Gerry Talks...

You are here: Home / Archives for SPs ‘r’ US

SPs 'r' US

by

Gerry to Graham Berry on Honey Tech

Graham Berry responding to Thomas Gandow and Aida Thomas on Facebook:

I was referring to all the “Fair Game” victims. However, to complicate such matters, Gerry has not welcomed, forgiven and befriended Marty and Mike but has mercilessly attacked and condemned them — even as they assisted and apologized to a few ex members and made the contributions to the truth and cause they are now making. I consider Marty and Mike to have also been victims and many of us know that the waking, recovery and healing process from Scientology is apparently the longest and toughest of all cults and takes many years. In my view, kindness, compassion, acceptance and generosity of spirit works better than the attacks some have fermented. Honey instead of vinegar works better here-at least IMHO.1

Thank you for bringing this subject up publicly, Graham. A couple of kind souls sent your FB post to me. Also Marty Rathbun’s recent comment on Oz TV about having paid off his karma some time ago2 makes a public clarification of this subject timely. The karma he’s talking about relates to his participation in, as you say, damaging or destroying people by intimidation, litigation and defamation activities.

Describing what I have communicated to or about Marty and Mike over the past five years as mercilessly attacking and condemning them has to be honey. You are applying honey tech. You and I had a phone call in 2012 in which we discussed honey and vinegar, and I’ve considered the concept and seen it in operation since then. The honey versus vinegar idiom means:

It is easier to get what you want by flattering people and being polite to them than by making demands. 3

If it really was easier, then courts, prosecutors and plaintiffs would flatter the accused, rather than demand the accused answer. To flatter means:

1. To compliment excessively and often insincerely, especially in order to win favor; or 2. To please or gratify the vanity of. 4

You are flattering me, and I am supposed to be flattered. Certainly honey tech lets me know you actually see me as doing something far worse than mercilessly attacking and condemning. If you were applying vinegar tech, you would not have honey-coated what you really considered I have been communicating as mere merciless attacking and condemning.

By harboring the heinous and hideous reality about me and only describing my communications to or about Marty and Mike as simple merciless attacking and condemning, you’re trying to cajole me into doing just that. You want me to merely mercilessly attack and condemn them, rather than keep doing the far more evil things you haven’t openly accused me of doing. Thanks Honey Tech!®

On the planetary victims scale, David Miscavige is an equally big one. And I would bet that the same many that know that the waking, recovery and healing process from Scientology might be the longest and toughest of all cults and takes many years would also know that it might take DM years too.

The waking and recovery and healing process cannot, however, be a relevant factor in the immediate Marty & Mike v. Gerry conflict. Or are you saying that you consider Marty and Mike to be my victims in M & M v. G, my victims in the victim-victimizer paradigm? It does appear that portraying the victimizers as victims and the victims as victimizers is a standard honey tech app.

Telling the truth is the sole factor in Marty and Mike’s conflict with me. It’s a one-step action. No matter where a person is on the years of waking, recovery and healing, he has the ability to tell the truth. If a person can be audited, he can tell the truth.

I am not asking Marty or Mike for a deep psycho-philosophical shift, when, for example, a person changes from lying as a pro-survival activity and way of life and starts to value and desire truth telling and that becomes a way of life. I am also not denying that such a shift could perhaps occur, or be related. I think testifying seventy-some days in Scientology litigations might have altered me psycho-philosophically, and certainly being M & M & every other Scientologist’s target for all these years has.

I believe, however, that the testimony or truth that Marty and Mike can provide me, which would assist in correcting injustices, can be provided in a couple of days. They know how to debrief, know how to tell the truth, and have always had the ability. The idea that Scientologists cannot tell the truth or do not know truth from lies is a ruse that some Scientologists use to escape responsibility and natural consequences for the bad acts they know they’ve committed against their victims, or are still committing.

Marty and Mike are at cause over their refusal to now assist the people they helped to damage or destroy by intimidation, litigation and defamation activities. Their condition or their place in their long or short path of waking, recovery and healing is not why they have not assisted their victims. They had the ability to assist people while inside Scientology and the Sea Org, and the idea that they have lost that ability since leaving is ridiculous. They also have the same reasons for refusing to assist their victims that they had while in the SO. They did not acquire a new set of reasons for doing what they had always done: something or anything other than assisting their victims, giving justice, telling the truth.

I am just requesting the narrow, relevant truth about a clear and active matter: Marty, Mike, Hubbard, Miscavige, et al. v. Armstrong & friends. Marty and Mike are two individuals with a great deal of information, who are now presenting as fighters for justice who have told the truth about their part in victimizing others. Since they have not told the truth, and do not seek justice, even in correcting injustices they perpetrated and can help correct, the logical conclusion is that they are “Loyalists” mispresenting themselves. My communications that you call mercilessly attacking and condemning Marty and Mike have been useful and valuable in establishing these facts.

Not everyone gets to tell the truth that matters to someone. My request has been appropriate and the truth I’m requesting is relevant in ongoing legally cognizable injustices. Sometimes a request for the truth can be by subpoena. In my case it is the earnest, free request of a knowledgeable and known victim in a long legal and extralegal campaign of victimization and injustice.

What you call mercilessly attacking and condemning Marty and Mike are my communications containing the level of truth I’m requesting of them and my best reason made understandable and unhumdrum. I am giving Marty and Mike what I am requesting of them; facts, reason and truth. I don’t want them to run their honey tech or fudge tech on me.

When I was getting out of the cult, I wanted the very best, most factual and truthful insights and information about L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology and Scientologists. Since then, in my own post-Scientology process, I wanted the same thing. I wanted information and insights from multiple sources. I wanted to know what I was up against as fast as I could learn it. There was a lot of truth available, but far less than now. I knew some myself. I didn’t want honey tech run on me, even though Marty and Mike successfully operated Dan Sherman to dupe me with professed kindness, compassion, acceptance and generosity of spirit.

Kindness, compassion, acceptance and generosity of spirit, I take it, would be absent from vinegar tech.

Neither honey nor vinegar works, I believe, and I would not endorse either. But then again, I’m not trying to catch flies. If honey worked, your honey tech, which I presume you apply at all times, would have brought about the result you sought: Marty and Mike doing what they could to assist those of us who were damaged or destroyed by the intimidation, litigation and defamation activities they were part of for many years. To me, their telling the truth is the essence of such assistance.

I know there are other fair game victims, and, presumably, like you, they have also been applying honey tech, and Marty and Mike would have assisted them if honey tech had worked. Although I do not use vinegar tech, it is also clear that, from what you say, and I agree, I do not use honey tech. I don’t want flies, I want justice. I suppose what I use could be called truth tech. But importantly, I think it’s safe to say that you believe that all other fair game victims are using honey tech like you, and I am the only one using truth tech, even if you miscall it vinegar tech.

More importantly, you are implying that with my truth tech I am complicating the matters of other fair game victims, the other people like you who are applying honey tech to get Marty and Mike to assist them. Perhaps Garry Scarff conjured this idea up, because I see a FB post by him that you respond to was deleted.

Logically, you should blame the failure to get Marty and Mike’s assistance on honey tech. But it appears you are blaming honey tech’s failure on the one person who hasn’t been applying honey tech.

In any case, think about it:

1. Marty and Mike, as you say, damaged or destroyed a number of people with the intimidation, litigation and defamation activities they were part of for many years.

2. Marty and Mike’s victims want them to assist them, at least that’s what you say. Why all such victims want this, I do not know. I want it for justice and to end injustices. Regardless, there are apparently other victims of Marty and Mike that want their assistance

3. One of the victims applies truth tech, tells Marty and Mike the truth and requests that they tell the truth.

4. The rest of the victims apply honey tech, flatter Marty and Mike and do not request that they tell the truth. These victims apparently hope that by applying honey tech Marty and Mike will assist them without being requested.

5. Honey tech didn’t work for its appliers. If it had worked, you wouldn’t still be hoping that Marty and Mike assist their victims.

6. Truth tech didn’t work for me, but only in the unimportant sense that Marty and Mike did not agree to my request. In all important senses, truth tech works miracles.

7. Marty’s Memoirs shows that he is still actively black PRing people in unison with the Miscavige Scientologists. Marty is not still black PRing his victims because I am pointing out that he is doing it, or because I’m complicating matters in his decompression or anywhere else.

8. Blame the one non-honey tech applying fair game victim for Marty and Mike not assisting the honey tech appliers. The corollary is that if everyone does not use honey tech, then Marty and Mike won’t tell the truth. Leverage, leverage, leverage.

For this belief to be even slightly sincerely held, the believer would have to have received a communication or signal from Marty or Mike or their communicants that I, or my truth tech, was complicating such matters for the honey tech users.

This is weirdly much like what happened with Marcus Thöss. He received a communication threatening that, if he was friendly with me, Marty, Mike and their communicants wouldn’t help him with his film about Scientologist Biggi Reichert’s death. Thöss went nuts on me, which apparently did get him some assistance from M, M & communicants.

Obviously, if Marty and Mike’s price for assisting their fair game victims is to have me blamed for their failure to assist their victims so far, a reason would be useful. So charge me with not using honey tech but applying vinegar tech; paint me bereft of kindness, compassion, acceptance or generosity of spirit; and label my communications as mercilessly attacking and condemning Marty and Mike. It makes that kind of sense.

The truth you get with honey tech will logically be the truth that validates honey tech: how wonderful and sweet the person is who was flattered into doling out such truth. The truth you get with truth tech will logically be truth that validates truth tech. I think it’s kind to Marty and Mike to let them know what I am asking for, why I am asking for it, and what they can expect by interacting with me, including that they won’t get honey or fudge tech.

I do not celebrate much when Marty or Mike dole out a new revelation, a new fact, a new vague confession, because the doling has all been antisocial, willfully cruel. People say that Marty and Mike are doling out the truth a bit at a time for strategic reasons, and, of course, they are. But it is also cruel. Indeed, cruelty is one of the strategies. This is not news, because cruelty is a common trait and aspiration in the Scientology milieu. Hubbard was stupendously cruel. Marty and Mike, of course, while inside Scientology, had the responsibility and were given organization power and resources to be cruel in many ways to the same people that they’re cruel to now with their dole tech or denial tech.

I am not claiming that when I left Scientology I immediately divulged all my experiences or knowledge. I don’t think that happens for anyone, although certainly is possible. Basically, I told the truth when requested and when it was relevant. This resulted in a lot of declarations or affidavits and oral testimony in a lot of legal proceedings, and I contributed to books and other media. All I am requesting of Marty and Mike is that they tell the truth in this very relevant, ongoing legal and extralegal fair game campaign against me.

In the March 23 Australia 60 Minutes segment “The Defector” this exchange took place between interviewer Liz Hayes and Marty:

LH: It’s a tough one now, knowing what you’re going through, when you reflect, knowing you did participate in activities similar to, to others.

MR: Yeah, and I feel that some of it is karma, and it is, I’m getting back what I, what I dished out. Quite frankly though, that balance was paid off some time ago.2

In an article “Tip of the Spear” in the January 2013 Los Angeles Magazine, Joel Sappell wrote about an October 2012 meeting he had with Marty:

I tell him that readers of this story will probably think he’s getting what he deserves. After all, this is the same treatment he once dished out. For the first time during my visit I see a flash of the aggressive Marty I remember. He stops pacing in the kitchen, where I’m seated, and stares at me. “That’s what they’ll think if that’s what you write!” he says, his voice rising as he points a finger at me. It’s not a matter of opinion, I say. Those are the facts. “I’ve taken a lot of hits in the last three years,” he says, softening his tone. “I’ve been working off a lot of karma for what I’ve done.” Now, he says, “the scales are even. I’ve built up a reservoir of good karma that I can draw on.”6

So at least by October 2012, Marty was saying publicly that he had fully worked off his bad karma – his damaging or destroying people by intimidation, litigation and defamation activities – and by that time had even built up a reservoir of good karma. Drawing on this store would mean that Marty could now safely do the things — damaging or destroying people by intimidation, litigation and defamation activities, etc. – that earlier had pulled in the bad karma. Marty is running what’s known as the karma con.

The Marty & Mike v. Gerry conflict is not about karma. It’s about justice. Nevertheless, because of Marty’s karma con, it is worth saying something about karma here. First good old Wikipedia:

Karma means action, work or deed; it also refers to the principle of causality where intent and actions of an individual influence the future of that individual. Good intent and good deed contribute to good karma and future happiness, while bad intent and bad deed contribute to bad karma and future suffering. Karma is closely associated with the idea of rebirth in some schools of Asian religions. In these schools, karma in the present affects one’s future in the current life, as well as the nature and quality of future lives – or, one’s saṃsāra. 7

Now from Hubbard’s sermons:

People create their fates. Somebody who believes that one has accumulated an enormous amount of karma up and down the track, and so on, is believing that nobody creates his fates.

Now all you have to do with somebody who’s worried about karma is get him to create a few fates, and his karma has a tendency to go poof! The way to solve karma is just to have somebody create some fates and consequences. 8

And one of the ways of phrasing it is that everything done by you will be revisited [visited] upon you. That’s karma.

“You will pay for everything you have ever done”: that’s karma. And a lot of people get the overt-motivator sequence mixed up with karma. They are not the same thing.

The overt-motivator sequence means that you have to lay yourself open to feeling bad about something – to a motivator – with an overt. That’s true, too. But do you know how it’s true? It says there’s an area you mustn’t attack. And that becomes the keynote and the whole swan song of a people: There are things you mustn’t attack. 9

Karma. Karma isn’t true.10

In the karma con, which integrates Hubbard’s fate-creation tech, first you make the evil you did to people almost heroic. As is clear in Rathbun’s Memoirs, he considered damaging or destroying people by intimidation, litigation and defamation activities was necessary, and he accomplished it almost single-handedly against a veritable juggernaut. So according to that calculus, there’s not much bad karma to pay off.

The next karma con step is to interpret the bad being visited on you as paying off or balancing whatever bad karma you’d ever accumulated. Marty was even able to parlay the Squirrel-busters and the black PR pages into a reservoir of good karma. So David Miscavige, by sending the Squirrel Busters and ordering the web pages, provides Marty the justification he needs to not assist their joint fair game victims. DM and Marty have a nice symbiotic thing going.

Ultimately, with karma con, since it is actually an antisocial use of karma and generates more bad karma, you can award yourself a karma balancing cert. With karma con, a person can almost achieve what Hubbard promised: total freedom from conscience. Who would want to though?

The Marty & Mike v. Gerry conflict is about injustice and justice. This is possibly true with their treatment of others among their fair game victims. It could be said that it is my karma to seek justice and the truth, and it is Marty and Mike’s karma to seek injustice and to have lies triumph. It is not necessary, however, to divine the force or source that brought us to this relationship to know that I seek justice, that Marty and Mike participated in damaging or destroying me by intimidation, litigation and defamation activities, which have resulted in ongoing injustices, indeed crimes, and that by simply telling the truth they could assist in obtaining justice.

You mention, Graham, a “cause” that apparently you have, and which you say Marty and Mike are contributing to. I think I’ve seen where this cause has been stated something like, “ending the cult in its current form,” which is not my cause at all. I see the SPs ‘r’ Us FB group states this quasi-universal cause as, “the destruction of the “Church” of Scientology in its present form,” which is also not my cause, and might even be unlawful.

It is easy to see that Scientology can change its current or present form, or leader, or leaders, without correcting injustices or giving justice. It is also easy to see that correcting injustices or giving justice is possible without Scientology’s form changing at all. Therefore, the legitimate cause is justice. By not assisting the people you say Marty and Mike helped damage or destroy by intimidation, litigation and defamation activities, Marty and Mike are not contributing to that legitimate cause.

Accepting for sake of argument that taking down the cult is a legitimate cause, the most effective thing that people with Marty and Mike’s experiences and knowledge could do to take it down would be to tell the truth about antisocial and criminal acts against wogs and wog institutions, e.g., the IRS. (Or, please identify what other actions Marty and Mike could take that would contribute more to achieving that goal.) Marty and Mike do not do this, despite it costing no money and incurring no legal liability. Therefore they do not share the goal of taking down the cult, let alone correcting injustices. In fact, by not doing this simple and obvious thing, they demonstrate they oppose the goal of taking down the cult, and their “contributions” are as suspect as David Miscavige’s.

I assume you have read Memoirs, Graham. Marty doesn’t mention you, but he mentions me by name over a hundred times, lies about me, black PRs me, and justifies his fair game against me while inside the cult. So in reality his fair gaming me did not stop when he left and became an “independent.”

I would like to know how as an attorney you would justify advising your client, whom an individual or a criminal conspiracy had damaged or destroyed by intimidation, litigation and defamation activities, to welcome, forgive and befriend his victimizer or victimizers.

I’m not implying that I’m your client. But presumably if I was your client you would advise me exactly the same way. Presumably too, you would advise all of your clients to welcome, forgive and befriend their victimizers. I am not suggesting that Marty, Mike or anyone else should not be welcomed, forgiven and befriended. Those actions, however, are not necessarily related to the demand for justice, or the request for the truth.

A person can demand justice and be unwelcoming, unforgiving and unfriendly toward the perpetrator of the injustice. A person can demand justice and be welcoming, forgiving and friendly toward the perpetrator of the injustice. Given the magnitude of what Marty and Mike have done to try to damage or destroy me by intimidation, litigation and defamation activities, given the fact that their fair game activities have continued in their new independent roles, and given their refusal to assist me to correct injustices, I believe that you will find my communications to them have been remarkably welcoming, forgiving and friendly. My communications have also been thoughtful, factual, sincere, caring, encouraging and real.

In my opinion, the application of honey tech, and the parallel attack on whoever does not apply honey, by the people Marty and Mike victimized and by others, has not worked, except by encouraging Marty and Mike to maintain their lies and injustices, and to keep right on victimizing their victims. Marty can get away with declaring his karma balanced because his honey tech-applying victims and others, such as his communicants, are telling him he’s balanced it, and tell him what wonderful contributions he’s making to the cause, and because he knows they attack anyone who says otherwise. Then, with his karma supposedly balanced and his good karma reservoir filled, thanks to his handled, but not assisted, victims, he never has to consider doing anything about all that damage or destruction by intimidation, litigation and defamation activities that the truth tech guy keeps communicating about; or, as you say, mercilessly attacking and condemning him about.

How about a debate, Graham? You can defend and promote honey tech being applied to Marty and Mike. I will argue against it, and propose truth tech as a better alternative.

Notes

  1. (March 13, 2014 1:45 p.m.)  https://www.facebook.com/GrahamBerry.LA/posts/10202121196484711?comment_id=6270767&offset=0&total_comments=19 ↩
  2. 60 Minutes Australia (23 March 2014) “The Defector”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDChgYTSCA ↩
  3. Retrieved from http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/You+can+catch+more+flies+with+honey+than+with+vinegar ↩
  4. Retrieved from  http://www.thefreedictionary.com/flatter ↩
  5. 60 Minutes Australia (23 March 2014) “The Defector”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDChgYTSCA ↩
  6. Retrieved from http://www.lamag.com/features/2012/12/18/the-tip-of-the-spear/print ↩
  7. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma ↩
  8. Hubbard, L. (1957, 16 January) “Havingness” ↩
  9. Hubbard, L. (1962, 3 April) “The Overt-Motivator Sequence” ↩
  10. Hubbard, L. (1957, 7 July) “Child Scientology” ↩

by

Michael Hobson and me

My first encounter with Hobson, I believe, was on Jesse Prince’s blog in May 2011. http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/4856

Prince had written something I found incorrect and maligning about people the Scientologists had made sign their silence contracts. I responded and asked him to rethink what he was saying about the people who settled with the Scientologists. Prince was actually parroting the Scientologists’ black PR line on this group or class of their victims. http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/4847

Hobson responded and falsely accused me of some untruth in my communication to Prince. I challenged Hobson on his false accusation, and he never responded.
http://princejesse53.blogspot.ca/2011/04/finale-here-it-is-for-you-now.html

In August 2011, in an ESMB thread “Marty Rathbun needs to answer Gerry Armstrong’s questions,” Hobson falsely accused me of making “numerous and repeated public accusations of criminal conduct on Mark Rathbun’s part for which [I did] not have even the slightest factual evidence.”

I’m sure this is going to go over like a lead balloon:

I cannot find any definition of the word “need” that makes the thread title correct.

As I understand the various documents I’ve seen so far, Gerald Armstrong took the private personal papers of Ron Hubbard with which he was entrusted (can you say “fiduciary duty”) and gave access to these materials to lawyers determined to get Hubbard for Mr. Armstrong’s personal profit.

The above fact seems to be blithely glossed over by Mr. Armstrong’s cheerleading section.

Furthermore, Mr. Armstrong has made numerous and repeated public accusations of criminal conduct on Mark Rathbun’s part for which he did not and still does not have even the slightest factual evidence.

Nope, Mark Rathbun doesn’t owe Mr. Armstrong so much as the time of day.

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?24205-Marty-Rathbun-needs-to-answer-Gerry-Armstrong-s-questions/page4

Hobson was lying. He identified no accusations from me concerning Rathbun’s conduct for which I had no evidence. The fact is that I do have factual evidence to support accusations I have made concerning Rathbun’s conduct, and I have presented it.

Commenting on Tony Ortega’s Village Voice 4 January 2012 blog article, Hobson falsely accused me of having “repeatedly publicly falsely accused Mark Rathbun of conspiring to have [me] murdered.”

Gerry Armstrong has repeatedly publicly falsely accused Mark Rathbun of conspiring to have him *murdered*.

If someone were to libel me that badly, they could expect an apology for whatever legitimate grievances they had about the time Hell Froze Over.

Michael A. Hobson
Independent Scientologist

I challenged Hobson’s false charge and demanded that he “support it with evidence, or publicly withdraw it.”

Michael Hobson:

You have made a factual assertion here that I have “repeatedly publicly falsely accused Mark Rathbun of conspiring to have [me] *murdered.*” I am challenging your assertion, and demand that you support it with evidence, or publicly withdraw it. You are making a serious charge, and I am taking it seriously.

You have demonstrated a nasty habit of black PRing good people who are already Scientologists’ fair game victims. This habit is virtually universal among Scientologists. I do not know you, but I assume you are a real person and an adult.

Clearly I cannot expect Scientologists, as you present as being, to correct your lies and black PR against wogs like me, in the same way that I might expect social, conscience-demonstrating wogs to correct lies or black PR they might originate or disseminate. Nevertheless, I will make the appropriate demand that you support or acknowledge the falsity of your charge.

You assert that these alleged repeated public statements you say I made accusing Rathbun of conspiring to have me murdered libeled him so badly that they caused me to forfeit until approximately hell freezes over any expectation a person such as you might have of an apology from Rathbun for whatever legitimate grievances I had.

I assure you and everyone else that I have never had any expectation of an apology from Rathbun for my legitimate grievances. I have not only not expected an apology, I haven’t asked for one. I don’t want an apology and don’t need one. In fact, I wrote Rathbun, and made my letter public, on September 4, 2009 expressly stating that an apology from him was not needed or wanted:

Dear Mark:

Some people have been saying that I wanted an apology from you, or you should apologize to me, or even that you’ll never apologize to me, for the fair game you perpetrated against me and got others to perpetrate against me while you were in the Scientology organization. I want to assure you and everyone else that I am not seeking or asking for an apology. In fact, an apology from you without you doing what you can to correct the wrongs you perpetrated and are ongoing could be yet another cruelty. With your apology plus a quarter I could make a local payphone call.

What needs attention and resolution are ongoing black PR, ongoing injustices, ongoing human rights violations, and the ongoing effects of other crimes, which you were involved in and can help resolve. I know that you know this.

Find this letter and several other letters to Rathbun on my web site. No links allowed here, I guess.

So Mr. Hobson, your choice:  one way or another acknowledge that your false charge that I have repeatedly publicly accused Rathbun of conspiring to have me murdered is false.

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2012/01/debbie_cook_scientology_enforcer_whistleblower_homophobia.php#Comments

Hobson did not respond.

In a June 21 2012 Facebook discussion (SPs ‘r’ US) of German filmmaker Markus Thoess’s false and bad faith YouTube copyright infringement claim against me, which concerned a short video of Mike Rinder, Hobson posted:

Michael Hobson ‎^^^^^—— Ok, so Gerry Armstrong doesn’t like Rinders *opinion* that he is a nutjob ? OK.

You are aware that Gerry Armstrong claims on his website that he is the “Scientology’s Salman Rushdie” (who had a fatwah – a religious death warrant – put out on him by several Islamic Mullahs for his book “The Satanic Verses” ?

So far, Gerry has produced zero evidence of any such death warrant from anyone in Co$. So I’m rather inclined to think he is beginning to look a bit like a nutjob myself.

Michael Hobson
Independent Scientologist

A fatwah, of course, is no more “a religious death warrant” in the Islamic world, or anywhere else, than a court order is a death sentence in the US justice system. A fatwah is “a legal opinion or ruling issued by an Islamic scholar.” A fatwah can mean an Islamic death sentence, but that is rare. A court order in the US can be a death sentence, but that too is rare. Hobson is pretending ignorance to make his black propaganda work.

There is no doubt that the Scientologists’ muftis – Hubbard, Miscavige, Rathbun, Rinder, et al., the religion’s ecclesiastical leaders – issued many religious rulings or orders for actions to be taken against me. These orders were all fatwahs, dozens of them, doctrinally motivated, ugly, criminal, covert and overt, program orders, mission orders, project orders, verbal orders, arbitrary orders, stupid orders, and all as religious as hell.

What in 2002 I actually had written:

 Salman Rushdie was sentenced by a totalitarian theocratic government’s legal edict, and is being threatened world wide, for writing a book that the theocrats don’t like. I am attacked and hounded around the world by Scientology’s totalitarian religious poseurs, using the U.S. legal system, for writing and speaking what the poseurs dislike. The Islamic fatwah is directed not only against Rushdie but also against all persons associated in the publication of his book. Scientology’s fatwah targets all persons acting in concert with me or in any way facilitating my speaking and writing. Iran is offering a $2,500,000 reward to the murderer who silences Rushdie. Scientology has already paid that to U.S. lawyers to silence me. Going the theocrats one better, however, Scientology’s commercial cultists want their investment back, quadrupled.

I am being persecuted by Scientology, with its official U.S. support, not for speaking lies or defaming the organization, but for speaking the truth. I am speaking the truth in response to Scientology’s lies about me, lies which are demonstrated even by the organization’s latest lawsuit, which is riddled with lies. I am speaking out to prevent Scientology from rewriting its history of lying and of persecuting people who speak the truth. Because I am persecuted for speaking is precisely why I should speak. Because other people are persecuted for helping me to speak is precisely why they should help. http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/introduction.html

This past October 18, gerryarmstrong.org had been online without interruption 11 years. Thanks to Caroline who acts in concert with me in everything on the site, and to Thomas Gandow and his friends who have hosted it in Germany, along with other valuable Scientology-critical sites.

In the same FB thread, David Love challenged Hobson for “trying to spin doctor,” and accused him of being “anti-Gerry Armstrong” because I expose Hubbard as a liar, fraud, etc. Hobson responded:

‎David Love you are quite mistaken. I’m for Truth, the Whole Truth and Nothing But the Truth – whether good, bad or indifferent as long as it is complete and accurate.

I’ve never met Gerry Armstrong and so I have no personal beef with him whatsoever. Even, if he had proved (let’s say) that Ron Hubbard raped sheep back on the farm in Montana when he was a kid, I would not care — so long as he could prove it.

However, I don’t particularly appreciate him making a public accusation that Mark Rathbun tried to have him *murdered* backed up by no evidence whatsoever and later showing up on his blog demanding a public apology for unspecified acts against himself, followed by running around all over the Internet whining because Mark Rathbun won’t give him one.

Whatever Mark Rathbun did or did not do to him (or cause done), if it were me, I would not be in an apologizing mood either.

Michael Hobson
Independent Scientologist

I am now again saying that Hobson is lying, and is libeling me. I am again demanding that he produce what he claims is a public accusation from me that Rathbun tried to have me murdered. I also demand that if he fails to support his libel with facts he correct his libel and repair the damage done. I am not demanding an apology from him.

I affirm that I did not at any time show up on Rathbun’s blog for any reason, including but not limited to, demanding an apology, publicly or otherwise, from him for any acts against myself, unspecified or not. I simply have not shown up on Rathbun’s blog at all. I also have not shown up anywhere else in the world and demanded an apology from him.

As shown above, I stated the facts concerning the “Rathbun apology” black PR line quite emphatically to Hobson in 2011, and quite publicly for all Scientologists of all stripes, as well as interested wogs.

I assure you and everyone else that I have never had any expectation of an apology from Rathbun for my legitimate grievances. I have not only not expected an apology, I haven’t asked for one.

[…]

What needs attention and resolution are ongoing black PR, ongoing injustices, ongoing human rights violations, and the ongoing effects of other crimes, which you were involved in and can help resolve. I know that you know this.

Here is the letter to Rathbun, with links to other communications to him: http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/4490

Hobson knows very well that I have never demanded an apology from Rathbun; because there is no such demand; because I have so openly challenged Hobson on his accusation; and because I have openly explained in simple words that there has never been such a demand. I cannot but conclude that Hobson is willfully lying, in pursuit of his Scientologist group’s antisocial goals.

I do suggest that the Scientologists apologize to their victims, because this would help move the Scientologists out of their fixed position in which their continual victimizing of good people has stuck them. I would never demand, however, that Scientologists, or wogs for that matter, apologize for their misdeeds. That would be like demanding that people be enlightened. I demand action toward justice. Being or becoming enlightened is the right thing to do; just as the Scientologists apologizing for their misdeeds against their victims is the right thing to do. But demanding enlightenment or apologies from the unenlightened or unapologetic is wrong, and I would not bother.

I also have suggested, at least once, that apologizing to one of the Scientologists’ victims who had filed legal claims for his victimization would be a good first step if the Scientologists desired a peaceful resolution of that litigation or conflict. There is this 1991 letter to the Scientologists’ attorney Eric Lieberman regarding the Malcolm Nothing v. Scientology case in South Africa.

I am certain that the Nothling matter can be resolved easily with the following organizational actions:

1. A sincere public apology for its “declare” and other antisocial acts.

2. A sincere, public and complete repudiation of “fair” game,” philosophy of attack, vengeance and hatred, and elimination from Scientology literature of all policies advocating such philosophy.

3. Monetary settlement.

Mr. Nothling says he has no hope that the organization would do any of 1-3; and I recognize that it has exhibited no sign of rethinking its antisocial philosophy and practices. I also recognize that someday it will, and I do what I do because I believe it can be without, and not compelled by, a great human tragedy.

Thus far the organization has attempted to solve its problems with aggrieved individuals with mere monetary settlements and the occasional insincere announcement; e.g., Hubbard’s famous elimination of the term ” fair game,” because it “causes bad PR,” or the more recent blaming of the GO for all things bad and bastardly. And so the organization has brought upon itself more problems and made more aggrieved individuals who seek sincerity but end up taking insincerity and money.
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/archives/4040

Also, in a 1996 letter to David Miscavige, although I was writing him about a different matter, I did take the opportunity to request, on behalf of Homo sapiens, that he apologize to our race for the offensive terms about us in Scientology’s literature and remove those offensive terms. Miscavige, of course, was uniquely qualified, as cult head who controlled all Scientology scripture and communications, to honor my request and have every offensive term or idea removed from scripture and from every other communication. It is universally known that he had and has the power to alter scripture in any way he wants, publish altered scripture, sell it, teach it, and enforce its “purity.”

While I do have this opportunity, however, there is another matter which is very important to a multitude of us. I represent all nonscientologists, as you know a considerable denomination. You refer to us throughout your copyrighted materials as “wogs.” We reject the term as we understand people of African origin to reject the term “niggers.” We understand that you mean by the term “wog,” inter alia, a disadvantaged person with inherently less ability, intelligence, emotional stability, power and opportunity for success than a non-nonscientologist. It is possible there are other disparaging and inflammatory terms, such as “homosap,” still used in your literature also in derogation of nonscientologists.

We request that you immediately undertake to tender an apology to nonscientologists and to remove all offensive terms from your literature. We are aware that you use nonscientology courts, services and utilities in the furtherance of your goals. It is inappropriate to insult the denomination of the very people on whose kindnesses you so completely depend. Perhaps you didn’t know what you were doing. You do, however, know that you personally have control of every public statement by every organization person or thing, and control of all of its copyrighted works. If you have any communications you wish to send to nonscientologists please consider me a channel. http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/writings/armstrong-ltr-miscavige-1996-06-22.html

Since 1996, and because of Miscavige and all Scientologists’ refusal to do anything about the offensive terms and malignant ideas about us in their scripture and other literature, I now proudly use “wog,” their hate term for us. I also now consider the term “non-Scientologist,” or “non-Scn’ist,” or similar even more hateful than “wog.” The Scientologists still refuse to call us human beings. They don’t even have the term “human being” in their tech dictionary; but they include their hate term “wog.”

When wogs replace the terms “wog” or “non-Scientologist” with “human being” in Scientology literature, the Scientologists’ misanthropism becomes clear. When the Scientologists replace these hate terms in their scripture with “human being,” the Scientologists’ misanthropy will start to dissipate, which would be a good thing. In any event, although I requested that Miscavige apologize to Homo sapiens or human beings for the Scientologists’ offensive, misanthropic terms about us, I never demanded he apologize. I request he enlighten up too. Relevantly, I never demanded, nor even requested, that Rathbun apologize for his dishonest, antisocial or criminal acts against me.

Since I have never demanded an apology from Rathbun, on his blog or anywhere else, Hobson’s assertion that I followed this non-existent demand by running around all over the Internet whining because Rathbun will not give me an apology is another bald-faced lie. I have never run around all over the Internet, and I honestly do not know how to do so or even where to start. I do not believe that Hobson is psychotic, but that his willful lies merely evidence his service to antisocial people and causes whose “command intention” is such willful lying. I do not believe that he is incapable of changing his mind or his actions, any more than any sociopath or psychopath is incapable of changing his or her mind or actions.

Hobson’s sheep rape is doubtlessly a bit of a straw animal; nevertheless, I have no evidence of any Hubbard history of raping these poor creatures. Hobson can plow up his own proof if he wants. One of the Scientologists’ more mercenary collaborators L. Fletcher Prouty claimed Hubbard was a big time sheep dipper, and all sorts of Scientologists seem to concur. There are multiple reports that during the Second World War Hubbard was caught with his pants down pounding goats on a Mexican island. And it is widely accepted that not too long after getting the Mexicans’ goats he knew the antichrist, in the biblical sense. Because of their toadying, and their unquestioning subservience to psychopathic leaders, Scientologists are often called sheep. They bleat on command, and of course Hubbard fleeced them, and screwed them figuratively and royally until his death. Then he left them for others like Miscavige, Rathbun and Rinder to fleece and screw. But I don’t believe I have ever heard before this that back in Montana cattle country Hubbard even had sheep on his ranch or farm.

The key message that Hobson has been communicating, either by his choice or by some other’s intention, is that the false facts he provides – A. that I had falsely accused Rathbun of criminal conduct without factual evidence; B. that I had repeatedly publicly falsely accused Rathbun of conspiring to have me murdered; and C. that I had made a public accusation, backed up by no evidence, that Rathbun tried to have me murdered — justify Rathbun’s refusal to do whatever I was asking him to do. As I have stated many times, I have never been asking Rathbun for an apology. I have been asking him, and all Scientologists really, for justice. It has unfortunately been Rathbun’s and all Scientologists’ intention and modus operandi to refuse justice to their victims, and to perpetrate and perpetuate injustice.

How I wanted Rathbun to help obtain the justice I was asking for I have stated repeatedly and very simply:

(1)  Communicate to me;

(2)  Debrief to me and my legal representatives on the lies, black PR, legal actions, intelligence actions, etc. he knows about, which were perpetrated against me, my attorneys, family and associates;

(3)  Execute declarations that contain the facts elicited in his debrief;

(4)  Make himself available to testify regarding such elicited facts in any legal proceedings to repair the injustices he knows about.

Before I communicated these four easy steps for Rathbun, there had been a number of people urging him to apologize to me, or claiming that I wanted him to apologize. I therefore included a fifth step: Apologize if he wants. I do not want him to apologize to me, but I also have no objection to him apologizing. I certainly am not trying to dissuade him from apologizing, just as I am not trying to stop him from being enlightened. As I said, he can apologize if he wants.

Since I did not accuse Rathbun of the things that Hobson accuses me of accusing Rathbun of – A to C, above — these non-existent things cannot conceivably justify Rathbun’s failure to do (1) to (4) above. These things that I have never said or done also cannot justify Rathbun’s other actions or inactions, words or silences, including his apologizing or not. It is clear to me that the most pro-survival action for Hobson is to acknowledge that he falsely accused me of A-C, and that he has no other justification for Rathbun not doing (1) to (4 )and helping me correct the injustices Rathbun helped create. No Scientologist has ever spoken up and urged Rathbun to do the ethical thing – (1) to (4) above — and Hobson could even be the first Scientologist to do so.

Some thoughtful person forwarded a bunch of 2012 “Indy Scientologist Facebook group” posts that contain a number of statements from Hobson relating to his black PR efforts against me, which deserve comment. These statements help in understanding his character, and in confronting the unlikelihood of him ever telling the truth about me or correcting his untruths. He presents as conscienceless, but, as happens with that condition, he does not appear to care. Not being bothered by either a conscience, or by its absence, clearly can feel superior. It really is OT.

Hobson posted:

Allow me to put in a little Reality of my own: the Internet is a counterintelligence and propaganda free-fire zone – not just the Church of Black Scientology, but Gerry Armstrong’s faction, Ron DeWolfe’s faction and other factions are conducting their operations 24/7 on the Internet.

Since I first arrived on the Internet and began to stick up for Ron Hubbard and his version of Scientology around 1998, I have been under nearly constant attack from persons who want this subject and our groups *destroyed* – because I interfere with their operations. *that* is the Reality I have lived with and continue to live with on the USENET newsgroups, Ex-Scn Message Board and now Marty Rathbun’s Blog and Facebook.

Steve Hall has posted a good summary of what is going on and what I am dealing with of which some of you seem to be either uninformed, ignorant or completely oblivious. I am disinclined to be “nice” or “polite” to persons out to destroy us and disrupt our groups. Sometimes, I shoot at the wrong person and that is unfortunate. When I discover this or it is brought to my attention, I do my best to unshoot them and move on.

Those of you who are offended with the way I conduct myself, well I’m sorry that you feel offended but I am not on this Earth or in this group to please you. I’m sorry.

Michael Hobson
Independent Scientologist
Indie 500 #99

There is no “Gerry Armstrong’s faction” “conducting [its] operations 24/7 on the Internet.” I have no faction at all. A faction is “a group of persons forming a cohesive, usually contentious minority within a larger group.” There is no “Ron DeWolfe’s faction.” Ron DeWolf died in 1991. Hobson’s black PR on him, which none of his fellow “Independent Scientologists” corrected, is despicable. These Scientologists really do constitute a faction within the Scientology religion. It is a faction that, using people like Hobson, really is conducting operations on the Internet, black PR operations against good people.

It is true that there is a class of citizens who “act in concert” with me, and doubtlessly these are the good people that Hobson and his fellow Scientologists black PR as my “faction.” But this is a class of good people that the Scientologists themselves postulated and manufactured. This a class of persons who facilitate my telling the truth about L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology, Scientology affiliated churches, organizations or entities and any of their officers, directors, agents, representatives, employees, volunteers, successors, assigns or legal counsel. Hobson and his faction, in fact all factions of Scientologists, lie religiously about Hubbard, Scientology, its entities and people, and us wogs.

The class of persons who act in concert with me also includes anyone who facilitates my assisting victims of Scientology, Scientology affiliated churches, organizations or entities and any of their officers, directors, agents, representatives, employees, volunteers, successors, assigns or legal counsel. The “Indies” comprise a Scientology affiliated entity, and Hobson is one of that entity’s representatives, even if a volunteer. The Scientologists’ injunction that prohibits the class of persons who act in concert with me from telling the truth about Hubbard, Scientology, etc. and from assisting the Scientologists’ victims is patently unlawful, and shows that the Scientologists universally form a criminal conspiracy against basic rights.

It is no wonder then that Hobson and his fellow Scientologist coconspirators, and their wog collaborators or coconspirators, in addition to squelching and destroying our rights, also black PR me and that class of good people who act in concert with me. This religion-wide criminality also explains why Hobson and his fellow coconspirators watch so intently to make sure Rathbun or any other Scientologist, or their supporters, do not break ranks and do the ethical thing for my class and me. The Scientologists and their supporters have achieved the terrible and global injustice they sought and bought, but it is nothing that cannot be undone. Until it is undone, this injustice serves the necessary purposes of demonstrating that Scientology does not work, at least as Scientologists claim, and that they comprise a criminal organization.

Scientology does work to generate and enforce in Scientologists five “valuable final products,” as they call them: vanity, dishonesty, hypocrisy, pugnacity and pusillanimity. Hobson demonstrates that he has achieved all of these Scientology VFPs. In wog society, Scientologists produce distrust, injustice and suffering. The Scientologists, operating a scam and being gargantuan hypocrites, naturally, do not acknowledge their actual, and very antisocial, products. They continue to this day to falsely claim that they produce and possess in themselves superior, indeed superhuman honesty, integrity, abilities and intelligence. The Scientologists continue to falsely claim that in our society they are producing sanity, decency, peace and trust.

A couple of days ago, Rob Williamson posted on the SPs ‘r’ Us Facebook group:

Back in July, Gerry A. asked Marty Mark to debate him on some points Marty put in his book, points that seem to be far from the truth. How come Marty just ignored Gerry, when the points in question are obviously questionable?

Hobson responded:

Rob, with regard to the OP, I don’t speak for or represent Mark “Marty” Rathbun, I’m not in any sort of regular communication with him, I’m not a personal friend of his and I have no influence over him whatsoever.

Even, if I were, Mark “Marty” Rathbun is under no slightest *obligation* to participate in any sort of debate with Gerry Armstrong for any reason. Mr. Armstrong has repeatedly insisted publicly that the GO/OSA has tried (and failed) to have him killed during the time period when Mr. Rathbun was in charge of all external legal affairs (as well as the GO/OSA). Further, Mr. Armstrong posted a demand in a comment on Mr. Rathbun’s blog that he reveal the insider knowledge of these alleged attempts he insisted Mr. Rathbun possesed. Together, these things amount to a public accusation that Mark “Marty” Rathbun conspired to murder Mr. Armstrong.

Now, this is just my own opinion, but if I were Mark “Marty” Rathbun, I would not give Gerry Armstrong so much as the time of day, until such a time as Mr. Armstrong publicly retracts that accusation or even the implication of it and apologizes in a sincere and believable fashion for it. I very much doubt *that* is ever going to happen, frankly.

It was reasonable that Williamson ask the question he did and raise such an issue for discussion. The FB group presents as being for discussion of Scientology-related issues, and my debate with Marty Rathbun is completely Scientology-related. I knew Williamson from the “Apollo” in the early 1970’s, and he’d made email contact with me a few years ago, but I had never communicated with him about my debating Rathbun. It was actually in May this year when I had proposed a debate, or series of debates, on “the rightness or holiness or effectiveness of [Rathbun’s] handling of me and my class per Hubbard tech and orders,” and other topics.
http://gerryarmstrong.ca/archives/773 Then in July, I posted my opening statement for our first debate, which is on Rathbun’s black PRing of the Suppressive Person class in his book Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior. http://gerryarmstrong.ca/archives/826

Hobson’s assertion that I have repeatedly insisted publicly that the Scientologists have tried to have me killed during the time period when Rathbun was in charge of external legal affairs and the GO/OSA is false. This is essentially the same falsehood Hobson has been telling over the past two years. I challenged him on that lie earlier, and he did not correct it. I am again challenging him to either produce evidence to support his false, defamatory assertion, or tell the truth. Even if I had said what Hobson falsely claims I said, however, it is no excuse for Rathbun not to either debate me about his lies or acknowledge and redress them.

Hobson’s assertion, that I posted a demand in a comment on Rathbun’s blog that he reveal the insider knowledge of these alleged attempts I insisted Mr. Rathbun possessed, is false. I have never posted on Rathbun’s blog. Hobson told a similar lie earlier about me posting on Rathbun’s blog. I challenged him on that lie, and he did not acknowledge or correct it. I am challenging him again to either produce evidence to support his falsehood that I posted on Rathbun’s blog, or tell the truth. I have also never insisted anywhere that Rathbun possessed insider knowledge of the incidents Hobson is inventing. Rathbun does possess insider knowledge of actual events, which, if he told the truth about them would be an action toward justice. Hobson, clearly, seeks to have injustice perpetuated; and he lies to accomplish that antisocial goal.

His conclusion that together, the things he is falsely accusing me of amount to a public accusation that Rathbun conspired to murder me could conceivably be true, if Hobson’s lies were true. Even if Hobson and all his fellow Scientologists in the world, and all of their collaborators, yell Tone 40 that his lies are true, however, his lies are still just lies. The idea that Rathbun should not debate me, or tell the truth, or give me so much as the time of day, until I publicly retract some accusation that Hobson fabricated and apologize to Rathbun in a sincere and believable fashion for Hobson’s fabrication, is an example of what is called psychopath’s logic.

A bit later in this recent FB thread, Williamson responded to Hobson, who then posted:

Rob, OP is about Gerry’s complaint that Mark “Marty” Rathbun will not debate him. I have offered what I think is a reasonable explanation and rather than address that, you reply with vague criminal allegations against Marty. How about an actual on-point response ?

Williamson’s original post is not about my complaint that Rathbun will not debate me. In the present circumstance, it is a complete triumph that he won’t debate me. It would be ridiculous to complain about a total victory like this. Williamson’s OP was about how come Rathbun ignored my invitation to debate me. The justification that Hobson offered up is a lie, that he cannot but know is a lie, even if it is a lie he is ordered to tell.

Why Rathbun hasn’t debated me is because his position on the real issues is indefensible logically and morally. He has not debated me because he should not debate me. He should simply acknowledge the truth where I’ve told it, and acknowledge the lies where he’s told those. And he should simply act to end and redress injustices he perpetrated or knows about. This is what is needed and valuable. And this is what Scientologists like Hobson lie about to prevent.

Hobson wrote:

I’m for Truth, the Whole Truth and Nothing But the Truth – whether good, bad or indifferent as long as it is complete and accurate.

He was, of course, lying. Nevertheless, I am giving him some long, complete and accurate truth here. He can be utterly for it. And I would be grateful.

Someone criticized Hobson for bashing a person until he left the FB group. Hobson responded:

False report as to my bashing anyone. I never make personal attacks on anyone.

What a lie. Hobson claims to be a person who knows fact from fiction, and can research facts. He doesn’t present as psychotic. The intentional, repeated, libelous and vitriolic lying, along with the mental condition that manifests in this behavior, makes him dangerous. Or at least it is a prolonged effort to appear dangerous to people his bald-faced bullying and lying targets. His fellow Scientologists and their collaborators, of course, would call Hobson vigilant and conscientious and a major reason why they have continued to expand as a group.

I say truth and justice Michael Hobson, and the rest of you Scientologists too.