Tuesday, 31 January 2012

Hubbard Communications Office.

Hubbard Communications Office
St. Hill Manor,East. Grinstead, Sussex.
HCO Policy Letter of 5th April 1965.

Justice Data Re Academy & HGC
Handling the Suppressive Person
The Basis of Insanity

The Suppressive Person(whom we've called a Merchant of Fear or Chaos Merchant and which we can now technically call the Suppressive person) can't stand the idea of Scientology.

If people became better,the Suppressive Person would have lost.The Suppressive Person answers this by attacking covertly or overtly Scientology. This thing is,he thinks, his mortal enemy since it undoes his(or her) "good work" in putting people down where they should be.

There are three "operations" such a case seeks to engage upon regarding Scientology: (a) to disperse it (b) to crush it and (c) to pretend it didn't exist.

Dispersal would consist of several things such as attributing its source to others and altering its processes or structure.

If you feel a bit dispersed reading this Policy Letter,then realize it is about a being whose "protective coloration" is to disperse others and so remain invisible.Such people generalize all entheta and create ARC Breaks madly.

The second (b) is done by covert or overt means. Covertly a suppressive person leaves the org door unlocked, loses the E- Meters, runs up fantastic bills, and energetically and unseen seeks to pull out the plug and get Scientology poured down the drain.We, poor fools,consider all this just "human error" or "stupidity". We rarely realize that such actions, far from being accidents are carefully thought out. The proof that this is so is simply If we fun down the source of these errors we wind up with only one or two people in the whole group. Now isn't it odd that the majority of the errors that kept the group enturbulated were attributable to a minority of peons present? Even a very "reasonable" person could not make anything else out of that except that it was very odd and indicated that the minority mentioned were interested in smashing the group and that the behaviour was not common to the whole group-meaning it isn't "normal" behaviour.

These people aren't Communists or Fascists or any other ists. They are very sick people. They easily become parts of suppressive groups such as Communists or Fascists because these groups, like criminals, are suppressive.

The Suppressive Person is hard to spot because of the dispersal factor mentioned above. One looks at them and has his attention dispersed by their "everybody is bad".

The Suppressive Person who is visibly seeking to knock out people or Scientology is easy to see. He or she is making such a fuss about it. The attacks are quite viscious and full of lies. But even here when the suppressive person exists on the "otherside" of a potential trouble source visibility is not good.One sees a case going up and down, on the other side of that case, out of the auditors view, it is the Suppressive Person.

The whole trick they use is to generalize entheta. "Everybody is bad." ""The Russians are all bad" "Everybody hates you" "The people versus Jonh Doe", on warrants. "The masses" "The Secret Police will get you".

Suppressive groups use the ARC Break mechanisms of generalizing entheta so it seems "everywhere".

The Suppressive Person is a specialist in making others ARC Break with generalized entheta that is mostly lies.

He or she is a no-gain-case.

So avid are such for the smashing of others by covert or overt means that their case is bogged and it won't move under routine processing. 

The technical fact is that they have a huge problem, long gone and no longer known even to themselves, which they use hidden or forthright vicious acts continually to "handle". They do not act to solve the enviroment they are in. They are solving one enviroment, yesterday's in which they are stuck.

The only reason the insane were hard to understand is that they are handling the situations which no longer exist. The situation probably existed at one time. They think they have to hold their own, with overts against a non-existent enemy to solve a non-existent problem.

Because their overts are continuous they have withholds. Since such a person has withholds, he or she can't communicate freely to as-is the block on the track that keeps them in some yesterday. Hence, a no-case-gain."

That alone is the way to locate a Suppressive Person. By viewing the case. Never judge such a person by their conduct. That is too difficult. Judge by no-case-gains: Don't ever use tests.

One asks these questions:
1.Will the person permit auditing at all? or
2.Does their history of routine auditing reveal any gains?

If (1) is present one is safe to treat the person as suppressive.It is not always correct but it is always safe. Some errors will be made but it is better to make than take a chance on it. When people refuse auditing they are (a) a potential trouble source(connected to a Suppressive Person) (b) a person with a big discreditable withhold;(c) a Suppressive Person or (d) have had the bad luck to be "audited" too often by a Suppressive Person or (e) have been audited by an untrained auditor or one "trained" by a Suppressive Person.

[The last category (e) (untrained auditor) is rather slight but (d) (audited by a Suppressive Person) can have been pretty serious, resulting in continual ARC Breaks during which auditing was pressed on without regard to ARC Break.]

Thus there are several possibilities where somebody refuses auditing. One has to sort them out in an HGC and handle the right one. But HCO by policy simply treats the person with the same admin policy procedures as that used on a Suppressive Person and lets HGC sort it out. Get that difference - it's with the same admin policy procedure as not "the same as".

For treating a person "the same as" a suppressive person when he or she is not only adds to the confusion.One treats a real Suppressive Person pretty rough.One has to handle the bank.

As to (2) here is the real test and the only valid test;

Does their history of routine auditing reveal any gains?

If the answer is NO then there is your Suppressive Person loud and very unclear!

That is the test.

There are several ways of detecting. When fair auditors or good ones have had to vary procedure or do unusual things on this case in an effort to make it gain when there are lots of notes from Ds of P in the folder saying do this-do that-you know that this case was trouble.

This means it was one of three things: 1. a potential trouble source.2.a person with a big withhold.3. a Suppressive Person.

If despite all that trouble and care, the case did not gain - or if the case simply didn't gain depite the auditing no matter how many years or intensives, then youv'e caught your Suppressive Person.

That's the boy. Or the girl.

This case performs continual calculating covert hostile acts damaging to others. This case puts the enturbulence and upset into the environment, breaks the chairs,messes up the rugs and spoils the traffic flow with "goofs" done intentionally.

One should lock criminals out of the environment if one wants security. But one first has to locate the criminal. Don't lock everybody out because you can't find the criminal.

The cyclic case(gains and collapses routinely) is connected to a Suppressive Person. We have the Policy on that.

The case that continually pleads "hold my hand I am so ARC broken" is just some body with a big withhold, not an ARC Break.

The Suppressive Person just gets no-case gain on routine student auditing.

This person is actively suppressing Scientology. If such  will sit still and pretend to be audited the Suppression is by hidden hostile acts which include:

1. Chopping up auditors;
2.Pretending withholds which are actually criticisms;
3.Giving out "data" about their past lives and/or whole track that really holds such subjects up to scorn and makes people who do remember wince;
4.Chopping up orgs;
5. Alterising technology to mess it up;
6.Spreading rumors about prominent persons in Scientology;
7.Attributing Scientology to other source;
8.Criticizing auditors as a group;
9.Rolling up Dev-T,off policy,off origin,off line;
10.Giving fragmentary or generalized reports about entheta that cave people-and isn't actual;
11.Refusing to repair ARC Breaks;
12.Engaging in discreditable sexual acts(also true of potential trouble sources);
13.Reporting a session good when the pc went bad;
14.Reporting a session bad when the pc went uptone;
15.Snapping terminals with lectures and executives to make critical remarks or spread ARC Break type "news"to them;
16.Failing to relay a comm or report;
17.Making an org go to pieces(notes one uses "making" not "letting";
18.Committing small criminal acts around the org;
19.Making "mistakes" which get their seniors in trouble;
20.Refusing to abide by policy;
21.Non compliance with instructions;
22.Alter-is of instructions or orders so that the program fouls up;
23.Hiding data that is vital to prevent upsets;
24.Altering orders to make a senior look bad;
25.Organizing revolts or mass protest meetings;
26.Snarling about Justice.

And so on. One does not up the catalogue,however one only uses this one fact-no case gain by routine auditing over a longish period.

This is the fellow that makes life miserable for the rest of us. This is the one who overworks executives. This the auditor killer. This is the course enterbulator or pc killer.

There's the cancer. Burn it out.

In short you begin to see that it's this one who is the only one who makes harsh discipline seem necessary.The rest of the staff suffers when one or two of those is present.

One hears a whine about "process didn't work" or sees an alter-is of tech. Go look. You'd find it now and then leads to a Suppressive Person inside or outside the org.

Now that one knows who it is, one can handle it.

But more than that, I can now crackthis case.

The technology is useful in all cases, of course. But only this cracks the "no-case-gain".

The person is in a mad, howling situation of some yesteryear and is "handling it" by committing overt acts today. I say condition of yesteryear but the case thinks it is today.

Yes, you're right. They are nuts. The spin bins are full of  either them or their victims. There's no other real psych in a spin bin!

What? Thant means we've cracked insanity itsel? That's right. And it's given us the key to the Suppressive Person and his or her effect on the environment. This is the multitude of "types" of  insanity of the 19th century psychiatrist. All in one.Schizophrenia,paranoia, fancy names galore. Only one other type exists=the Suppressive Person got "at".This is the "manic depressive" a type who is up one day and down the next. This is the Potential Trouble Source gone mad. But them are in the minority Spin Bin, usually put there by Suppressive Persons and not crazy at all! The real mad ones are the Suppressive Persons. They are the only psychos.

Over simplification? No indeed. I can prove it. We could empty the spin bins now. If we want to. But we have better use for the technology than saving a lot of suppressive persons who themselves are only to scuttle the rest of us.

You see, when they get down to the no-case-gain where a routine process won't bite, they can no longer as-is their daily life so it all starts to stack up into a horror. They "solve" this horror by continuous covert attacks against their surroundings and their associates.After a while the covert ones don't seem to to hold off the fancied "horror" and they commit some senseless violence in broad daylight-or-collapse-and so they can get identified as insane and are lugged off to the spin bin.

Anybody can "get mad" and bust a few chairs when a Suppressive Person goes too far. But there's traceable sense to it. Getting mad doesn't make a mad man. It's damaging actions that have no sensible detectable reasons that's the trail of madness.Any thetan can get angry. Only a madman damages without reason.

All actions have them lower scale discreditable mockery.The difference is, does one get over his anger?The no-case in of course can't. He or she stays mis- emotional and adds each new burst to the fire. It never gets less. It grows. And a long way from all Suppressive Persons are violent. They are more likely to look resentful.

A Suppressive Person can get to one solid dispassionate state of damaging things. Here is the accident prone, the home wrecker, the group wrecker.

Now here one must realize something, the Suppressive Person finds an outlet for his or her unexpressed rage by carefully needling those they are connected with into howling anger. You see the people around them get dragged into this long incident by mistaken identity. And it is a maddening situation to be continually misidentified, accused,worked on,double crossed. For one is not the being the Suppressive Person supposes. The Suppressive Persons world is pretty hard to live around. And even ordinarily cheerful people often blow up under the strain.

So be careful who you call the Suppressive Person. The person connected with a Suppressive Person is liable to be only visible range in sight!

You have some experience of this-the mousy little woman who rarely changes expression and is so righteous connected to somebody who now and then, Yes, gets into a frenzy.


When an Academy finds it has a Potential Trouble Source, a "withholdy case that ARC Breaks easily" or a Suppressive Person enrolled on a course or a blow, the Academy must call for the HCO Department of Inspection and Reports Justice section. This can be any HCO personnel available, even the HCO sec.

The HCO representative must wear some readily identified HCO symbol and must take a report sheet with a carbon copy on a clip board.HCO must have present other staff adequate to handle possible physical violence.

The student, if still present must be taken to a place where an interview will not stop or enturbulate a class, by Tech Division personnel. This can be any Tech Division office, empty auditing room or empty class room. The point is to localize the commotion and not stir up the whole Tech Division.

If Tech Division personnel is not available, HCO can recruit "other staff" anywhere by simply saying "HCO rerequires you" and taking them into the interview place.

HCO has a report sheet for such matters, original and one copy for Justice files.

The HCO representative calls for the student's folder and looks it over quickly for TA action. If there is none(less than 10 divs/sess) that's it. It is marked on the report sheet. "No TA actions in auditing" or "Little TA". HCO is not interested in what processes were run. Or why there is no TA. If the course requires no meters the folder is inspected for alter-is( which denotes a rough pc)or no case changes.If there is no TA notations in the folder, HCO should put the person on a meter, making sure the person is not wearing a ring. One asks no questions, merely reads the TA portion and notes the needle and marks these in the report sheet. The Tone Arm will be very high (5 or above) or very low(2 or less) or dead thetan (2 or 3) and the needle would be an occasional RS or stuck or sticky if the person is a Suppressive Person. This is noted in the report sheet.

If the folder or the student in question says he has no case gain, this is again confirming of a Suppressive Person.

If two of these three points(folders, meters statement) indicate a Suppressive person, HCO is looking for two possible students when so called in-the one who caused the upset and that student's coach or student's auditor.There very likely maybe a Suppressive Person on that course that is not this student. Therefore one looks for that one too, the second one.

If a bit of questioning seems to reveal that the student's auditor was responsible, test that student too and enter it on a second HCO report form. And order the other one to auditing at the students own expense.

When one walks in on it. Find out why and what.If the HCO tests indicate some doubt about either student being a Suppressive Person. HCO asks about a possible withhold and enters any result on the sheet and sends the students and sheet separately to the Tech Division, Dept of estimation. The procedure is the same for a Suppressive Person but is "a withholdy pc who ARC Breaks easily" or simply a "withholdy pc" if no ARC Breaks are noted. "Auditing recommended". 

But there is a third category for which HCO is very alert in this interview. And that is the POTENTIAL TROUBLE SOURCE.

For this person may only be audited further if he or she disconnects or handles the Suppressive Person or group to which he or she is connected  and can't be sent to the HGC or back to the course either until the status is cleared up.

How to tell them apart? Easy! Just ask this question.

Which gets a case gain easily?

Well, it's even simpler than that! Put the two on an E-Meter. Don't do anything but read the dial and needle. The Suppressive one has the high stuck TA. The other has a lower TA. Simple?

Not all Suppressive Persons have high TA( my emphasis TA/ Tone Arm on an E- Meter). The TA can be anywhere especially very low(1.0). But the needle is weird. It is stuck tight or it RSes without reason(the pc wearing no rings to cause a n RS) ( my emphasis RS/ Rock Slam).

Suppressive Persons also can have the "dead" thetan clear read!

You see people around a suppressive Person Q and A and disperse. They seek to "get even" with the Suppressive Person and often exhibit the same symptoms temporarily.Sometimes two Suppressive Persons are found together. So one can't always say which is the Suppressive Person in a pair. The usual combination is the Suppressive Person and the Potential Trouble Source.

However, you don't need to guess about it or to observe their conduct.

For this poor soul can no longer as-is easily. Too many overts.Too many withholds.Stuck in an incident that they call "present time". Handling a problem that does not exist. Supposing those around are the personnel in their own delirium.

They look alright. They sound reasonable. They are often clever. But they are solid poison.They can't ask anything. Day by day their pile grows. Day by day their new overts and withholds pin them down tighter. They aren't here.But they sure can wreck the place.

There is the true psycho.

And he or she is dying before your very eyes. Kind of horrible.

The resolution of the case is a clever application of problems processes, never O/W (overts and withholds). What was the condition? How did you handle it? is the key type of process.

I don't know what the percentage of these are in society. I know only that they make up about10% of any group so far observed. The dat is obscured by the fact that they ARC Break others and make them mis- emotional - thus one of them seems to be, by contagion, half a dozen such.

Therefore simple inspection of conduct does not reveal the Suppressive Person. Only a case folder puts the seal on it. No case gain by routine process.

However this test too may soon become untrustworthy for now we can crack them by a special approach. However we will also generally use the same approach on routine cases as it makes cases go upwards fast and we may catch the Suppressive Person accidentally and cure him or her before we are aware of it.

And that would be wonderful.

But we'll still have such on our lines in Justice matters from now on.So it's good to know about them, how they are identified, how to handle.

HCO must handle such cases as per the HCO Justice Codes on Suppressive acts when they blow Scientology or seek to suppress Scientology or org one should study up on these.

The Academy should be careful of this and report them to HCO promptly as they would potential trouble sources or withholds that won't be delivered. The Academy must notfool with Suppressive persons. It's a sure way to deteriorate a course and cave in students.

If this is the case, there is no point in continuing the person in the Tech Division and HCO takes overfully, applying the policy related to Potential Trouble Sourcees.

This type of case will probably not be dangerous but quite co-operative and probably dazed by having to do something about his situation. He or she has been hammered with invalidation by a Suppressive person and may be rather wobbly but if Justice steps are taken exactly on policy there should be no trouble. HCO can take Potential Trouble Source(but never Suppressive Person) out of the Tech Division premises and back to HCO to complete such briefings. Remember, it is all one to us if the Potential Trouble Source handles it or not. Until it's handled or disconnected we don't want it around as it's just more trouble and the person will cave in if audited under those conditions(connected to a Suppressive Person or group).

A Suppressive Person found in an Academy is ordered to HC processing always.And always at his or her own expense.If the Suppresive Person won't buy auditing, or co-operate, HCO follows steps AtoE in policy on Suppressive Persons in the Justice Codes. HCO may be assisted in this by Tech personnel.

The point is, the situation must be handled fully there and then. The student buys his auditing or gets A to E or both. There is no"we'll put you on probation in the course if..." because I've not found it to work.

Auditing or Suppressive Person A to E or both.


The student however may have blown off the premises or has gone entirely. On a minor momentary blow, where all it took was the student's auditor and a few words to get the student back, the matter is not a real blow.

But where the student leaves the premises in a blow or doesn't turn up for class, the Tech Division must send an Instructor and the student's auditor over to HCO Department of Inspection and Reports, an HCO representative should go with them at once to pick up the student.

The student is brought back with as little public commotion as possible and the procedure of HCO checkout, etc is followed as above.


Where the student can't be gotten back(or in all such cases) the real cause may be a Suppressive Person in the course itself, not the blown student or the upset student.If the Suppressive Person is on the course(and is not the blown student) HCO will want to know this. In all such cases the one who caused the environment may not be the culprit.

The HCO representative calls for the blown student's case folder and looks for the TA. If there is none or for some reason the student wasn't audited, or if no meters were used on that course, HCO seeks to find out what the cases response were to processing.

If the case seemed to change or improve yet the student is gone, HCO looks over the blown student's ex-auditor for suppressive characteristics such as satisfaction the pc blew, critical statements about Tech or Instructors, case rough or difficult, lies about the circumstances, etc and if such signs are present HCO orders the blown student's ex-auditor to the HGC at the student's own expense.

If this interview with the blown student's auditor seems to indicate a Suppressive Person beyond any doubt HCO orders the student to the HGC at the student's own expense.

The blown student's course auditor will not be found usually to be a Potential Trouble Source as these are seldom bad or rough auditors, so questions about this possibly don't really apply.

But if this student ( the blown student's auditor) is Suppressive, it's HGC or A to E. If the student gives on A to E he or she may be returned to course or to the HGC as HCO deems best.

In all such cases where a Suppressive Person is found, watch out for legal repercussions by having a reliable witness present during such negotiations or upsets and take liberal notes for possible Comm Ev. This is why there must be an HCO representative handling it.

If there is no agreement to be audited and the student is found to be a Suppressive Person, will not respond to A to E(because student has blown and can't be found or because the student flatly refuses) the student is considered terminated.

A waiver or quit claim is given or sent the student stating:

I........................... having refused to abide by the Codes of (name and place of Org) do hereby waive any further rights I may have as a Scientologist and in return for my course fee of ....... I do hereby quit any claim I may have on (name or Org) or any Scientologist personnel organization of Scientology

Only when this is signed the student may have his course fee returned, but no other fees as he accepted the service.

The ex-student should realize this makes him Fair game and outside our Justice Codes. He may not have recourse of any kind beyond refund. And after signing can only return to Scientology as per policy on Fair Game.

The HGC audits such a Suppressive Person sent to it on special processes specially issued by HCO B for Suppressive Persons with histories of institutionalized insanity may be audited in HGC.
L. Ron Hubbard.

PS: If you've wondered if you are a Suppressive Person while reading this - you aren't! A Suppressive Person never does wonder, not for a moment!

Here's a dictionary to help you with anything you don't understand.

To the average human being this policy letter is nuts by any stretch of the imagination, but let's just for one moment imagine this as being real.In a Scientologist's mind this is real! This is the guide for determining an SP (Suppressive Person) or PTS (Potential Trouble Source). This Policy letter written by L. Ron Hubbard in 1965 is a part of the "Tech", the valuable "Technology" that determines your life.

This policy letter was the policy letter that declared my Father a Suppressive Person, this policy letter was the deciding factor in my loosing my only parent.This policy letter decided and destroyed the life of an 11 year old child. This policy letter was studied and believed in by Hubbard's most faithful followers and because of those strong beliefs allowed the Scientologists to play at being GOD!

To decide the fate of another human being on a whim, because the little brown box and the soup cans had the ability to know all of your innermost thoughts.Scientologist's think they are Gods and have the ability to rule your life.And to the unknowing person, they do very successfully.

Some people think Scientologist's can believe anything they want to believe as long as they are not harming anyone.If you fervently believe in L. Ron Hubbard's Technology, do you really believe that belief in this kind of policy is not harming anyone?

But, then at 11 years old, I wasn't really a child was I? I was an adult in a little body.

So while were being so "religious" and sanctimonious, pray tell me, is there no harm in that belief?

Friday, 27 January 2012

Sacriligious Lamb


Well, lets get into a real religious debate here, let's do this.

Mike Rinder,Do you suppose that the tenets of L. Ron Hubbard  really supply you with the were with all to morally justify this:


Yeah, that's so religious!

Go, push your buttons, do you know what's the worst of the worst, YOU, Mike Rinder.

Let's Pretend.

Let's Pretend
This never happened:

And this never happened:

And this never happened:

And this never happened:

And this never happened:

And this never happened:

And this never happened:

And this never happened;

And this never happened:

And that certainly never happened, did it? Quote"this is unreal to me" Really?

So, this never happened either


And neither did this:

Or this:

And this:

And this:

And this:
and there's this:

And then there's this:


And then there is this:

I'm all for this, I really am, but don't denigrate OUR lives, at the cost of thousands out there whom have lost everything dear to them,because of one man. The man who stole our childhood.

Wednesday, 25 January 2012

Hit by a Freight Locomotive

Still Mad as Hell.


A tribute to anonymous, the OG and everyone fighting the cult of $cientology.

Since early January, an Internet collective known only as Anonymous has been exposing the criminal activities and corrupt practices of the Church of Scientology (CoS) and its leadership. We do not oppose the rights of the "church's" membership to believe in the "religious" tenets of scientology. We oppose the illegal, immoral and deadly acts of its leadership including and maybe most importantly their attempts to suppress free speech on the internet.

The difference between myself and a lot of people is I do oppose the supposed"religious" tenets of Scientology, because I firmly believe these "religious tenets" are the route to all evil, I believe they cause massive trauma to those that follow them, I believe they make perfectly normal people mentally unstable and unable to lead a normal life and I believe that people whom are already unstable or for whatever reason mentally challenged are challenged beyond what they can endure.

So, when I read things like this I am dumbfounded:

and am relieved when I read this:by Frederic. L Rice.

Pulitzer Prize material! The law enforcement agencies involved at the time did not investigate the murder, but there have been other Scientology murders that have never been investigated, she was not the first nor the last.

I am even more endeared when I see things like this:

And... back to Big Brother...

Tuesday, 24 January 2012

Scientology and Orwell's 1984.

"People simply disappeared, always during the night. Your name was removed from the registers, every record of everything you had ever done was wiped out, your one-time existence was denied and then forgotten. You were abolished, annihilated: vaporized was the usual word."
- George Orwell, 1984, Book 1, Chapter 1

"It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away. A nervous tic, an unconscious look of anxiety, a habit of muttering to yourself--anything that carried with it the suggestion of abnormality, of having something to hide. In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face...; was itself a punishable offense. There was even a word for it in Newspeak: facecrime..."
- George Orwell, 1984, Book 1, Chapter 5

Newspeak Dictionary:


Scientology Dictionary:


The fact the Scientology has its own language makes it difficult for non-Scientologists to read Scientology texts and understand what ex-Scientologists are going on about. The wording and abbreviations are so complex that Scientology has actually published two full-sized dictionaries for use by its own members. This glossary is not meant to be a comprehensive Scientology dictionary, but rather to help the casual reader decipher "Scientologese".




L. Ron Hubbard on George Orwell:


Nation of Islam and Scientology:


Monday, 23 January 2012

Banned for being abusive.

I have been banned on ESMB for being abusive.Me being abusive about an abusive cult and it's followers.

You have been banned for the following reason:
Date the ban will be lifted: 31st January 2012, 02:00 PM

This is what I posted:

Re: Human Rights at Its Finest on Facebook

Quote Originally Posted by Terril park View Post
good catch!
Obviously not!

You are an abomination Terril Park, a liar, a Scientologist and a disgusting human being.

And, I don't give a toss whether I am banned from posting here, because I don't want to be any where near where you are.

Emma had it right, here :

Most people I know, who posses even the smallest amount of social grace, would shy away from doing something that they know upsets most of the people most of the time, especially given the inappropriateness of the venue (board/thread) etc.

But not you Terril. You don't care how wrong it is, you'll just kjeep doing what you do because Ron would want you too.

One day, if you ever understand the seriousness of this, you'll be free. Until then, no matter what you think, you are not free.(end quote)

One day, and I know it won't be soon, I hope you realize the error of your ways. You make light of the atrocities imposed by LRH,because YOU WERE NOT THERE, what's true for you is true for YOU!


When you try to leave, they bring you back!

Many of these people had their lives wrecked, but to you it's just a game

What Emma did not see was the private message I had from Terril Park.A continuation of Commodores Messengers, but I can't quote that because I can't access the ESMB and can't quote. Terril is instrumental in waging war with Messenger against Messenger because he thinks he has all the facts.He only has what the messengers want him to know, in actual fact, he knows NOTHING!

keep at it MR. SPY, LRH really would have been proud of YOU.

I have got to quote this:From ESMB today.But not to worry apparently I am not banned, just on holiday.HaHa!

Myself and Sharone met many times at protests and were friends,
and had fun chatting in post game times in pubs. Lots of nice chatting

I can't find a time I PM'ed Sharone in my sent log.

Maybe I missed one or two. We had much interaction with Anons in London protrests, and in November I believe were both protesting at St Hill.

Recently met her old friend Janis Grady who was locked in a hold with her
on the Apollo.

Sharone has both our best wishes. 

Not only is this man delusional about a supposed friendship as most anons and exes know, but what's worse is this bold faced lie.

I can't find a time I PM'ed Sharone in my sent log.
How convenient. Selective memory syndrome.How's that TR Lie  working out for you?

It's official - I am a trouble maker, bit like being declared an SP really, but as I always said, I am.

So I guess I'm putting it out there and asking you guys what you would do in my position. Honestly the easiest path is just to ban trouble makers, but then if you keep doing that, who will you have left? And WTF will you have to talk (and complain) about?


By the way the PM, I'm talking about below is not the same as the one above.
I'm really sorry to the person that PMed me on ESMB, but I can't contact you again till the 31st of January and I doubt that after this posting.

But, we of the church believe:
That all men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to write freely their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others.

and there lies the problem, I'm a woman, I'm not allowed to.And, because of that I'm abusive.Oh, the creed of a scientologist.

A bit of advise,never mock a "religion", especially Scientology, they are not a tongue in the cheek kind of religion, they believe everything L. Ron Hubbard said, wrote and did as the whole of the law.







Wednesday, 18 January 2012

Children in Scientology's Sea Org.


"If a child or these children are found in Hold 1
_or_ any hidden compartment of the ship they are to be locked up."


This is a light and airy space to put children in, isn't it?I bet all those "wog" families couldn't think of a better start for their children, could they?L. Ron Hubbard thought this was a good punishment for his messengers who had the audacity to speak to Greek boys.Lower the lighting, make it pitch black, with just a ships lantern and scrape, scrape, scrape at the rust and not knowing whether it was day or night, finally go to sleep sitting up, because there was not enough room to lie down between the girders, in a small hidden compartment.No blanket's, no mattress, just cold metal flooring, no food other than bread and water.And, you will break to get out of this hole, after all you are one hell of a security risk, you naughty little girls, how dare you speak to boys that don't even speak your own language. What a FLAP! What a Liability! What a security risk!What a Success Story!

What are Your Crimes?

Well, I successfully managed to explain what my name was and for that I was put in the hold of the Apollo in a condition of Liability.for being a security risk.

I was 11 years old, did I get scientology thrown out of Corfu, I don't think so. I think the daily overboardings, the constant FLAPS, the televised Granada program, the Governments of the day and the news papers got the Apollo thrown out of Corfu, it's just a shame they didn't keep at it.

And then of course, there was the FBI, the CIA, the Communists and most worrisome of all SMERSH.







Why can't Scientology behave like a decent organization should, caring for its youth? Why does it have to violate the Universal Declaration of Human Right in pursuit of profit?
The answer lies with their founder L. Ron Hubbard, who made his word into law for scientologists. Scientology can not change therefor, not by themselves, it would be against all that is sacred for them to abandon the twisted ideas of child abuse which emanated from Hubbard. If we want to see a change in the organization's attitude toward children then it can only come from outward pressure. Get active, write your US representative, politicians, media and inform your friends. Spread the word!

What does the Declaration has to say about these inhuman Scientology practices?

Article 5.

    No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 9.

    No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
    (2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
Article 30.
    Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
    Adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948.

Flag Orders on Children:

The Creed of a Scientologist:

What about the women?

And Children?

Tuesday, 17 January 2012

Cruise Ship was 'a prison'

aca - A Current Affair's story on Ramana Dienes-Browning.


The story is out there and that's what matters, Tom Cruise's crazy "religion" is far more crazy than anyone could ever possibly believe.Unfortunately, you have to have been there.The reenactments are somewhat flimsy, but good on aca for trying.As for the pseudo naval church of mind bending psycho sermons, we've heard it all before.

The Church rejects suggestions made by SA Senator Nick Xenophon who again is fronting to the media without any facts to hand – in a continued campaign of religious vilification to incite fear and hatred against Scientologists and their Church. It’s time this discriminatory behaviour ceased.

The allegations raised by Senator Xenophon in the Senate have time and time again been proven to be false, and despite this, the Senator has not once apologised or publicly corrected the record for abusing parliamentary privilege to harm the Church of Scientology and its parishioners in Australia. To this date he has not accepted invitations to come and tour our Churches and speak with the many happy Scientologists who are contributing to their community.

Government officials, military personal, police and other dignitaries tour the Freewinds and 15,000 people from the islands went aboard the Freewinds last year alone. The Freewinds passes all of its international maritime inspections with flying colours. These officials have praised the Freewinds and its crew for their excellent service and safety. The US Homeland Security office publicly commended the Freewinds for its public service – and this is from officials who have worked closely with the Freewinds crew. They have been and looked and dealt many times with the Freewinds.

The Church yet again extends an open invitation to Senator Xenophon to visit our Church in Australia and speak with Scientologists and see for himself instead of relying on the hearsay of unreliable apostates and former disgruntled member."

Monday, 16 January 2012

1968 Revisited 'The Mind Benders'.

In 1968 Cyril Vosper was declared an SP after a comm ev ( committee of evidence). He had devoted 14 years of his life to Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard since 1954.He wrote a book which Scientology tried to ban.

You must not read this book! It just might enlighten you as to what has been going on inside Scientology all along.Now let's see, who was in charge of Scientology in 1968? David Miscavige, who was only eight years old at the time?Or is there just a slim chance that L. Ron Hubbard was the authority?

And remember, anyone can believe anything they want to believe as long as it doesn't harm anyone.



TO: Those Concerned E.O. No. 729 WW, 388 SH,
FROM: HCO Exec Sec WW 9 EU, 1 SH FND.
SUBJECT: Declaration of Enemy. 2nd September, 1968
Recommendation of Comm Ev convened
on EO 727 WW

1. CYRIL VOSPER, 8 Newlands Crescent, East Grinstead, is declared in a
Condition of ENEMY.

2. He put stops in the way of mounting a Guardian Mission. By his own
admission before a Committee of Evidence he was guilty of failing to
immediately produce plans, and of failure to pass completed orders to
Exec Council and Alert Council members before copying or duplicating,
thus permitting a mission to depart with incomplete orders and causing
Dev-T to seniors and Mission Efficiency Experts.

3. He put stops on mission training of WW personnel by failing to take
responsibility for his post of Dissem Sec WW in that he

a. Failed to assign a deputy for his week end Foundation post or make
arrangements so that he would be free to take the training he needed to
become efficient in getting out missions. By failing to be part of the
WW training team he also effectively stopped remaining WW staff from
carrying out dummy missions and the resulting situation had to be handled
by a Sea Org member.

b. Failed to take responsibility to see that an Efficiency Expert was
trained for the Guardian Mission, sending the Expert home to "study in

4. Vosper is to apply the Enemy formula which is: "Find out who you really

5. He is not to be processed or trained.

6. Anyone connected to him is not to be processed or trained until he or
she has disconnected from him in writing.

Ken Urquhart,
Convening Authority.

Or was the authority Kenneth Urqhart on behalf of LRH?

If Hubbard were just one individual, he would be pathetic but avoidable. There are 5,000,000 Hubbards and in that quantity are not pathetic but menacing and very difficult to avoid.


"Find out who you really are?"

That is what the Ethics Order told me to do.

"Vosper is to apply the Enemy formula which is: 'Find out who you really are.'"

No good writing to Ken Urquhart and telling him, "Look, Ken, I've known you for years. You know who I am".

Hubbard and all his peculiar extensions - Scientologists - wanted me to say, "I AM A SUPPRESSIVE PERSON!"

I wrote it down on a piece of paper, trying to get conviction into the very ink. I was sitting on a bench in Hyde Park, near Speaker's Corner. People were walking up and down. They did not know there was an Enemy of all Mankind in their midst. I felt quite famous.

It was not sufficient to just write down, "I AM A SUPPRESSIVE PERSON" and send that in. Oh, no. These Scientologists want a total confession of all the dreadful things you have done in your life. If you know any, they want dreadful things from earlier lives too! They want you to completely degrade yourself. To admit you are one of the Enemies of Mankind.

I started writing. I've done lots of really lousy things. I cheated at school once. I thought L. Ron Hubbard was an idiot, often. I got angry with my children, sometimes. When I was seven, I had fired an arrow at a cat.

There were dozens of things like this and when I read it over, I realised what a tame life I had led. I hadn't made any mountains of skulls like Attila the Hun, not even a small pile of skulls. When I was twelve I had smoked some cigarettes that had been stolen by another boy. Maybe that was "Receiving Stolen Property".

I felt much better when I had finished my long list. I really was not an Enemy of Mankind.
Should I send it in? Or was it all such complete nonsense that I would be wiser to ignore the Scientologists?

But the children; what would they think of me if I didn't try to get back into Scientology? I posted it to Ken Urquhart.

Over the following six weeks, I sent in another five of these applications of the Enemy Formula. I got more and more imaginative every time. In the end I was able to picture myself as one of the most evil beings ever to have inhabited the physical universe. It did not do any good though.

I kept getting extraordinary letters from Peter Warren, telling me to "Find out who you really are". They were not going to up-grade me. But, by now, I really did not want them to.

In the end I decided that I would not act out this idiocy any longer and went back to see my children.
The next day I was declared a Suppressive Person. Per Gardstrom, International Ethics Officer, World Wide, found me in the Lower Hall working and handed me HCO Ethics Order 729 WW (World Wide), 388 SH (Saint Hill), 9 EU (Europe), 1 SH FND (Saint Hill Foundation). He did not give me time to read it.

"Get off the premises right away," he said.

"But my children are here somewhere. I must see them and say goodbye."

"Get off the premises right away."

"One day you'll have children, Per. I hope you will then remember what you have just said. I hope you will feel very proud of yourself," I said.


not having acquired previously the condition of
being charged, and not being recognized such fell accusations in our judicial
ordinance, the participation of these accused persons in the commission of the
crimes which said private accusation imputes to them not ensuing either from
the documental evidence or
from the balance of from the formal actions practiced, whereby, in accordance
with what is disposed in article 641, 2' of the Law of Criminal Prosecution,
the provisional abatement of the lawsuit with respect to the accused Kurt
Weiland, Per Ake Gardstrom, William Knight and Peter Warren.


John Caban
Pedro Lerma et al. ? All complainants in the Spanish Criminal case
were harassed incessantly and offered settlements to drop their original complaints, I was in telephone contact with one of the complainants, an American named John Caban, a jeweler, who also put Pedro Lerma (no direct relation that I know of) on the telephone one time. After all the other complainants had been harassed into accepting scientology's settlement offers.. John called me and related the amount of pressure he was under, and the fact he was the last man standing...he sounded apologetic, almost ashamed, that he could not continue..to stand alone, which brings up another point, no man can stand alone against organized fascist tactics, it takes your support to keep going. Every target of Scientology they wish to handle is subject to a campaign to isolate them, until they feel alone.. this tactic reduces the cash pay outs of scientology necessary to silence their enemies. So don't think that what you do, has no effect. Doing and saying NOTHING is what aids Scientology's campaign for SILENCE.

David Miscavige bragged about this during the 2002 new years event, saying that even when the prosecution called its own witnesses "Scientology Worked" -

Meister asked Warren if he could see Ron Hubbard. He knew that Hubbard's daughter, Diana, was about Susan's age. In Meister's own words:
Passing the guarded gates into the port compound, we had our first look at Hubbard's ship, Apollo. It appeared to be old, and as we boarded it, the girls manning the deck gave us a hand salute. All were dressed in work type clothing of civilian origin. Most appeared to be young. Upon boarding we were shown the stern of the ship, which was used as a reading room, with several people sitting in chairs reading books. The mention of Susan seemed to meet disapproval from those on board .... We were shown where Susan's quarters were in the stern of the ship below decks where it appeared fifty or so people were sleeping on shelf type bunks. Susan's letter had mentioned she shared a cabin all the way forward with one other person. Next we were shown the cabin next to the pilot house on the bridge where the alleged suicide had taken place. It was a small cabin and appeared to be one where a duty officer might catch some sleep while underway .... We were not allowed to see any more of the ship .... I requested an interview with Hubbard as he was then on board. Warren said he would ask .... He returned in about a half hour and said Hubbard had declined to see me.
Meister and Galbraith returned to Casablanca. Meister found that the thirty or so films he had been carrying with him had disappeared, including the film he had shot of Sail and the Apollo.
As I was preparing to leave the hotel [to take the flight home], the telephone in my room rang. It was Warren who said he had to see me at once on a matter of utmost urgency. I told him I would see him in the lobby .... Warren came into the lobby a very frightened man. His face was pale and he motioned me to a chair in the corner of the lobby... he told me he was sent to make a settlement with me in cash.

A critique by Kenneth Urqhuart of Jon Attack's book.

18. p.207. Jon raises the matter of the death of Susan Meister, and strongly suggests that foul play caused it. I never heard LRH mention foul play. By the time of this incident, we had GO people on the ship, and that office took charge of the investigation and handling of her terrible end. If they had proof of foul play it is conceivable that they would have withheld it - but not from MSH and I doubt extremely that she would have withheld it from LRH. It is possible that LRH would have withheld it from me.
I was involved unknowingly in Susan Meister's situation. A week or so before her death, she had written to LRH asking his permission for her to leave the ship and return home. At that time, his policy on such was to refuse (it varied). I composed a reply to this effect and included it in his mail for signature. He signed it. He was considerably put out when I reminded him of this - he had signed the reply without reading it or its original request (and this was not unusual practice for him - I should have known better). From then on, I put a warning note on any similar reply composed for him to sign.
Further, on Susan Meister: Jon quotes some letters she wrote home in high enthusiasm about Scientology and what she took to be the mission of the Sea Org. He quotes them as examples of how gullible SO members were. We had a number of people on the ship who came without a great deal of education but with at least some experience of street drugs (I don't know if Susan had a drug history or not; she was certainly not well educated). Finding themselves on the ship, and sometimes with menial jobs and very unattractive berthing, some of them let their imaginations run wild, and their false enthusiasms flap. Many of them graduated through that phase to some maturity and, in some cases, great ability. I believe that Susan Meister was unable to face the growth that staying on the ship challenged her to encompass; I will always deeply regret that her cry came through me, and I chose to adhere to the current policy rather than to hear her, listen to her, and help her in compassion and good sense.


Compassion and good sense don't seem to be compatible with Scientology.

L. Ron Hubbard lovers unite:


Jerry Armstrong talks about the most shocking aspect of Scientology:

But to this day independents,freezoners, indies, whatever the hell you want to call them and I call them true blood Scientologists will tell you stupid stuff like this:

SZ: Listening to you, it sounds as if Hubbard had been harmless. Ronald DeWolf, who passed away in 1991 and was the oldest son of the Scientology founder, described his father in an interview as a sadistic, violent and paranoid occultist, who in contrast to his own teachings of purity had drunk a lot of alcohol and also taken drugs.

Rinder: First of all, I know that Nibs (editorial remark: De Wolf's nickname) has later taken back these statements. And secondly, I myself have spent a lot of time with Hubbard, as much as few others. He was the most brilliant person I ever got to know. Yes, he was moody at times and he could get angry when something went wrong. But was it always like that? No. Did he treat people like Miscavige? Not one bit. Did he care for his family? Absolutely. Did he take drugs? Absolutely not. Was he polite? Incredibly. Was he funny? Very much so.

From an interview with Mike Rinder.
There are many people that should be speaking out, but they won't.

Here's one guy that deserves a lot of respect for speaking out:

Mike Rinder Speaks in Germany.

Ex-Scientologist about Cult Leader:
"He Beat me, He had me Clean Toilets"

Interview: Marc Felix Serrao

For 20 years, Michael Rinder was the head of the feared intelligence agency of the Church of Scientology. In 2007 he left - because he couldn't cope with the cult leader's totalitarian methods anymore. Since then his own family despises him. In his first interview he explains why an open revolt in Scientology is only a matter of time.

Since a few days ago, all hell has broken loose at Scientology. A Scientologist with conviction by the name of Debbie Cook sharply criticized the cult leader David Miscavige and his alleged wasteful conduct with donations in an e-mail sent to thousands of other Scientologists. Such strong statements were until now only known to come from former members and not from within the organization. An isolated occurence? Not at all, says Michael Rinder. There are few people who know the cult as well as the 56 year old Australian. Rinder already grew up in a family of Scientologists. He was a spokesperson and for more than 20 years head of the Office of Special Affairs, Scientology's infamous intelligence agency. In 2007 he left, because, as he says, he couldn't cope anymore with the totalitarian methods of the cult leader. In his first interview, which appears in Germany, he explains why an open revolt in Scientology is from his perspective, a mere question of time.

SZ: Mr. Rinder, is the Church of Scientology in a state of crisis?

Michael Rinder: It is. If you want to know why, you need to know who Debbie Cook is. She is the author of that critical mail - and she was a member of the Sea Organisation within Scientology (editorial remark: That's the name of the cult's elite unit; its members wear military-style uniforms and address their superiors with "Sir".) In contrast to people like me, Debbie was the whole time a member of the Church in good standing. She was popular, she enjoyed a lot of respect. This means that most members will have read her mail. And what Debbie has written impinges on Scientologists: She's quoting L Ron Hubbard's rules (editorial remark: who is the late cult founder, who died in 1986 and is enthusiastically adored by the members to this day) And she points out that very much of what the leadership of the Church does these days grossly contradicts them.

SZ: According to Scientology, Debbie Cook represents an individual opinion, which was a sign of a "small, ignorant and unenlightened view of today's world."

Rinder: This is a lame PR answer. It's an attempt at damage control, nothing more.

SZ: And how big is the damage?

Rinder: It's considerable. This can also be infered from the reactions following the first statement. By now Debbie has even been called an apostate. It may sound bizarre to your ears, but it is a message that is
mainly directed at members. Debbie is an apostate, don't believe a word she says!

SZ: What do you think, how many members secretely share Cook's criticism?

Rinder: The majority.

SZ: Seriously?

Rinder: Yes. If the parishioners were to talk openly with you, everyone of them could tell you a story about the "vulture culture".

SZ: Vulture culture?

Rinder: It's the attitude of vultures. The obsession to squeeze as much money out of people as possible. This kind of thinking has permeated the organization in its entirety. And when Debbie brings up this painful subject, it resonates with every Scientologist.

SZ: Then why aren't there thousands of such protest mails?

Rinder: People are afraid, especially of the media. Debbie also didn't intend for her mail to become public.

SZ: Do you know what's happening to her now?

Rinder: We're not in contact.

SZ: But if there is anyone who knows how Scientology deals with a critic, it's you.

Rinder: That's true. I even have quite a precise idea of what is currently going on. At first the facebook police is activated. It informs all the members that Debbie must not remain "friends" with anybody. Then she is given the label of "suppressive person" - a prohibition of contact with her. And later you'll be able to observe an ever increasing number of attempts to paint the woman as a liar. As somebody who doesn't know anything. As a disgruntled former member who holds a grudge. That's standard procedure.

SZ: That works?

Rinder: Not as it used to. A lot of Scientology staff members live a completely isolated life. They don't read the press, they completely cut themselves off from anything that could be critical. For every member asking questions they need somebody to handle it. That's the nice thing about Debbie Cook. At first she's just causing a media reaction. But the long term consequences are enormous. The doubt has been planted. It's going to bear fruit.

"I had to sleep on the bare floor"

SZ: Let's talk about David Miscavige, the head of Scientology and Tom Cruise's best friend. Are we witnessing the beginning of the end of his rule?

Rinder: No, that already happened before. But what is happening now is going to speed up his demise. His power depends on people listening to him. That they trust him to lead Scientology into the promised land. When this image starts to shake the whole structure of the Church starts to shake. It's entirely aligned to his person. Nobody there can do or decide anything without Miscavige's agreement.

SZ: A dictator?

Rinder: Absolutely.

SZ: How well do you know him?

Rinder: Oh, I know David Miscavige. We have worked together for a long time and very closely too.

SZ: What kind of a person is he, good and bad both considered?

Rinder: The bad clearly predominates. But [good/well]... He's an extremely fast learner, very intelligent. There is almost nothing which he cannot intellectually process. But he uses his intelligence to manipulate others. He's incredibly vain and very vindictive. If you question something he says he's going to teach you a lesson. He never allows people around him a minute of rest. His punishment is often arbitrary. You never know when you have to clean the toilet or when he's going to slap your face.

SZ: He punched you?

Rinder: Maybe 50 times. He beat me. He had me clean toilets. I had to sleep on the bare ground. I was sent into the hole. Things like that.

SZ: Did you fight back?

Rinder: I just covered my face with my arms. I wasn't the only one. There are many reports about his violent behaviour.

SZ: Supposedly you also hit others.

Rinder: Yes. David Miscavige told me and others: You'll now go over to that person and hit him. And if you don't do that then I will and after that I'm going to hit you too.

SZ: Scientology denies what you say. Your own wife called you a liar on CNN.

Rinder: People like my wife say everything out of fear. They march like good little robots and tell what Miscavige told them to. There were several wives of ex-members on CNN. Two of them even used the exact same word order.

SZ: Supposedly Miscavige also has a dog that wears a uniform and which has to be greeted by members with a salute?

Rinder: That's correct. The uniform is blue and there are golden stripes on the front.

SZ: You describe yourself as an "independent Scientologist". What does that mean?

Rinder: I believe that our philosophy has the potential to help people lead a better life. The organization, however, uses this knowledge to get to their money.

SZ: So you aren't interested in obliterating critics and in world domination?

Rinder: No. And I know that this is a huge topic in Germany in particular. This arrogance: We're superior, we alone know the way to happiness. David Miscavige bears responsibility for the fact that Scientology and its members are considered to be radical - in the sense of: crazy jihadists. This image does not represent reality, but is reinforced time and again when the church acts against critics and journalists like yourself and treats them like dirt.

SZ: You're refering to the infamous "fair game" policy - the ruthless handling of critics. It's by far not the only principle that Scientology owes its bad reputation to. Such rules have always existed. They were created by the founder, L. Ron Hubbard.

Rinder: [Well.] That could be a long discussion. So: I can understand how you arrive at that perspective. The "fair game" policy should never have been written that way [in the first place] and it was badly misinterpreted. The same holds true for the policy of "disconnection"...

SZ: The duty to cut off contact with people who are "suppressive" in the eyes of Scientology.

Rinder: Exactly. If you read everything Hubbard wrote on the subject, you will see that it was meant as a last resort. Disconnection was supposed to allow someone to be happy. If you are in an abusive relationship, then it is best to cut off contact. That was how it was [originally] intended. As a means to help the individual, not as a political means of control which grants the Church the power to say: You must no longer see this person or that person.

"I must protect myself"

SZ: Listening to you, it sounds as if Hubbard had been harmless. Ronald DeWolf, who passed away in 1991 and was the oldest son of the Scientology founder, described his father in an interview as a sadistic, violent and paranoid occultist, who in contrast to his own teachings of purity had drunk a lot of alcohol and also taken drugs.

Rinder: First of all, I know that Nibs (editorial remark: De Wolf's nickname) has later taken back these statements. And secondly, I myself have spent a lot of time with Hubbard, as much as few others. He was the most brilliant person I ever got to know. Yes, he was moody at times and he could get angry when something went wrong. But was it always like that? No. Did he treat people like Miscavige? Not one bit. Did he care for his family? Absolutely. Did he take drugs? Absolutely not. Was he polite? Incredibly. Was he funny? Very much so.

SZ: That sounds all fine and dandy. But it was Hubbard who created this unshakable distinction between the supposedly [clear] Scientologists and the rest, the "wogs", the "raw meet", the "suppressives". This world view of black and white, either with us or against us, that's pure Hubbard. And you yourself experience it, since you left, Mister Rinder. Now you are one of the bad guys. Even your family has declared war on you. How do you reconcile all of that?

Rinder: By pushing out that church-like kind of thinking out of my life. We're on the same page: This position of us fighting against the rest of the world and treating every critic as an enemy, is wrong. You may
find individual passages by Hubbard with which you can demonstrate that we're in disagreement. So what? There are many passages that have very different content. I'm not a full time interpreter of Hubbard's words who thinks about how to defend him with every sentence I utter. I just want the abuse to stop which is currently happening on a daily basis within the church.

SZ: Your wife calls you a person which hates children and your daughter calls you a bigamist. Does that hurt?

Rinder: Of course it hurts. But I have to protect myself. I know why they do that. They think that they don't have a choice. They even have visited my 86 year old mother in a home for elderly people and got her to write [mean] letters to me. But I know who I am. I know how I live. Now I have a five year old step-son who I love to bits and pieces. We have a wonderful relationship. If I really was such a horrible person, then why was Cathy married to me for 30 years? You know, I don't even read all that dirt anymore which they throw at me.

SZ: From your point of view: Is there any way for you and your family to ever find reconciliation and peace?

Rinder: Only if they wake up. Only if they recognize that they have been brainwashed.

SZ: If you take a look at all you experienced: Do you see yourself as a victim or as a perpetrator?

Rinder: I'm not a victim. I'm just reaping part of that which I have sown. And that's why I want to do my part in ending the abuse in this organization.

SZ: There are few countries which treat the Church of Scientology in as critical a fashion as Germany: As a dangerous cult that financially ruins people, which knows no freedom of speech and which recklessly attacks critics and former members. In short: as a danger. Can you understand this criticism?

Rinder: Certainly. But I would like to argue for a differentiation. The organization and its leadership are the problem, not the normal members. They should be allowed to think and believe in whatever they want without being stigmatized. After all, in many cases these are the same people who are being abused by the Church by pulling their money out of their pockets and by controlling them through the threat of disconnection.

SZ: The latter is also of interest to the german Office for Protection of the Constitution.

Rinder: And rightly so.


Rinder: First of all, I know that Nibs (editorial remark: De Wolf's nickname) has later taken back these statements. And secondly, I myself have spent a lot of time with Hubbard, as much as few others. He was the most brilliant person I ever got to know. Yes, he was moody at times and he could get angry when something went wrong. But was it always like that? No. Did he treat people like Miscavige? Not one bit. Did he care for his family? Absolutely. Did he take drugs? Absolutely not. Was he polite? Incredibly. Was he funny? Very much so.

The Hubbard Rinder knew must have been an impostor.

Scientology's Crimes:

Cult Awareness Network:

Cult Information Charity faces Charity Commission Curb after Complaint.

Haworth said: "We were awarded charitable status 20 years ago in spite of complaints from the Moonies, Scientology and the Hare Krishnas, which the commission was prepared then to override. Meanwhile, the commission continues to award charitable status to some very sinister and suspect groups whose contribution to the public good is arguable, and now the CIC is being told it can't operate effectively.

"The commission has got it all so wrong, while the whole business has distracted us from our core work. Our website content is now problematic, and we can't fundraise properly or talk openly to the press about groups, which is particularly worrying given that the vast proportion of stories go untold because cults are so litigious.


• This article was amended on 13 January 2012. The original article said that "an official [from the Charity Commission] let slip at a meeting attended by Haworth, and some CIC trustees that it was the Church of Scientology" which had made the complaint to the Charity Commission about the CIC. This is denied by the Charity Commission which has asked us to make clear that it is the commission's policy not to reveal the source of any complaint and that the complaint came from an individual who did not claim to be making the complaint on behalf of any one else or any other organisation.

Sunday, 15 January 2012

Astra Woodcraft's story.

Narconon Survey.

Scientology and Greece Unchain:

The December 2008 riots in Athens and elsewhere in Greece were significantly influenced by the subversive pylons, which the Scientology extremist cult created in Greece at the beginning of the '90s. Top executives of the SYNASPISMOS political party (which today is the main party of the SYRIZA coolition in the Greek Parliament) are deeply involved with this totalitarian, racist and inhuman cult, which had even the CIA intervening in Greek Intelligence Agency for Scientology benefit and for other extremist organizations. Synaspismos is basically a Scientology-afilliated strategic organization, expressed as political party. The 1995 confiscated documents of three police raids in the Greek Scientology Headquarters (KEFE) prove that at least since 1993 Scientology and top Synaspismos executives were interlacing and Synaspismos practically started laundering Scientology power in the Greek society.