and he really is writing propaganda for them for free, propagandizing for them at conferences and in the media for free, whitewashing their dark acts and arts for free, and black PRing their victims for free, it could evidence a man even more venal than if he were openly being rewarded monetarily for his work.

Introvigne might have missed the irony in his assertion that your statement that he was paid by Scientology for his expertise is defamatory. He is about the world’s most pro-Scientology “academic,” extoling the Scientologists’ “ethics,” “tech,” “admin” and character. That these super-ethical beings were paying Introvigne for his work for them should be for him anything but defamatory. He should be honored, and put it on his curriculum vitae.

His accusation that he didn’t sue you because US litigation is expensive is also a hoot, and from an attorney a whole semi air horn blast. Certainly US litigation is unconscionably expensive. But that is not the reason he didn’t sue you. And now he threatens to sue me for defamation for repeating what you said. Actually I said that you admitted what you said; I did not simply repeat it.

From my perspective, and from my extensive experience and knowledge of Scientology, Scientologists and their collaborators like Introvigne, your fact assertion — that he was paid for his work — was not a baseless allegation at all, but comports with my experiences and knowledge. I would actually find it incredible if I heard, even from himself, that he was never rewarded in any way for all his work pro Scientology.

He writes, as an obvious legal opinion: “Even repeating what somebody else said amounts to defamation, if you do not have hard evidence that the allegation is true – and it isn’t.” I am no lawyer, but he is wrong. Whatever was said would have to be defamatory before someone’s repeating it could possibly amount to defamation. In this case, I gave the source of the fact claim in good faith, and actually did not give any thought to the possibility that in this instance you were BSing about Introvigne being paid. His delay in either suing you or correcting your statement, which you apparently published on August 24, 2020,  is another hole in his lawyer bag.

Please let me know if you stand by your fact statement about Introvigne being paid by Scientology for his work. And please provide any further facts you are aware of that bear on this matter.

Sincerely,

Gerry Armstrong

From: Massimo Introvigne
Sent: April 7, 2021 2:30 AM
To: Gerry Armstrong
Subject: Re: Masterminds, Sidekicks and the Bear, Oh My!

Dear Mr Armstrong

I noted that you referred to this passage from Mike Rinder

Rest assured, every one of the “experts” scientology touts is paid. Massimo Introvigne of CESNUR., Gordon Melton, Brian Wilson and many, many others. I know, I did the original program to find “religious experts” who would write “expertises” on the subject of scientology. Every single one of them was paid for their “work,” though that fact was not made public.

I know what he refers to. He has claimed he was in charge of preparing a book of academic expertises about Scientology (http://www.scientologyreligion.org/religious-expertises/).

Only, I did not participate in the project and am not among the authors of that book. The memory failed Mr Rinder that time.

I didn’t sue Mr Rinder because American litigations are expensive and, not being on the payroll of anybody, I preferred not to spend that much money. But I can always sue those who repeat such baseless allegations.

Although it is obvious Mr Rinder was referring to the book, let me add that as a backup some could mention that once in my life I served as an expert witnesses called by the defense of Scientology, in Lyon, France in 1999. It would be a bad backup plan because I gave to the court a written statement, included in the minutes of the trial, that I did this pro bono and even paid my travel expenses to Lyon (not a heroic deed as Lyon is not very far from Torino where I lived at that time).

I am sure you will not repeat such baseless accusations in the future. Even repeating what somebody else said amounts to defamation, if you do not have hard evidence that the allegation is true – and it isn’t.

Best regards

Massimo Introvigne

On 6 Apr 2021, at 05:47, Gerry Armstrong <gerry@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:

Dear Dr. Introvigne:

I posted a response to your Bitter Winter article black PRing Alexander Dvorkin, me, others, and the February 25 ICSE conference.
https://gerryarmstrong.ca/masterminds-sidekicks-and-the-bear-oh-my/

Sincerely.

Gerry Armstrong