Worse Than Fair Game? | | Print | |
Wednesday, 03 November 2010 11:06 |
I am reposting Marty's recent post since it caused such a backlash from the Church of Miscavige, i.e. a denial of service attack on Marty's website. - Thoughtful
What then does justify the criminality demanded by Miscavige in the minds of those who feel they must comply? Certainly he lacks the charisma personally to make people want to harm others to protect him and his regime. While providing some assistance to Daniel’s defense preparation, I was asked by some people involved, “what makes these people (OSA) think what they are doing is ok”? It prompted me to do a little soul searching on the subject. I knew that I’d do something similar, perhaps not as over-the-top and vicious, if I were confronted with similar circumstances back in the day. What motivated me to comply? What justified my actions in working to destroy other human beings when I set up OSA and worked through it for so many years? The answer was HCO PL 12 February 1967 The Responsibilites of Leaders. Please note that LRH wrote the Policy Letter for the Org Executive Course, and issued it as Admin (Administration) Know How Series 13. He did not make it confidential. He did not issue it to the Guardian’s Office (predecessor of OSA). The Responsibilities of Leaders is one of the more widely recognized and revered policy letters of the thousands LRH wrote. While the policy letter sets forth some interesting and insightful principles concerning the subject of power, it has been abused by executives on many occasions throughout the years. Miscavige used such an abuse as part of his own push toward power in the early eighties. A couple of Mission Holders, most notably one Kingsley Wimbush, used Responsibilities of Leaders as an integral part of a process called ”De-dinging.” Wimbush would gather staff and public at the end of the evening in the course room of his mission. He would have them read The Responsibilities of Leaders. He would then insist that properly interpretted the policy required all of those who depended upon his “power” (all staff and public) to flow “power” to Wimbush. He told them that the power flow he desired was money, and he’d pressure the staff and public to fill his hat with bills, the larger the denominations the better. With this information Miscavige grotesquely violated this provision of The Responsibilities of Leaders: So to live at all in the shadow or employ of a power, you must yourself gather and USE enough power to hold your own – without just nattering to the power to “kill Pete”, in straightforward or more suppressive veiled ways to him, as these wreck the power that supports yours. Miscavige did so by writing the most exaggerated, alarming and vicious reports about Mission Holders. In fact, he used the Wimbush abuse of The Responsibilities of Leaders to unjustly paint dozens of Mission Holders with the same color. His reports were so “Kill Pete” in nature that he led LRH to believe the Mission Holders were in fact government operatives out to kill LRH. Ironically, or perhaps predictably, once Miscavige rose to power through such shifts, he eschewed virtually all LRH policy, but for one: The Reponsibilities of Leaders. Apparently, Miscavige recognized how one (Wimbush for example) could get people to do the most irrational and off policy things by fixating their attention on this one policy. Ironically, or perhaps predictably, Miscavige was obsessed with the very paragraph I quoted above. But, not the line I quoted. The rest of the parapraph, from point 6 of the 7 points about power: He (the Power) doesn’t have to know all the bad news, and if he’s a power really, he won’t ask all the time, “What are all of those dead bodies doing at the door?” And if you are clever, you never let it be thought HE killed them — that weakens you and also hurts the power source. “Well, boss, about all those dead bodies, nobody at all will suppose you did it. She over there, those pink legs sticking out didn’t like me.” “Well,” he’ll say if he really is a power, “why are you bothering me with it if it’s done and you did it. Where’s my blue ink?” Or “Skipper, three shore patrolmen will be along soon with your cook, Dober, and they’ll want to tell you he beat up Simson.” “Who’s Simson?” “He’s a clerk in the enemy office downtown.” “Good. When they’ve done it, take Dober down to the dispensary for any treatment he needs. Oh yes. Raise his pay.” Or “Sir, could I have the power to sign divisional orders?” “Sure.” Miscavige crammed me and ordered me to cram others on The Responsibilities of Leaders many times; all in the context of emphasizing the brutal, blind loyalty requirement aspect of it as outlined in the text cited above. Miscavige and his wife Shelly required RTC executives to read several books on Simon Bolivar (the subject of The Reponsibilities of Leaders policy letter) to drive the point home. Did anyone notice that one of the first Miscavige “re-issued” LRH books that was released in the late eighties after LRH’s death was the Ethics book, and that suddenly it had 12 pages of The Responsbilities of Leaders added? From thenceforth, DM’s control manual was required reading and a part of one’s hat, not only for staff but for public. You don’t think it has become part of every corporate church Scientologist’s hat? Well, Miscavige also slipped it into Volume 0 of the OEC, the Basic Staff Hat. I assure you it was David Miscavige who personally ordered The Responsibilities of Leaders into Vol 0 and into the Scientology Ethics book. Now, recognize that while this policy was being crammed into the skulls of all Scientology executives, with particular emphasis on the segment that would suggest to some that committing crimes including murder is quite expected of anyone “on board”, Miscavige was busy turning the entire church PR and Marketing apparatus onto positioning David Miscavige as being the ultimate “Power” of Scientology. The guy who should have bodies slayed and disposed of quietly on his behalf by anyone who is “on board.” As interpretted and applied by Corporate Scientology Responsibilities of Leaders in some ways is more nefarious than Fair Game. At least there were some boundaries with Fair Game. It was couched in the passive. That is “may be” lied to, cheated, sued…..”without recource” to Scientology justice. You also had to be declared SP to receive that treatment, and back in the day you could always get a comm ev to challenge the SP declare. Now, Miscavige only has to look at someone sideways, or express his displeasure about someone, or finger someone for execution – and the bots are expected to rally into action, by whatever means necessary, in order to protect the power they depend upon. Miscavige has slaughtered all Justice lines in the church and for going on twenty years there has not been a straight comm ev available for anything. By any means necessary, towards anybody regardless of their status and worth, with no recourse possible. I am not at this stage passing judgment on the wisdom of the inclusion of point Six of the seven points of power in the original policy letter. That may or may not be a debate at some time in the future. Fact of the matter is, to focus one’s attention on that passage exclusively, to make the policy (originally an Admin Know How policy) part of the Ethic of a Scientologist, to make it part of the Basic Staff Hat, while continuously berating all high level executives of the organization to apply it unquestioningly on behalf of the only recognized “Power” of Scientology, resulted in a lot of otherwise decent people doing a lot of ugly things to other people who didn’t deserve that treatement. Written by Marty Rathbun |
Comments
Then there was another one where the F and Rs were disapproved and sent back by IJC. When we got them back I found that they were not even the F and Rs that we had submitted!. They had been greatly altered, to worsen of course. When I was outraged and saw the I and R, she told me that she was "saving our ass" as we had screwed it up. then, on a third one, the Interested Party had requested the Comm-Ev to query his dismissal from the SO. We were told at muster that we were named by RTC to be on the Committee. The Acting CO CMO Ship
told us that she had orders to give him his Comm-Ev and then ensure that he was off the ship before it next sailed.
So the fiFindings were pre-ordained before the Committee even started! But there was nothing in writing dismissing him! I asked him who had dismised him and he did not know for sure, bu that it was probablt COB. I asked the CMO for something in writing and she said no, we can't ask RTC for it in writing. She then got impatient with our slow progress and sat down at the Committee's computer and started typing the F and Rs herself, inserting all kinds of crap. I must admit, (as I wrote up in OWS a few years later) that I went into a Gestapo valence for awhile and starting writing the F and Rs in reverse, writing the recomendations frist (offload) then finding him guilty of Crimes to warrant the offload, then working the evidence to fit the Crimes. I then saw how crazy this was, threw thode Fand Rs away and started over.
In the last Comm-Ev of my career I was the Interested Party. My stats were up and so I was put on the meter for hours to see if in the 16 years I was on post I had ever falsified my stats. When this failed I was told due to the seriousness of the offense (I had failed to provide dust free air where the ship sails on desert islands where dust blows everywhere) that it did not matter that my stats were up. I pleaded Not-Guilty to the charge (which was a High Crime) The Committee tried to get me to plead Guilty saying that since LRH said to Comm-Ev engineers when this happened, that made me automatically Guilty of the Charge.I continued to plead Not-Guilty,knowing I would be found guilty anyway.
When the F and Rs came back the Captain read them at muster. The findings were "The Interested Party pleaded Guilty and the Committee comcurs". I asked the Dir I & R for a Reviev Comm-Ev which I did not get until 6 months after I was dismissed from the SO The Review Comm-Ev listened to the tape and found that I had pleaded Not-Guilty and they found me Not-Guilty due to lack of evidence of the Charge.I had already been dismissed by then as I had tested positive for HIV. I had received a contaminated blood transfusion in 1989 in Curacao and had terminal AIDS by then. I, however, have fully recovered despite attemps described elsewhere to sabotage my medical treatment.
RSS feed for comments to this post