§   What's New  ||  Search   ||  Legal Archive  ||  Wog Media  ||  Cult Media  ||  CoW ® ||  Writings  ||  Fun  ||  Disclaimer  ||  Contact  §

 
 
 
 

 

May 14, 1994

Jonathan W. Lubell, Esquire
Morrison Cohen Singer & Weinstein
750 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10022

Dear Mr. Lubell:

    I apologize for not writing earlier in response to your
letter of January 27, 1994 regarding F.A.C.T.Net, Inc. (Fact).
Sometimes it's hard to compose many thoughts in the moments
available for such things.

    As it turns out, however, I'm grateful for the delay because
it afforded David Miscavige the opportunity, to which he rose, to
craft and distribute his reaction to Fact. A copy of his
reactive statement, in case you have not seen it, accompanies
this letter. More about this later.

    Until January 21, 1994 I was F.A.C.T.Net, Inc's president so
you were correct in addressing your letter to me. I received it
at the address below.

    You are, I'm sure, aware of the fact that in the week or so
before your January 27 letter the Scientology organization
threatened a number of individuals and groups it claimed to
consider were somehow connected to Fact with contempt of court
charges for "acting in concert" with me in actions the
organization also claimed were violations of a partial injunction
entered May 28, 1992 by Judge Ronald Sohigian in the CSI v.
Armstrong
case known as Armstrong II. My being president of Fact
was not a violation of the injunction, nor has been anything else
I've done; nevertheless, to remove any conceivable threat of
Sohigian-based litigation to these individuals or groups I
resigned on January 21 as a director of Fact and as its
president.

    Since I have never been involved in Fact's day-to- day
electronic, fact-finding, educational or other activities, my
resignation did not make much of a blip in the company, which has
thankfully continued to operate without disturbance. I will,
therefore, respond to your letter, not as Fact's president, but
as an individual deeply concerned about the matters concerning
which you express concern.

    You have asked for two things: the halting of the
dissemination of the publication; and the retraction of all
falsehoods in the publication. I am not in a position to halt
the dissemination of this publication, and although I would

 

Jonathan W. Lubell
May 14, 1994
Page 2          /

undoubtedly have said it differently if I had myself said it, I
am grateful that it was said because it is a significant public
service. Certainly if I know of any Fact falsehoods I will point
them out to Fact; as you can see I'm pointing out at least some
of yours to you.

    What you have asserted is that Fact's questionnaire entitled
"Death, Psychosis, and Scientology," the document you have called
"Are There Undisclosed Dangers in Scientology's Techniques?"
(which is actually the section title at page five of the
questionnaire), contains false and defamatory statements. Were
it not for the truth this might be so.

    For the truth is that the organization has for decades
denied or covered up much of the human tragedy connected to it,
manufactured diversions to draw attention away from the
tragedies, or attacked those who did try to bring them to light
so that the conditions which brought about the tragedies could be
improved. The truth is that the organization is paranoid and
schizophrenic, and this bizarre combination seems to be reflected
in the way it deals with its tragedies, which are often its
victims.

    It is no secret to anyone that the organization is more than
occasionally labelled in the media "the secretive Church of
Scientology," and now no secret to you that it is known as
something sinister in my wide circle of professional contacts.
It is a closed system based on secrets and lies. It need not be;
it could be as easily an open system based on faith in courage
and honesty.

    It is closed, secretive and dishonest pursuant to its
leader's orders. That is how Hubbard was and how he set up his
organization. Now Miscavige enforces his own secret orders on
secret communication lines from secret places with secret threats
of things to be done in secret. The organization's leader could
just as easily issue open orders for things to be done in the
open.

    What these leaders try to hide are who they are and their
organization's tragedies; what was done to whom and who ordered
it; what was done in the name of Scientology or Hubbard or
Miscavige which resulted in a tragedy; what potential "PR flap"
was covered up; who got ripped off, who was hurt, who was abused.
The coverups inevitably result in more tragedies, and more
attacks and abuse.

 

Jonathan W. Lubell
May 14, 1994
Page 3          /

    What if, for example, Phil Valinski (I'm unsure of spelling,
but will accept yours for now) didn't die in his sleep, as his
family was apparently told, and as you have apparently been told,
but died while being audited. Although I was not in the auditing
session, and am not the source of this information, this was the
way it was described to me while I was at Hubbard's La Quinta
base, and seemed to be widely known at the base. If Phil did
indeed die while being audited, shouldn't his family have been
notified of that fact, rather than that he died in his sleep. If
he died while being audited, and that fact was covered up,
shouldn't his family now be told?

    Shouldn't Scientologists be told that not only did Phil die
during auditing, but that Hubbard's processes, which he claimed
revived those who do die during auditing, didn't work? Shouldn't
these processes therefore be stripped from Scientology auditing
decrees as unworkable; and shouldn't auditors be trained rather
in CPR, or something workable? And shouldn't people thinking
about getting into Scientology be told up front of the actual
numbers of people who have died while undergoing auditing?

    Miscavige's book What is Scientology? contains lots of
pretty polychrome pie graphs, but no stats on people who died or
went crazy during auditing, or even any numbers for those who
feel they've been religiously ripped off. Honestly, aren't these
things more important to people seeking to understand what is
Scientology than the claims that 2.2 percent of Scientologists
golf and 16.1 percent walk? And speaking of stats, isn't it true
that the reason Hubbard and now Miscavige inflate so flagrantly
Scientology's membership (by the Miscavige method of counting now
approaching ten million) is to falsely lower the organization's
per capita tragedies?

    Characteristically, what Hubbard's and Miscavige's
Scientology did with Phil was lie about the actual circumstances
of his death, even to you, their attorney. And now they use you,
with all the weight and threat of your stature and clout in the
legal industry, to forward the lie. Their other option was to
tell the truth. That is still Miscavige's option; but that has
not been his way, nor the way of Scientology under him. The fact
that truth has not been his and his organization's way is what
has made the collection of information about Scientology's untold
tragedies by an outside agency such as Fact necessary.

    This is the information I have about Phil's death. He was
being audited by one Dan Koon one afternoon in 1977 at the Palms
house on the La Quinta base. Dan was running Phil on an upset he

 

Jonathan W. Lubell
May 14, 1994
Page 4          /

had had with Kima Douglas, who had been busted from her MO and HU
posts and was then working in the base galley. At lunch that day
Phil had requested a piece of chicken, and Kima, not having any,
had not given it to him. Phil had a heart attack in session, and
Dan kept right on auditing him, reportedly for many minutes, not
doing CPR and not going for help. Dan apparently kept commanding
him to think of his poor auditor, which is a process Hubbard
claimed worked to bring people back to life if they died, or as
Hubbard said, "did a bunk," while being audited.

     Following Phil's death, Kima was accused of killing him and
sec checked on her overts and withholds toward him. This is
standard Hubbardian practice within the organization, because it
can never be admitted that Hubbard's processes could have
contributed to harming, much less killing anyone. According to
Hubbard there's always a "who" in every flap, and Phil's death
was certainly a flap. Kima was an acceptable "who" because she
was at that moment in Scientology time Hubbard's latest scapegoat
"SP."

     To the world outside, including the local authorities and
Phil's family, however, the charge or admission could not
logically be made that Kima had killed Phil by refusing him a
piece of chicken, because that would lead to the fact that he had
died while being audited, and that would result in some "bad PR."
Therefore a "shore story" was concocted which had Phil, as you
say, dying "in his sleep of a heart attack." His family was then
notified and given the shore story. Some of the personnel were
also moved off the property when Phil's family visited to cover
up even what the base's actual activities were.

    It is for reasons such as what happened with Phil that the
organization's stories and data are doubted. It is not as you
would like it to appear that those who question the circumstances
of the organization's tragedies are "trying to destroy the
Church." Hubbard was a judicially recognized pathological liar.
His replacement acts in every way as if he is cut from the same
madly embroidered cloth. Neither I nor anyone I know has any
interest in destroying Scientology or causing any trouble for
Scientologists. It is its leaders' lies and enforcement of those
lies, including the enforcement by its big time Philadelphia
lawyers, which threaten to destroy what is good in Scientology
and cause trouble for its people of good will.

    I have little doubt that Dan Koon has been ordered to lie
about his auditing of Phil and that the auditing reports have
been falsified. It would be stupid, or malicious, of you to

 

Jonathan W. Lubell
May 14, 1994
Page 5          /

automatically doubt my data and automatically accept your
client's. I have confirmed what happened to Phil with four
people who were in positions to know. Miscavige's data cannot be
trusted. He deals in lies; and that, not the "protection" of a
few "celebrities" and not for reasons he pays you to give, is why
he dismissed CSI v. Fishman.

     I do not know anything about the other incidents you list
and will leave their investigation to others. I had heard the
rumor about Ed Brewer, who was a good friend, over ten years ago,
but cannot even recall who told me. You can see, however, in the
Phil Valinski matter it is you who did not investigate and you
who chose to disregard the facts in order to make your
allegations. You will note, if you reread Fact's questionnaire,
that Fact welcomes, in fact requests any information anyone,
including organization personnel, has in clearing up or getting
to the truth in the many reports of Scientology's tragedies. It
would, however, given the overwhelming evidence of the
organization's coverups and its policies ordering coverups of its
tragedies, be irresponsible for anyone to simply accept your or
your client's assertions that all these reports are lies.

     It seems, moreover, something less certain than doubtful
that Miscavige would allow his org personnel to communicate with
Fact to clear up any of the reported tragedies and rumors of
tragedies. On the other hand he will order his operatives to sow
more disinformation and lies; which is another reason why data
coming from the organization, until its personnel are free to
communicate without fear, will always be suspect. Communicating
the truth about Scientology's tragedies to those who should know
is considered "out-security." According to Hubbard's policies,
orders and "logic," "out-security equals treason." Treason
merits severe "ethics" punishment, and is a breath away from
"fair game." And fair game is limited only by the threat of
public exposure. Therefore we're grateful whenever exposure
occurs, and Scientologists should be grateful as well.

     Miscavige and his organization have, as Hubbard and his had,
in addition to their psychological proclivity or compulsion for
weaving tangled webs, a multimillion dollar motive, for lying
about Scientology's tragedies. The same motive drives them to
hire multimillion dollar lawyers to threaten those who seek to
bring those tragedies to light, and it drives the lawyers to do
this dirty work. It really is a cult of greed.

     Even more urgent than the fact that families of the
organization's tragedies, Scientologists and potential customers,

 

Jonathan W. Lubell
May 14, 1994
Page 6          /

should, for reasons of right to know and common decency, be
informed of what really happened to those tragedies, is the
prevention of future catastrophes. The organization's leaders
enforce a belief in and the dramatization of Hubbard's
pronouncements about the human mind and behavior. These leaders,
from Miscavige on down, enforce the belief that if the withholds
of anyone are missed that person will attack those who miss them.
These leaders enforce the belief that the attacks will end when
the withholds have been pulled, or exposed. Those of us who have
been attacked by Miscavige's organization must, for our very
survival, deal with the organization's dramatization of its
missed withholds, and are in physical danger until those
withholds have been pulled. Thus Fact has done thousands of us a
considerable service with its destimulation of Scientology's
group reactive mind missed withholds.

    Hubbard defined a "withhold" as an undisclosed transgression
or "overt" against the known mores of a group. The group can be
as large as humanity itself. In the Phil Valinski matter the lie
that he had died in his sleep would have been a withhold from his
family, the local authorities, Scientologists and the
organization's future potential customers. A "missed withhold"
Hubbard defined as a withhold which has been restimulated but not
divulged or pulled. When Miscavige gets this letter, for
example, his withholds that he knows the real circumstances of
Phil's death, has lied about them, has had you lie about them,
and has attacked those who sought and told the truth about them,
and all the other tragedies he knows of and has had his
organization lie about, will be restimulated. Unless he divulges
those withholds, he will, pursuant to Hubbard's dictates,
dramatize them with natterings, upsets, critical tirades and
attacks. To quote Hubbard, "This is the WILD ANIMAL REACTION
that makes Man a cousin to the beasts." (HCOB 12/15/72R
"Withholds, Missed and Partial")

    Miscavige attacks me and has his organization attack me
because he must dramatize, as Hubbard ordered and he enforces,
his missed withholds concerning me. Every time he hears my name
or thinks of me he is reminded of his crimes against me: the
lies, the assaults, the black PR campaigns, the PI operations,
the use of my pc folder materials, the threats, the frivolous and
malicious lawsuits, the lies, the theft of my things. Thus he
must hide, and thus I am at continual risk.

    To stifle your conscience you will consider that I, being
critical of Hubbard's and Miscavige's policies and practices,
have my own withholds which you and your organization are

 

Jonathan W. Lubell
May 14, 1994
Page 7          /

missing. But also please consider that I have no intelligence
bureau, no private investigators, no propaganda machine, no
weapons, no militant minions, and no mad policies justifying the
use of these things. I am also visible, my communications are
open and signed, and I am willing to meet with Miscavige or
anyone and communicate openly to resolve the Scientology
situation. Miscavige has so far refused to be open, refused to
meet, refused to sign his name to his black PR, and refused to do
what is rationally called for to resolve the situation.

    It is a dangerous situation, and thus there is a need to
pull and expose Miscavige's and his organization's withholds to
reduce the threat. Hubbard's policies and their enforcement
really do drive people insane, and the organization's power and
wealth in the hands of these truly wonky folks with their clear
determination to destroy the innocent individuals they imagine
may expose even more of their withholds is the stuff of
nightmares. You should be doing something to lessen this threat,
rather than making it worse by giving Miscavige and his cohorts a
false sense of security and legitimacy; but you have, as they do,
a magnificent monetary incentive to ignore the truth and this
situation's urgency.

    In truth there is no need for anyone, Miscavige included, to
have their withholds pulled or confess their transgressions. In
truth these withholds and transgressions are so insignificant and
their effects so meaningless that it can be truthfully said that
they don't exist. That is why they can be resolved with
forgiveness, for forgiveness is the recognition that what needs
forgiveness didn't happen. Hubbard didn't understand about
forgiveness, thus he defined it as "censorious," (Certainty, Vol.
13, No. 3) which is the sort of screwy twist he gave to lots of
things. Forgiveness and censoriousness are the two modes of
human thought and action. They are not the same.

    Miscavige's Scientology, following Hubbard's example and
policies, is censorious in thought and action and does not
recognize nor practice forgiveness. Seeing value and reality
only in condemnation, it applies that value and reality, even if
valueless and unreal, to itself; and thus it considers that to be
free of its withholds and transgressions and their effects it
must have these withholds and transgressions pulled. In that
Scientology is no better than the worst in the worst of us. Not
understanding and giving forgiveness it cannot accept forgiveness
for itself. It could, very easily, for forgiveness is not hard,
but the organization would not then be Scientology. No matter
what Miscavige and his organization do they will be forgiven.

 

Jonathan W. Lubell
May 14, 1994
Page 8          /

Given that fact we simply ask that they don't do those things.

    I will take this opportunity to renew and repeat my demand
for Miscavige's return of everything he or any member of his
organization or any of his agents has ever stolen from me at any
time, especially my original Hubbard Letters art work. I am
certain that you are in a position to ensure that Miscavige does
one more time get this demand. Please return my things.

    Now, to address the widely distributed Miscavige reaction.
Any denial by him that he did not order, edit and author this
document is just a denial. Since there's no denying his and his
mentor's mendacious pathology, such a denial would be received by
all with titters and hoots. It is his work, his style and his
language, his party line right down to the incorrect copulatives,
and even if one of his abject juniors comes forward to claim
authorship, that would mean nothing more than another lie, which,
tragically, in that organization at this time would not be all
that hard to find.

     Miscavige's reaction is a splendidly educational example of
what Hubbard termed "black propaganda" or "black PR." He defined
it as "spreading lies by hidden sources," or "a covert attack on
the reputation of a person, company or nation using slander and
lies in order to weaken or destroy." He gave its purpose as "a
common tool of agencies who are seeking to destroy real or
fancied enemies or seek dominance in some field," and said it was
to be "used for the destruction of ideals or institutions or
repute of persons." In his black PR manifesto Miscavige tries to
remain the hidden source, and his intention to destroy the
reputations of his fancied enemies named therein, I think even
you will agree, is manifest.

    You, being something of a libel lawyer, will recognize that
the charges and black PR in the Miscavige reaction are unrelated
to the subject matter in the Fact questionnaire. That fact is
indicative of the maliciousness of the defamatory reaction. That
its source attempts to remain hidden also goes to malice. So
does the premeditated, careful, and calculated, albeit mad,
assembly of charges, their printing and extremely wide
distribution. Then there are the lies therein themselves. His
intention is clear: expose named "enemies" to hatred and danger,
cause them to be shunned and injure them in their careers and
life.

    Take Gerry Armstrong, for example. I did not steal any
records in 1981, and the 1984 Breckenridge decision, upheld on

 

Jonathan W. Lubell
May 14, 1994
Page 9          /

appeal, states what did happen with the Hubbard archives. This
charge, long ago judicially declared so much bushwa, stems right
out of Miscavige's missed withholds. Having stolen my documents,
he accuses me of theft. Libel per se. Being terrified of the
truth he has never allowed his organization spokesmen to say what
I really am and what I really do.

    The pig dream is only significant because it is a document
which was stolen by Miscavige's organization, and then
specifically sealed by Judge Breckenridge in the Armstrong I
case. Miscavige's use of it now is in violation of that court
order. The pig dream does not more clearly demonstrate my state
of mind than any of my other writings. It captured a couple of
seconds of dream thought in 1985, and has no relation to my state
of mind beyond that. Since I keep hearing of the pig dream from
Scientologists and Scientology lawyers around the world, it
should be clear that it actually has captured the Scientological
mind more precisely than any of my other writings.

    This letter to you is a much better representation of my
writings, and for, inter alia, that reason I am copyrighting it,
and will include it in a book of related materials to be
published in the near future. Miscavige, like his erstwhile
master, seeks to divert attention from his organization's
tragedies with imaginative tales of his imagined enemies' sex
lives. The only result of making sex so relevant is that some
day Miscavige will have to put his on the line. The only thing
significant about my sex life is its insignificance since I have
for some time been a yogi of the brahmacharya persuasion, almost
as long as I have been a shave away from full-blown jutta-
dharihood.

    I have never used heavy drugs and never used any drugs
heavily, and was never paid to provide homosexual sex. But these
Miscavige libels point out two things which should be quite
important to Scientologists: 1. statements made in what is
represented to be a confidential setting in Scientology, even
statements concerning enforced "past lives" incidents, are not
confidential and will be used by the organization's leaders to
vilify those who foolishly trust the organization's
representations of confidentiality; 2. Scientology auditing
doesn't work.

    The abuse of Scientologists' supposedly confidential
statements by the organization's leaders for the purpose of
attacking those Scientologists has been demonstrated by these
leaders so many times right up to this instant that it need not

 

Jonathan W. Lubell
May 14, 1994
Page 10          /

be elucidated further. What does require some light shone on it,
however, is why all the Scientologists of good will do nothing
to rein in these leaders and this ongoing tragedy. I believe it
evidences the terrible menace of those leaders. Who would dare
to stand up to a Miscavige who blows the heads off photos of his
fancied enemies and lounges with the likes of a Gene Ingram who
threatens to blow off their actual heads? It is Scientology's
auditors who use the tech, and potentially use it to free rather
than enslave. It is not Miscavige who uses the tech, and doesn't
own it, even if he claims to by his RTC emperorship. It is
therefore the auditors who are in a position to do something
about the abuses, even if it means walking off the job.

    If auditing works, why does Scientology's leader always use
the pre-Scientology past of former Scientologists to attack them?
Auditing, according to Scientology promises, erases the past and
eliminates any aberrative behavior stemming from that past. Yet
the organization always acts, by attacking its Ex-Scientology
victims with incidents from these victims' auditing sessions, as
if auditing had done nothing. And that is indeed what auditing
does. The harm is in all the lies, extortion and abuse the
organization's leaders make part of the auditing package. The
inescapable reality of the Scientology philosophy is that while
promising to make people smarter, at the Hubbardian rate of a
point of IQ per hour of auditing, it makes them stupider; and
having made them stupider, charges them to do it. I have never
seen a person who did not get smarter when he or she got out of
Scientology. I understand philosophically and mathematically why
it makes people stupider, and I believe that for the future
wisdom of the world it's important that I recommend that people
do get out. Surely you wouldn't recommend that your children get
into something that will make them stupider, and my guess is
you're still smart enough yourself to not buy into it. You will
agree, I'm sure, that if I'm right what I'm saying makes good
sense.

    "Armstrong in the nude holding a globe," is close to true.
I have always been nude, and often I wear clothes as well. In
the photo which appeared in the November 11, 1992 Marin
Independent Journal
I am also, in addition to being nude, wearing
clothes. I assume you, as you are reading this are also nude,
and may or may not be wearing clothes. Emperor Miscavige, as
well, underneath those nifty suits, is, as you and I and everyone
can imagine, naked as a jay bird. Stark raving nude.

    You know about malice, and you know that a guy with a smile
on his face sitting in the lotus posture and holding the world in

 

Jonathan W. Lubell
May 14, 1994
Page 11          /

his hands, all of which facts can be seen in the IJ's photo, is
something so different from "in the nude," which fact cannot be
seen, although it can certainly be seen that it very easily could
not be true - shorts being a modern day yogi's common, usual and
expected garment of choice - that Miscavige's malice is
unmistakable. Add to this the fact that hiss pet PItviper
slithered into the IJ after the 11/11 article was printed to
rattle the writer, and sure did know that I was something
different from nude. Then add the delivery to the organization's
UK legal personnel of the IJ photo, plus a big, bold blowup
thereof, and throw in the identical lie that I'm sitting there
all fully bare. I'm sure you know that the UK solicitor's clerk,
one Helen Margaret Barlow, through whom Miscavige slipped his
"Armstrong in the nude" taradiddle into the UK courts, claims
that she was given the information by the organization's US
attorneys, which fact is altogether unremarkable because that is
exactly how the organization uses its lawyers to spread and
consecrate its dirt. You are one of its US attorneys, right?
Finally, consider the fact that in all the depositions Miscavige
has dragged me through since November, 1992 I was never once
asked if I had been indeed nude during the shooting of the IJ
photo. I was not asked because Miscavige, looking forward to
using his little bare-cheeked lie, didn't dare learn the unnaked
truth.

    As to Gerald Armstrong's recognition of the valuelessness of
money, it is quite understandable that your cult of greed's
leader, having put so much time and effort into extorting all
that stuff from so many people, would be having nightmares
contemplating the fact that it was all for naught. It is also
understandable that he might be terrified that his underlings and
other victims might wake up to the same truth. But Miscavige
really need not worry. What is valuable will remain long after
money is seen for what it is. Ironically, renunciation is
Miscavige's safest route out of his predicament. He should tell
the truth, turn Scientology over to its people of good will and
wisdom, and then he should go off and do something good and wise
himself; or, if he can't figure out something good and wise to
do, he should join a monastery and put himself in the hands of
someone good and wise to give him simple orders until he can
figure things out.

    Do not think that because I have not committed suicide or
succumbed to Miscavige's savagery and forsaken my sense of humor
I have not been deeply wounded and threatened by his, his
organization's and his lawyers' personal attacks. The attacks
must cease. You and your client must do what you can to heal the

 

Jonathan W. Lubell
May 14, 1994
Page 12          /

wounds. And all of you must stop threatening your way through life.

    I am not unhappy that you have insisted that I rectify the
false charges that have made their way to Fact. Your fellow CSI
lawyers have until now refused to allow me to rectify any false
charges on penalty of $50,000 per rectification. I assume that
you are their senior, being so close to Miscavige himself and
being near the top of the pleadings hierarchy, and that your
releasing me to rectify falsehoods supersedes your associates'
earlier refusals to so release me. In that Miscavige's reaction
has made its way to Fact, and presumably by Fact's mandate become
part of its library, I will send this letter to Fact as well. I
will also send a copy of this letter to many people who should
know, and many of these I've indicated on the copy list which
follows. I will also avail myself of this window of opportunity
you've opened to rectify any other falsehoods concerning my
experiences with the Scientology organization which have made
their way into Fact's library.

    Your fellow CSI lawyers have claimed in the second amended
complaint in Armstrong II filed April 5, 1994 that I "provided an
entire assortment of documents to FACTI for its electronic
library, including a copy of the settlement agreement herein,
scores of declarations, and documents which Armstrong retained in
violation of paragraph 7(E) of the Agreement," and go on to claim
that providing such documents is a breach of the "agreement." As
you can imagine these claims are as nutty as the lawyers
themselves, which nuttiness I know you have to smooth over to
continue to pull in those big fat fees.

    I retained no documents in violation of paragraph 7(E) of
that or any other agreement and I did not send any of these
documents I didn't retain to Fact. Miscavige made the same
charge through Ken Long in the CSC v. Russell Miller case in the
UK in 1987, and it was, despite his organization's threats that I
would be sued if I corrected the lie, disproved there as well.
CSI's own lawyers filed the settlement agreement in open court,
probably some fifteen times in the three lawsuits they have
brought against me in Marin and Los Angeles in the past couple of
years, and it is entirely probable that they are the source of
whatever copy Fact acquired if it did indeed.

    I have sent Fact very little, and it has wanted very little
from me, because my materials have been public documents
available almost anywhere. I will as soon as possible make an
effort, especially now with your release of me to do so and with

 

Jonathan W. Lubell
May 14, 1994
Page 13          /

the latest Miscavige attack, to find out what Fact has relating
to me and my experiences with Scientology in its library, make
certain the information is complete and rectify any falsehoods
therein. I will also let Fact know that I will be available to
answer the questions of anyone who may have received false data
concerning my Scientology experiences, or the dangers of
association with the organization. I hope it puts your mind at
ease to know that I will be helping in this manner.

    In addition to getting Miscavige to retract his latest
libelous publication, perhaps you can help in a related matter as
well. As you know, on February 8, 1994 Miscavige executed a
declaration which was filed in Fishman in an effort to prevent
his court ordered deposition from going forward. Miscavige
included in his declaration an attack on me filled with what even
a fool can see are lies. On February 22 I executed a declaration
in response to correct the lies. Then one of his litigation
puppets, CSI, amended the Armstrong II complaint to include a
cause of action for my writing my declaration, seeking another 50
K liquidated damages. These people are dangerously crazy.

    In December, 1992 I wrote to Miscavige in an effort to
initiate a peace process. He tried to have me jailed for writing
the letter. Then he had CSI sue me, claiming damages of
$950,000.00 for the letter. It is dangerous to attempt to make
peace with mad men. And that is why I'm appealing to you, the
man's lawyer.

    You know that the organization's leaders cannot prevail in
our courts. They have neither right nor decency on their side,
and they have long since lost the battle in the marketplace of
ideas. The opponents they made, for no other reason, by the way,
than to satisfy their need to look important by being opposed,
are no longer merely being pushed around and aren't going
anywhere. The organization's leaders are abusers, and the world
has in recent years come to recognize abuse and abusers and now
acts to restrain them. Perhaps, therefore, you can let the
abusers you work for know that the game is dangerously close to
over, and perhaps you can suggest an orderly withdrawal from
their fortifications. Nobody is waiting out here to pounce on
them. All of us out here really do want peace. This time,
however, unlike in December 1986, let it not be peace with abuse.
Just peace.

Yours sincerely,

 

 

Jonathan W. Lubell
May 14, 1994
Page 14          /

Gerald Armstrong
715 Sir Francis Drake Boulevard
San Anselmo, CA 94960
(415)456-8450

Hub Law Office
711 Sir Francis Drake Boulevard
San Anselmo, CA 94960
(415)258-0360
Fax (415)456-5318

:ga
Enclosure (1)

cc: (all without enclosure)
Ford Greene, Esquire
Graham E. Berry, Esquire
Daniel A. Leipold, Esquire
Floyd Abrams, Esquire
F.A.C.T.Net, Inc.
Cult Awareness Network
Lawrence Wollersheim
Bob Penny
Robert Vaughn Young
Steven Fishman
Jon Atack
Margaret Singer, Ph. D.
Kent Burtner
David Miscavige

© 1994 Gerald Armstrong

 

 
 
 
 

§   What's New  ||  Search   ||  Legal Archive  ||  Wog Media  ||  Cult Media  ||  CoW ® ||  Writings  ||  Fun  ||  Disclaimer  ||  Contact  §