From: CL <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: An open letter to Gerry Armstrong
References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>
Comments: This message probably did not originate from the above address.
It was automatically remailed by one or more anonymous mail services.
You should NEVER trust ANY address on Usenet ANYWAYS: use PGP !!!
Get information about complaints from the URL below
Date: 13 Dec 2002 10:22:27 +0100
Organization: Happy Lobster & Partners / LE Mail2News
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Boudewijn van Ingen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>You haven't been
paying enough attention. I have been asking questions
>too. I got all the answers I ever asked (and sometimes more) from
Well, now, Bogus,
I pay ~very~ close attention, and you are JUST the
person I've been looking for. Since you claim you're so fucking good at
getting the weasel Gerry Armstrong to answer questions, let's see you
get him to answer these, which he's been running from, ducking, dodging,
skirting, ridiculing, and evading for several YEARS now:
1. Did you know
about CST owning all the copyrights before the
"Scientology Copyright Transfers" database was published in a.b.s.?
2. In a recent post,
you said: "$cientology, as directed by the
Miscavige regime..." and that the "$cientology corporations...are
all part of the single criminal enterprise under the criminal
dictator Miscavige." How, exactly, does Miscavige exert dictatorial
control over the people who own all the copyrights, and how can I
document/verify your answer the way the Library of Congress
documents prove conclusively that CST owns all the copyrights?
3. Have you seen
the legal documents proving that CST can take over any
and all of the registered trademarks from RTC (Miscavige) at any
time, at their "sole discretion"?
4. Given that CST
owns the copyrights, and has ultimate control over
the trademarks, precisely what is the leverage that Miscavige has
over CST that makes them dance to his dictatorship anyway?
5. In message <email@example.com>,
dated 20 January
1998, you said: "Because of dealing with Hubbard's lawyers in LA,
and for security reasons, Laurel and I move to the Cedar complex and
set up MCCS [Mission Corporate Category Sort-Out] and the Hubbard
Archive." Your own Appendix to the Breckenridge Memorandum says:
"During the first part of 1980, Defendant Armstrong moved all of the
L. Ron Hubbard Archives materials he had located at Gilman Hot
Springs to an office in the Church of Scientology Cedars Complex in
Los Angeles. ...Defendant Armstrong had located himself in the
Cedars Complex, because he was also involved in 'Mission Corporate
Category Sort-Out,' a mission to work out legal strategy."
in what month in 1980 was this move
to the Cedar complex, as closely as you can place it?
B) What was the
purpose and nature of your dealings with
Hubbard's lawyers in LA?
C) Who were Hubbard's
lawyers in LA that you were dealing with?
D) Did you deal
with Hubbard's lawyers in relation to MCCS?
E) Where, exactly,
was the Hubbard Archive set up?
F) Did you deal
with Hubbard's lawyers in relation to the
L. Ron Hubbard biography?
G) Was the location
of the Hubbard Archive 1301 North Catalina
Street, where Stacy Brooks Young later established the
corporation known as North Star Publishing, Inc.?
6. Please name all
the people who had access to the Hubbard Archive
during your tenure--in any capacity--on the biography project.
7. In message <firstname.lastname@example.org>
you say that you did,
in fact, meet with Ronald DeWolf, a.k.a. L. Ron Hubbard, Jr., a.k.a.
Nibs. In Bent Corydon's book, "Madman or Messiah," you are quoted
saying that Norman F. Starkey questioned you in Archives when you
"had just gotten back at that time from seeing Nibs [Ron Jr.]."
that book, you go on to say that "a few days later I was called out
to Gilman Hot Springs to talk with the Master at Arms about a report
from Starkey," and, "it would just be a matter of time till I
'busted.'" You are describing events leading up to and just
preceeding your leaving, which you have placed as being on or about
12 or 13 December 1981. Given these orienting references:
A) Did you, then,
meet with Ronald DeWolf, a.k.a. L. Ron Hubbard,
Jr., a.k.a. Nibs, in approximately November of 1981? If not
November of 1981, what month in 1981?
B) In your meeting
with DeWolf, did you at any time discuss, or
refer in any way to, the whereabouts or condition of his father,
L. Ron Hubbard? If so, what was said?
C) What information,
in any form, did you give to DeWolf?
D) What information,
in any form, did DeWolf give to you?
8. Did you continue
to be "dealing with Hubbard's lawyers" [see
question #5, above] between April 1981, and when you left--on or
about 12 or 13 December 1981? If not, when did your dealing with
Hubbard's lawyers end, and why?
9. Did you ever
meet Sherman Lenske? If so, when and under what
10. In message <email@example.com>,
"I was first Deputy Ship's Rep then Ship's Rep for maybe 2 1/2
years, from 1972 into 1974. The Ship's Rep handled many of the
ship's needs in port, including, dealings with...lawyers, and so
forth." According to Russell Miller's "Bare-Faced Messiah,"
19, on or about 3 December 1972: "The Commodore then sat fretting in
his hotel suite for several hours while lawyers in Paris, Lisbon and
New York assessed the risk of his extradition to face fraud charges
in France. [Jim Dincalci]: '...After two or three hours there was a
telephone call from the Port Captain. When he [Hubbard] put the
phone down he said, 'This is really serious. I've got to get out of
here _now_.'" The Ship's Rep post you held was in the Port Captain's
office. You were in Lisbon, as the Apollo was in dry dock.
A) Who were the
lawyers in Paris, Lisbon, and New York who were
assessing the risk of Hubbard's extradition to France?
B) Are you the person
who placed the call to Hubbard? If not, who
11. On or about what
date did you have your very first contact with
attorney Michael Flynn, and what were the circumstances?
12. In message <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
"The 'Armstrong documents' were under seal in LA Superior Court in
September, 1982." And, indeed, according to a U.P.I. story on file,
Judge John Cole, on 24 September 1982, had ordered the "21 boxes of
personal letters and journals of the sect's reclusive founder L. Ron
Hubbard" into the custody of the County Clerk. In another story, the
Associated Press (14 February 1983) said it was an estimated 30,000
A) Is the 30,000
documents estimate workably accurate?
B) Did the 21 boxes
include somewhere in them what came to be known
as "The Zolin Tape(s)," an excerpted transcript of which has been
published in this forum and elsewhere?
C) How did you come
into possession of the so-called "Zolin
D) Who transcribed
the "Zolin Tape(s)" and when?
E) If you had provided
to Omar Garrison only materials he needed
for an LRH biography, and you only took documents from the
materials you had already supplied to Garrison, why was the
"Zolin Tape(s)" among the materials submitted to the court?
13. In message <email@example.com>,
you said: "Your
assertion that I...have never mentioned that the Lenskes
participated in the set-up [of CST] and were 'Special Directors' is
A) When, where,
and to whom have you mentioned that the Lenskes
participated in the set-up [of CST] and were "Special Directors"?
B) When did you
first know that the Lenskes were Special Directors
C) How did you find
out that the Lenskes were Special Directors of
D) When did you
first know of the participation of the Lenskes in
the set-up of CST, and under what circumstances did you learn of
E) Why did you never
make mention of the Lenskes' participation in
the set-up of CST, and the fact of their being Special Directors
of CST, in any of your publically-available affidavits or
declarations, or in the very appropriate forum of a.r.s.?
14. According to
your own Appendix to the Breckenridge "Memorandum of
Intended Decision": "Defendant Armstrong made two copies of almost
all documents copied for Mr. Garrison - one for Mr. Garrison and the
other to remain in Hubbard Archives for reference or recopying." And
in "Madman or Messiah," you are quoted as saying: "I was
trying to get Garrison everything that I could. ...The pressure of
the situation was getting to me. ...So I worked as long as I could
and copied virtually everything I could for Garrison. I knew I had
to do that, because I knew that I would soon be sec checked on what
I'd been giving Garrison, and so I had to get it to him before that.
...Joycelyn was still working for me at that time and we were
copying madly to get all we could to Garrison. Every day I was going
to Costa Mesa in Orange County, where Omar Garrison lived, and I
would take down a box of materials that I had copied. Then I'd take
down a box of shirts or books or whatever, until we got down to the
point where we had, box by box, totally moved the whole place out."
Finally, in message <firstname.lastname@example.org>, you said
that you had "not actually" taken "a very impressive collection
documents with you," but, instead had: "supplied the biographer
Omar Garrison with this 'impressive collection of documents,'
pursuant to contract arranged by Hubbard's personal attorney, over
the course of the prior year or more." In consideration of the
A) Were the 21 boxes
of documents submitted to the court originals,
or were they only copies/reproductions of whatever you had
"supplied the biographer Omar Garrison with"?
B) Who was the "Hubbard's
personal attorney" who arranged the
contract under which you supplied Garrison with copies of the
C) Did the contract
allow you to deliver originals to Garrison, or
D) When and how
did you get the 21 boxes of documents from Garrison?
E) Did you only
make copies/reproductions of what Garrison had, or
did you take what he had, leaving him with no biography
F) If you or he
made copies of some 30,000 documents so that you
could have the set was submitted to the court, who paid for that
copying, and how much was it?
G) Did your receiving
of the documents or copies/reproductions of
documents from Garrison violate the contract?
H) Will you post
a copy of the contract to a.r.s. or a.b.s.?
I) If there were
original documents in the documents that were
submitted to the court, where, when, and how did you come into
possession of those originals, and by what authority?
15. Did Sherman Lenske
ever have a key to the Hubbard Archives while you
were working in any capacity on the biography project?
16. Referring to
the case filed by Ronald DeWolf, a.k.a. L. Ron
Hubbard, Jr., a.k.a. Nibs, in which he claimed that his father was
either dead or incapacitated, you say: "It was the forged
[$2,000,000] check on Hubbard's [New England Merchants Bank] account
which precipitated the missing person case, nothing I did."
(Reference: your message <email@example.com>)
According to an Associated Press article of 13 November 1982, "Son
Believes L. Ron Hubbard Dead Or Mentally Incompetent," the New
England Merchants Bank froze Hubbard's account after determining
that a $2 million check written against it in June of 1982 had a
forged signature. Yet as early as 5 May 1982 (at least a month prior
to the check forgery), in a Clearwater Sun article titled "Hubbard's
Son Will Testify Today," Clearwater Sun staff writer Bill Prescott
said: "In a recent magazine article, DeWolfe said he suspects his
father is dead." And indeed, two days later, on Thursday, 6 May
1982--in hearings being conducted by your attorney, Michael Flynn,
before the Clearwater city commissioners--DeWolf testified, and,
during his 6 May 1982 testimony stated publically that he believed
that his father was dead, insinuating that Hubbard's letters were
being forged. [Cite: Clearwater Sun 7 May 1982, "Sect Founder's Son
Thinks Dad is Dead," by Sun staff writer Steven Girardi.] Questions:
A) On what date
did you retain Michael Flynn as your attorney?
B) On what date
did you deliver the documents [see questions #12
and 14 above] into the custody of Michael Flynn for
C) Did you ever
discuss with DeWolf your own opinion that his
father might be dead (a sentiment which you expressed to
several journalist, as reported in several news articles),
and if so, when was the first time you discussed it with him,
and what did you say?
17. In message <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
you say, "C$T was
hatched in MCC$." [sic: "CST was hatched in MCCS."] "MCCS"
for "Mission Corporate Category Sort-out," of which you were Mission
2nd. According to your own Appendix to the Breckenridge Memorandum,
your involvement in MCCS ended in June of 1980. [NOTE: The Appendix
gives the date as "June 1990," which is clearly impossible. If
"1990" isn't a typo for 1980, please state correctly when your
involvement in MCCS did end.] Yet CST was not incorporated until 28
May 1982--nearly two full years after your involvement in MCCS
purportedly ended. Finally, according to Judge Bruggink in CST vs.
US, No. 581-88T, United States Claim Court: "CST...claim[ed] the
MCCS discussions were abandoned in June of 1981, and that no action
was taken with regard to anything the committee discussed."
A) When, how, and
by whom was CST "hatched in MCCS?"
B) How do you know
that CST was "hatched in MCCS"?
C) Was CST co-founder
Meade Emory involved in any way in MCCS?
D) Did you ever
meet or speak to Meade Emory? If so, when, where,
and under what circumstances?
E) Was CST co-founder
and incorporator Sherman Lenske involved
in any way in MCCS?
F) Did you ever
meet, meet with, or speak to Sherman Lenske in
relation to MCCS, CST, or the biography project? If so, when,
where, and under what circumstances?
G) Was CST co-founder
Leon Misterek involved in any way in MCCS?
H) Did you ever
meet, meet with, or speak to Leon Misterek in
relation to MCCS or CST? If so, when, where, and under what
18. When and where
in 1979 did you last see L. Ron Hubbard?
19. On 17 December
1986 the Los Angeles Times reported on your
settlement. In their report, they said that the Hubbard papers you
were returning as part of your settlement had been valued by a
collector at $5 million, and included manuscripts. AP and UPI had
also reported that the documents at suit and in the custody of the
court contained "unpublished manuscripts." And PR Newswire had
similar report valuing the collection at $5 million, further
stating that one of the unpublished manuscripts alone had been
valued at $1 million. Yet in your accounts of how you came into
possession of the documents (only via Omar Garrison; see data in
question #14 above), you refer only to having made copies to give to
Garrison. How could copies/reproductions be valued at $5 million,
and why would you be returning mere copies as part of a settlement?
20. If your answer
to questions in #14 and #19 above involved
Garrison--and then, as a result, you-- being in possession of
originals instead of copies:
A) What justified
having the highly-appraised originals being moved
out of the archives and into Garrison's private possession all
the way down in Costa Mesa, when all Garrison needed was the
information, and photocopies would have been perfectly adequate
for his research, since he would have had a direct chain of
custody to you, ensuring for him that the copies were valid?
B) Had L. Ron Hubbard
approved of the originals of his diaries,
unpublished manuscripts, etc., being shuttled down to Omar
Garrison--who was a non-Scientologist?
C) If Hubbard didn't,
who did? Who had that authority?
Be sure and get back
to us when you have his answers.
>Then let's hear
some foundation for any critisism that is thrown
>Gerry's way first, shall we?
Oh, well, that's
easy. To quote somebody I heard recently: You haven't
been paying enough attention. (Oh; that was you.) Go back and read all
of my posts again. He's a fucking thief who stole over $5 million worth
of intellectual property. I've posted the newspaper accounts where the
property he stole was assessed. If he hadn't stolen the property, if he
had any rightful claim to the property he took without permission, he
wouldn't have had to return it, now would he? But he did, and accepted
an $800,000 payoff for it from his accomplices, Lenske, Lenske and
Is that "foundation"
enough for you, you fucking airheaded Armstrong
>It is a bit hard
to "agree to disagree" if people keep running away.
Ain't it though.
So see if you can pin down your hero, the weasel
Armstrong, long enough to get him to answer the questions above, even if
his legs are still kicking when you do it.
Of course you won't.
And if you do, he won't answer the questions. He
can't. It would reveal too much that he doesn't want known about his
crimes and his collusion with the Lenskes. That's my prediction: right
here, in writing. Prove me wrong, genius.
Your fucking hero
is a criminal and a fraud and a lying weasel.
>I think these
people should have a way to learn about the things they
>do wrong. For some of the more hardened fraudsters that may be a
I couldn't have said
it better myself.
The so-called "A.R.S. Week In Review" is a white-washed propaganda
whose excuse for an "editor"--Rod Keller--uses extreme socio-political
censorship to hide important material facts from anyone relying on it.
Keller is in a deep state of denial on the existence and power of the
corporation known as "Church of Spiritual Technology" (CST--doing
business as the "L. Ron Hubbard Library"), and the three tax lawyers
control it: Sherman Lenske, Stephen Lenske, and Lawrence E. Heller. CST
is the owner of all Scientology-related intellectual property, and is
the senior and most powerful corporation in all of Scientology. Keller
"sanitizes" his publication, keeping out of it of all mention
of CST and
the non-Scientologist attorneys running it. Anyone in pursuit or support
of truth and integrity should boycott "A.R.S. Week in Review."
newsgroup alt.religion.scientology for yourself and learn the truth.
"In Wollersheim's case, make that lying, millionaire, winner scumbag."
--Michael Reuss, Honorary Kid
"Your latest 'post' was longer than two paragraphs, so I didn't read
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----