The Top 25 People Crippling Scientology, No. 1: L. Ron Hubbard

GuessWhere25.jpg
On August 5, we started a countdown that will give credit -- or blame -- to the people who have contributed most to the sad current state of Scientology. From its greatest expansion in the 1980s, the church is a shell of what it once was and is mired in countless controversies around the world. Some of that was self-inflicted, and some of it has come from outside. Join us now as we continue on our investigation of those people most responsible...



The Top 25 People Crippling Scientology

#1: L. Ron Hubbard


LRHubbard.jpg
LRH
We can already hear the howls from the growing independent Scientology movement at our choice for the top person in this list, the church's founder, 1930s pulp fiction writer, occult dabbler, bigamist, noted singer, author of Dianetics, founder of Scientology -- the commodore himself, Lafayette Ronald Hubbard.

How, we've been asked, could a man who's been dead for 25 years be crippling the movement he left behind, as in the present tense? Wasn't it Hubbard's prolific output, his charisma, and his shrewd instinct that turned a brief self-help fad in the summer of 1950 into a decades-strong globe-spanning religious organization? And even if the church has fallen on hard times in recent years, isn't the new independence movement rescuing Hubbard from it, getting back to his first principles, which have nothing to do with the corruption of official Scientology under its current leader, David Miscavige?

Allow me to call bullshit.

Just as L. Ron Hubbard gave and gave to the Church of Scientology, the same man, paradoxically, poses the greatest threat to its continued existence. How can that be? Let us count the ways, grasshopper. And we'll start with the most obvious of reasons.

Anyone who has compared Russell Miller's Bare-Faced Messiah, the most thorough biography of Hubbard's life, to the official church version -- what Professor Hugh Urban called a "hagiographic mythology" in his book, The Church of Scientology, A History of a New Religion -- is well aware that Hubbard was as prolific a liar as he was a writer. There was no aspect of his own life Hubbard was unwilling to fictionalize to make himself a larger-than-life hero, extending all the way back to his childhood.

Hubbard was a blood brother of Montana's Blackfeet Indians at only like 4 -- or was it 6? (Um, no. Never happened.) Well, in 1924 at the age of 13 he became the youngest Eagle Scout in the U.S. (In 1924, the Boy Scouts didn't keep track of who was the youngest Eagle Scout, so Hubbard couldn't have known if that was true.) While still a teenager, he had extensive travels through Asia, and had profound discussions with holy men while few Westerners could penetrate these strange lands. (Actually, he made a couple of brief trips and complained about the "gooks" he found, and after a later trip, concluded, "The trouble with China is, there are too many chinks here.") In college, at George Washington University in Washington D.C., the young Hubbard used his experiences in nuclear physics to launch his explorations into the mind. (Actually, he took only one class in atomic physics, and failed it. He left without a degree.) Well, he was too busy becoming a barnstorming pilot, one of the best in the country. (Actually, his pilot's license was only for gliders, not powered flight, and he didn't renew the license because he didn't have the money.) Later, in World War II, he commanded an anti-submarine vessel and sank two Japanese submarines off the Oregon coast. (Actually, he didn't sink anything, and he lost his command after shooting up some Mexican islands for gunnery practice.) He was injured severely during the war with machine-gun fire, which left him blind and lame, and he was twice declared dead. It was in search for a cure to his debilitating wounds that he healed himself and discovered the concepts that would become Dianetics. (Sigh. It was an ulcer that brought Hubbard low, not enemy fire. And even his military doctors considered him a pain in the ass.)

Scientology's problem is that these fanciful tales and their debunkings will never go away, like a truth-dripping faucet with a permanently broken handle. And because Hubbard's biographical whoppers are an integral and inseparable part of Scientology's own history and public image, Scientology's and Hubbard's credibility are likewise forever fused together. This wasn't always a problem for Scientology -- Hubbard crafted his mythological biography at a time when prospective members couldn't easily fact check his tall tales. But as everyone with an Internet connection knows, those days are over for Scientology, as are the days of it attracting bright, well-intentioned people to its ranks.

Hubbard's eye-rolling biographical farce isn't the only embarrassment Scientology can't wish into a cornfield. Hubbard wrote thousands of policy letters, many which have come to define how Scientology is perceived. Disconnection, Fair Game, the derogatory and discriminatory labeling of "SPs" and "Wogs," the dirt-digging on perceived enemies to silence them, "dead agent packs," the equating of criticism of Scientology with criminality, hostility toward homosexuality, journalism, psychiatry, and so on. David Miscavige didn't create these policies (though he's done a bang-up job implementing many of them), they're entirely a product of Hubbard's paranoid, megalomaniacal mind, and they're part of Scientology's permanent and lasting legacy as a result.

You want to rehabilitate L. Ron Hubbard for a new generation? Then you're going to have to deal with his voluminous utterances that portray him as a paranoid relic of another era. Here are just a few that he has hung around the neck of Scientology for now and evermore:

"The only way you can control people is to lie to them."

"When somebody enrolls, consider he or she has joined up for the duration of the universe -- never permit an 'open-minded' approach... If they enrolled, they're aboard, and if they're aboard they're here on the same terms as the rest of us -- win or die in the attempt."

"There's only one remedy for crime -- get rid of the psychs! They are causing it!"

"A truly Suppressive Person or group has no rights of any kind and actions taken against them are not punishable."

"If attacked on some vulnerable point by anyone or anything or any organization, always find or manufacture enough threat against them to cause them to sue for peace."

"ENEMY: SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed."

"MAKE MONEY. MAKE MORE MONEY. MAKE OTHER PEOPLE PRODUCE SO AS TO MAKE MORE MONEY."

Thank you, commodore.

Now, onto the less obvious reasons Hubbard's legacy has doomed Scientology.

As Professor Urban contends, Hubbard was less a religious leader of the type we're most familiar with, and more an "entrepreneur and spiritual bricoleur," that is, he synthesized an array of others' ideas, from Freud, to Buddhism, to Anton LaVey -- consciously or not -- to form Scientology. Hubbard's gift was that he possessed an acute understanding of the country's mood, and was able to build, package, and repackage Scientology in accordance with the perceived needs of the greatest target audience, based on the prevailing attitude of the time.

But this approach left Scientology vulnerable to the inevitable march of time, as he provided no mechanism for Scientology to alter itself (like, say, the U.S. Constitution) or grow from his shadow. Accordingly, Hubbard's writings -- especially his forays into pseudoscience and Cold War paranoia -- will only grow more embarrassingly out of touch over time. While shedding the past and adapting to new times hasn't been much of a problem for centuries-old mainstream religions, Scientology faces the challenge of having to contend with Hubbard's vast doctrinal output, much of which finds him dictatorially micromanaging in a much different, far away time and place. And yes, there's that pesky Internet again, reminding everyone just how fantastically wrong Hubbard was about so many things (like radiation, nuclear physics, and floridly imagined anti-Scientology conspiracy groups like SMERSH and Tenyaka Memorial).

Perhaps the most compelling reason that Hubbard will continue to slowly kill his own creation with each passing year is his mandate that the survival of Scientology be the most central, guiding principle in Scientology, rendering Scientology as little more than a protective shell intended to preserve the genius of Hubbard's unalterable works. Jon Atack described this policy, Keep Scientology Working, as existing to "inculcate reverence to Hubbard as the 'Source' of Scientology, and to show the crucial role of the Scientologist's mission on Earth." Or as Tom Cruise less profoundly put it: "It really is KSW... that policy has really gone, boy!... that's exactly it." On second thought, maybe Cruise's description is the more profound. After all, Scientology has always revered the successful for their success and lauded the important for their importance -- who better to illustrate this empty circular logic than Cruise?

By making Scientology the most important thing in Scientology, Hubbard rendered Scientologists subordinate to the religion, in turn rendering fundamentalism the norm as opposed to the exception. While it's hardly the case that all Scientologists follow an ends-justifies-the-means rationale, history finds no shortage of dangerously fanatical Scientologists under Hubbard. Whether it involved organizing a bomb-scare to implicate journalist Paulette Cooper, staging a hit-and-run accident to frame then-Clearwater mayor Gabe Cazares, or infiltrating the IRS, Scientologists have repeatedly exhibited an unflinching willingness to ignore laws and ethical boundaries in order to protect or advance Scientology. Hubbard created no institutional principle that prevents or discourages acting outside the law where Scientology is threatened. There is no asterisk at the bottom of Hubbard's KSW policy letter, and yes -- it can be interpreted in more benign ways -- but it's hardly a reach for some to interpret it as justifying most any action taken in defense of Scientology.

The majority of Scientologists -- public members anyway -- can afford to dabble in Scientology and enjoy the luxury of treating it like the self-help therapy Hubbard originally designed it to be. At the institution's executive core, however, Scientology has seen a ruthless and vicious game of corporate politics play out time and again. David Miscavige's ascension to Scientology's corporate throne was not explicitly ordained by Hubbard, but it was hardly an accident -- Miscavige simply played The Game the best.

Which leads us to the final reason Hubbard booby-trapped Scientology. Despite being perhaps the most prolific writer in American history, Hubbard found no time, for some reason, to muse about how future Scientology leaders would be selected. So far this has only mattered once, the result being a coup that saw Hubbard's last will and testament mysteriously redrafted the day before he died, which led to Pat Broeker suddenly out as executor, putting in Miscavige loyalist Norman Starkey, who helped set forth the corporate vehicle Miscavige would soon inhabit as "Chairman of the Board." So will the next succession be another sordid Machiavellian backstabbing free for all? It seems like a good bet, because it's not as though the Scientology anthology can be added to -- Hubbard made sure of that. And that is why ultimately, Hubbard, and not David Miscavige, bears the greatest responsibility for Scientology's eventual demise -- because he ensured that only the David Miscaviges of this world will ever rule the Scientology corporate empire... and rule it right into the ground.

UPDATE: Marty Rathbun has posted a fascinating response to this article at his blog. Please go there and read it. I think it's a great rebuttal that should help anyone gain a better understanding of the Scientology independence movement. -- Tony O.

[I am greatly indebted to Scott Pilutik's expert help in the preparation of this entry.]


The Top 25 People Crippling Scientology
#1: L. Ron Hubbard
#2: David Miscavige
#3: Marty Rathbun
#4: Tom Cruise
#5: Joe Childs and Tom Tobin
#6: Anonymous
#7: Mark Bunker
#8: Mike Rinder
#9: Jason Beghe
#10: Lisa McPherson
#11: Nick Xenophon (and other public servants)
#12: Tommy Davis (and other hapless church executives)
#13: Janet Reitman (and other journalists)
#14: Tory Christman (and other noisy ex-Scientologists)
#15: Andreas Heldal-Lund (and other old time church critics)
#16: Marc and Claire Headley, escapees of the church's HQ
#17: Jefferson Hawkins, the man behind the TV volcano
#18: Amy Scobee, former Sea Org executive
#19: The Squirrel Busters (and the church's other thugs and goons)
#20: Trey Parker and Matt Stone (and other media figures)
#21: Kendrick Moxon, attorney for the church
#22: Jamie DeWolf (and other L. Ron Hubbard family members)
#23: Ken Dandar (and other attorneys who litigate against the church)
#24: David Touretzky (and other academics)
#25: Xenu, galactic overlord


Tony Ortega is the editor-in-chief of The Village Voice. Since 1995, he's been writing about Scientology at several publications.

tortega@villagevoice.com | @VoiceTonyO | Facebook: Tony Ortega

Keep up on all of our New York news coverage at this blog, Runnin' Scared


SCIENTOLOGY IN THE VILLAGE VOICE

[All recent stories] | [Top 25 People Crippling Scientology] | [Commenters of the Week]

FEATURED INVESTIGATIONS

[Scientology spokesman Tommy Davis secretly recorded discussing "disconnection"]
[Benjamin Ring, LA deputy sheriff, wants you to spend your 401K on Scientology]
[Scientologists: How many of them are there, anyway?]

MARTY RATHBUN AND THE SIEGE OF SOUTH TEXAS

[Scientology has Rathbun arrested] | [Rathbun and Mark Bunker reveal surprising ties]
In Germany with Ursula Caberta: [Announcing plans] | [Press conference] | [Making news about Tom Cruise, Bill Clinton, and Tony Blair] | [Post-trip interview]
The Squirrel Busters: [Goons with cameras on their heads] | [Rathbun's open letter to neighbors] | [Ingleside on the Bay, Texas rallies to Rathbun's cause] | [Squirrel Buster's claim to be making a "documentary"] | [VIDEO: "On a Boat"] | ["Anna" sent to creep out Monique Rathbun] | [Squirrel Busters go hillbilly] | [A videographer blows the whistle on the goon squad] | [Ed Bryan, OT VIII, shows the power of Scientology's highest levels]

SCIENTOLOGY SPYING AND "FAIR GAME"

[Secret Scientology documents spell out spying operation against Marc Headley]
[Scientology's West U.S. spies list revealed] | [Scientology's enemies list: Are you on it?]
Spy operation against Washington Post writer Richard Leiby: [Part 1] | [Part 2]
[A Scientology spy comes clean: Paulien Lombard's remarkable public confession]
[Scientology advertises for writers in Freedom magazine]
[Accidental leak shows Scientology spy wing plans to "handle" the Voice]

SCIENTOLOGY AND CELEBRITIES

["Tom Cruise told me to talk to a bottle"] | [Tom Cruise likes coconut cake] | [Tom Cruise has a sense of humor] | ["Tom Cruise not a kook!"] | [Paulette Cooper on Tom Cruise]
[Paul Haggis, director of Crash, issues an ultimatum, leaves the church]
[Character actor Jason Beghe defects noisily] | [Actor Michael Fairman reveals his "suppressive person" declaration] | [Michael Fairman talks to the Voice]
[Giovanni Ribisi as David Koresh: Scientology-Branch Davidian link makes sense]
[Russell Brand weds ex-Scientologists in wild ceremony] | [Skip Press on Haggis]
[Placido Domingo Jr.: Scientology's retaliation is "scary and pathetic"]
Grant Cardone, NatGeo's "Turnaround King": [Doing Scientology's dirty work?] | [Milton Katselas complained about Cardone's smear job] | [Cardone runs to Huffpo]

JANET REITMAN'S INSIDE SCIENTOLOGY

[Our review of Inside Scientology] | [An interview with Janet Reitman] | [A report from Reitman's first book tour appearance] | [At the Half-King: Reitman not afraid]
[Scientology doesn't like Inside Scientology] | [Q&A at Washington Post]
[A roundup of Reitman's print reviews, and why isn't she on television more?]

HUGH URBAN'S THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY

[A review of Urban's scholarly history of the church] | [An interview with Hugh Urban]

EX-SCIENTOLOGISTS SPEAK OUT

[Marc Headley: "Tom Cruise told me to talk to a bottle"] | [The Nancy Many interview]
[Sympathy for the Devil: Tory Christman's Story] | [Jeff Hawkins' Counterfeit Dreams]
[86 Million Thin Dimes: The Lawrence Wollersheim Saga] | [Mike Rinder on spying]

OVERSEAS NEWS

[Scientology dodges a bullet in Australia] | [Scientology exec Jan Eastgate arrested]
[All hell breaks loose in Israel] | [Scientology sees fundraising gold in the UK riots]
[Aussie former rugby pro Chris Guider calls David Miscavige "toxic" and "violent"]
[Stephen Cox, UK church newbie, pledges 20K pounds] | [Biggi Reichert: A German Lisa McPherson?]

ODD VIDEOS AND ODDER NEWS

[Scientology singalong, "We Stand Tall"] | [Captain Bill Robertson and "Galactic Patrol"]
[Scientology wins a major award!] | [Scientology wants your money: Meet Dede!]
[Birmingham in the House! The "Ideal" dance mix] | [Scientology and the Nation of Islam]
[When Scientology was hip] | [Sad: David Miscavige makes fun of his own fundraisers]
[Freedom magazine parodies The New Yorker. Hilarity ensues.]
[Scientology surf report: Anonymous parties outside the New York "org"]

THE VIEW INSIDE THE BUBBLE

[A scientologist's letter to the Voice and its readers] | [Scientology silent birth]
[Tad Reeves: Scientology might listen to this guy] | [More Tad Reeves and family]
[Scientology never forgets: A heartwarming telemarketing holiday miracle]



Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help
793 comments
yermucker
yermucker

I found my way here after watching the channel 4 documentary in the UK. I'm really glad there are people brave enough to stand up against the culture of isolationism, bullying, and greed which seems to be pervasive within the church of Scientology. Also, I think that the tension between the three poles represented by this piece, the rebuttal, and the position of mainstream Scientology are very interesting: an aetheist perspective; an enlightened believer; and a dogmatic traditionalist. I think these positions exist in discussions of other religions but, here they seem more important because of the deliberate opacity of Scientology and its hostile actions. Good luck with these debates and remember that most developed states have only come about through the willingness of individuals to take on autocrats...

ericpfeiffer576
ericpfeiffer576

"While shedding the past and adapting to new times hasn't been much of a problem for centuries-old mainstream religions" ---are you serious? That one line destroyed all your credibility.I'm not defending Scientology,merely pointing out that there is a myriad of parallels between the tactics used by Scientology to protect itself and EVERY OTHER RELIGIOUS ENTITY ON THE PLANET.In fact,Scientology is pretty soft compared to the Catholic Church or (dare I say?) Muslim fundamentalists.So the founder exaggerated his bio? I wonder how Jesus,Mohammed,or Joseph Smith would hold up under similar scrutiny? At least the Church of Scientology go after their enemies directly,instead of murdering and destroying the lives of thousands because of the actions of a few.From what I see,there is little or no ethical difference between Scientology and other major religions.

Melvinspinoza
Melvinspinoza

there mis no tech whatsoever that improbves the lives of people than SCN.NONE.It is seldom properly applied,but you can never dispute the fact when applied properly it works.

Tatiana Baklanova
Tatiana Baklanova

To understand better L Ron Hubbard and get the perspective I suggest to watch the video-interviews with Phil Spickler. They all can be found on his website "From Stanford With Love" on the page "Sunday Talk (video)" http://community.freezone-tech...

Reasonable_Insanity
Reasonable_Insanity

I just read Marty Rathbun's rebuttal towards you Mr. Orgeta.

And I while he makes a few good points about independent scientologists, I wholeheartedly disagree with him.

Mr. Rahtbun is willing to overlook all the bad and negative things that Hubbard did or said. He does this while stilling staying true to his writings/works.

And I don't think that's right. You can't really have the bad in with the good in my opinion.

Jim Lippard
Jim Lippard

It may well be *possible* for a religion to transcend the foibles and nonsense generated by its founder--the description of Hubbard you give (and Hugh Urban gives) would also fit Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon religion, which gets much more respect than Scientology.  But for myself, I don't see any reason to give any weight to religions based on fictions created by con artists, where the only evidence that they "work" is subjective validation.

Rathbun claims Miller's book is "a third-rate propaganda piece," but gives no evidence at all to support that.  All of the supporting documentation I've seen backs up Miller over the Scientology version, every time.

Arnaldo Lerma
Arnaldo Lerma

Mr Ortega,  Perhaps Hubbard should have been #1.1

janecollins
janecollins

my sisters friend makes $50 an hour on the computer. She has been out of job for 9 months but last month her cheque was $6200 just working on the internet for a few hours. Read about it here CashHard.com

XeNo!
XeNo!

Anyone in the Co$ that stays in the cult after learning about the evil Lord Xenu are\blithering fucking idiots, debased of any common sense. Totally mind fucked by LRH'stwisted imaginings and ego.

Peter Söderqvist
Peter Söderqvist

Chris Owen didn’t ignore the 4-Dec-1950 article from LOOK. It is documented in the end ofthe chapter; “Crippled and Blinded”, and Jon Attack documented it in his book A Piece of Blue sky in chapter; “His Miraculous Recovery” Page 85. But I cannot find it in Russell Miller’s book and Bent Corydon’s book. He received disability compensation at least up to 1973 according to court documents in the Gerry Armstrong case; “Attached as Exhibit [P] is a letter from the VA stating Hubbard was still receiving the 40% disability compensation in 1973. Exhibit [Q], correspondence between various individuals in the GO, including Mary SueHubbard, show that the organization and Mrs. Hubbard possessed L. Ron Hubbard's naval documents at least by 1976" Yet Hubbard claimed he had cured himself in less than two years. If he succeeded to cure himself, then he defrauded the Veteran Administration, or if he failed to cure himself, then he lied about his science of mind’s curability!

walter777777
walter777777

I was saved from this insanity.  In 1951 or 52 Ron gave talks on Dianetics in Chicago, and I, at 12 years of , went to this craziness.  It took my parents months (with the help of a psychologist) to get me to stop believing in his weird nonsense.

w.

RegularWog
RegularWog

Defending L.Ron Hubbard=Where OSA and the "Independents/FreeZoners" meet.

Is this battletoads?
Is this battletoads?

Margaret,I have a question about LRH's science"Leukemia is an engram containing the phrase It turns my blood to water" where is the science behind that statement,please provide the scientific data,lab results or people who have been cured of this malody by LRH's quackery.My point is either put up or shut up.

Margaret
Margaret

For those that might have missed the fun above (and under the "#8 Mike Rinder" article) with regard to Hubbard's war injuries/ailments and his Sequoia Univ. PhD, there is now documented and incontrovertible proof that:

1)  Hubbard told the truth about his war-related maladies (LOOK magazine 4-Dec-1950), and

2)  Hubbard told the truth with regard to his receiving a legitimate honorary PhD from Sequoia University (see my article above from today, 1-Oct-2011, for details).

Margaret
Margaret

Peter, I responded to you over on today's scientology-related "Philip Boyd" article here at villagevoice. This article's comment section is getting to unwieldy to use anymore (at least for me).

Margaret
Margaret

ISB, I don't happen to agree with that statement, so afraid I can't help you.  However, if you look into the recent science of epigenetics, you will find some interesting similarities with the early theories of dianetics -- specifically what's been called Lamarckism: the ability of an organism to pass on characteristics which it acquired during its lifetime to its offspring.  Up until about 15+ years ago, no mainstream scientist would have ever considered Lamarckism to have any merit.  Hubbard was using this theory in his developement of dianetics more than 60 years ago.

In any event, I provided above my overall view of using science to falsify (or validate) the effectiveness of auditing in relation to other methods of personal improvement, and/or alongside a placebo, control group, etc.  In short, I'm very much in favor of it.  (You can also do some research into TIR - traumatic incident reduction -- and metapsychology, to see the work of others in the field of psychology, who have made efforts to try to integrate auditing methods into their field.)

Yeppir
Yeppir

I'll controvert that piece of crap degree any day because it certainly controverts the one I actually had to EARN. Post a transcript of his course work and grades, Margaret. Then let's talk. (I know, he "challenged" every class because he was just that f'ing brilliant, right? Who needs to actually attend and LEARN anything? Right?). I am now very tired of trying to have a cogent discourse with you because you are an insufferable tool. Feel proud. You win.

EDIT: okay. I see "honorary." But isn't that enough of a joke, anyway? (Apologies to all you honorary degree earners who aren't cult leaders.)

Mafiawog
Mafiawog

Uh... yeah. He did tell the truth about having ulcers and whatnot, but spent most of his PR touting his lies about being crippled and blinded. And yes, he did receive an honourary PhD from that establishment, awarded to him for his paying 25 dollars to the chiropodists, Mr. Houghton, who awarded the samedegree to his non-accredited diploma mill, which was shut down a few years later, to ANYONE who paid 25 dollars.

Margaret knows LRH was a decieving and manipulative liar, who did tell 1 part truth and 9 parts lies. Your head wont explode for admitting to yourself you know, Margaret ; it actually will increase the brain's ability to be rational and struthful. Actually, didn't Hubbard say he had a PhD to "Sequoia's University", when it wasfrom The University of Sequoia? So actually, he did lie. Great perfect recall, especially on something as important as his Fricking PhD! What a loser.

Carmen
Carmen

Word clear "diploma mill," lady. Hubbard's "doctorate" is as valid as Scientology's "humanitarian awards."

You only need a bag of money; no skill, talent or good works required.

Raymond Hill
Raymond Hill

That Hubbard told the truth to a Look Magazine reporter in December of 1950 does not mean he did not lied about himself later, which he did. Google "crippled and blinded".

robinlandseadel
robinlandseadel

Poor Maggie—the concept of Overwhelming Preponderance of Evidence hasn't quite kicked in yet, has it? If one has to dig so deep to find out that a PR puff piece "backs up" the "Source's" con job [but still doesn't erase the montebank's military record] then one should not offer up such red herrings in the first place. Similarly a mail-order diploma from a then illegal and now shuttered operation doesn't improve the resume one little bit.

LRH was a lying sack of shit.

Wolfyrik
Wolfyrik

So start a new post on here and refer back to it.

You have a strange idea of "proof" and a wierd understanding of the word "evidence". All you have shown us is that Hubbard did complain of illness but we already know that. That is not in dispute.The dispute is the extent of the illness and so far the only sources of evidence that support Hubbards claim of blindness etc are scientology owned or sourced. Your "evidence", far from incontrivertible, is worthless.

Peter's question is perfectly valid and should be answerable here. Did Hubbard lie about the curability or did he defraud the Vet. Administration?

Margaret
Margaret

Mafiawog, the truth is not always what it appears.  I do hope you keep digging and remain intellectually honest throughout.  My best to you.  Truly.

Margaret
Margaret

As valid as everyone else's was, including the highly accomplished, educated and respected David B. Steinman who was very happy to accept the honorary doctorates from Sequoia University in 1952 (along with ones from Rensselear and Columbia).

Margaret
Margaret

When you've previously announced exactly and accurately what "crippled and blinded" means -- to a nationwide audience no less -- then yes, it definitely means that you are not lying when you later use the phrase.

The only tragedy is that Tommy Davis didn't know or think to send a little postcard to Lawrence Wright informing him of this fact, prior to the Haggis piece.  But that's probably more a function of the cultic aspects of the "church", than anything else..

DuckBenway
DuckBenway

"LRH was a lying sack of shit."

True that! And it makes Maggie appear to be another sack of it, covered in it, or both. Whatever the case, it's a shitty situation and no one I know is buying it.

And so lulzy to have all these apologists and defenders so enturbulated.

And to paraphrase something Joe Lynn left in one of his wakes, "And oh yeah, Maggie - being conned for 50 years doesn't make you an expert - it makes you an idiot."

robert
robert

Agreed.

Margaret, you have spent countless words on this question of the Sequoia degree to try to prove that he wasn't lying.  But you can't dispute the cable with which he ordered it up, you can't dismiss that the state of California never recognized the school. To say that they were not able to shut them down doesn't make them worthy. By that token then, the CoS is worthy and saintly because no one has shut them down yet.

 You point to Steinman accepting an honorary degree from Sequoia as though that somehow means something because one obscure person accepted a degree from them. Not only doesn't that prove their validity, but then you leap in logic further to therefore assume that the school was "highly respected".  

A letter from the CA bureau of school approvals states: “This institution has never been approved or recognised by this office. Repeated attempts have been made to obtain compliance with the legal requirements. None of these attempts have proved successful".

In any event, you seem to fail to respond to all the other points made about his other lies about his degrees or any of the other multiple lies about his life..  What do you say about the multiple lies about being a "nuclear physicist" -to the point of having it on the cover of early editions of All About Radiation? Or the lies about being a "C.E."?  

And as Wolfy notes, the issue about his "injuries" during the war is not whether he was ill.  It was whether he was injured in combat, as he claimed, as as the CoS continues to claim to this day.  He had no Purple Heart so that pretty much settles that right there.  Conjunctivitis is not a battle wound, and it doesn't lead to making you legally blind.  Try again. An ulcer is not a battle injury.  You left out the letters he wrote to the navy claiming that he was suffering from mental illness and depression.  Why'd you leave those out?

He claimed combat injuries.  He was never in combat.  He claimed medals that he never in fact earned.  He earned four medals that anyone in the theater of operation would have earned as a matter of course. He fired on Mexico. His commanders found him unfit for an independent command.  Lie upon lie upon lie, and this was just a few of them.

     

bobx
bobx

Appearances are not always what things seem to be?

Yeppir
Yeppir

Ironic statement, Margaret.  "The truth is not always what it appears."  You seem to be a reasonably - dare I say? - intelligent person.  Does your cognitive dissonance ever chime in and cause you to wonder why you spend so much time defending LRH?  Why?  Was he that revolutionary?  Seriously, girl.  Look at it.  I presume you've devoted much of your life to this . . . stuff.  You have developed a construct that just doesn't hold together.  Settle for the fact that you got a jolt from the auditing, or whatever, but join the rest of us who were able to cognite (funny how spell check doesn't know that word) that the whole thing - LRH's pièce de résistance, and your raison d'etre, is just a pipe dream and cannot stand up to scrutiny or practice.

robinlandseadel
robinlandseadel

I see you have been "disappeared."

Don't say I didn't warn you.

Margaret
Margaret

"Highly accomplished"?  What can I say, Steinman was highly accomplished.

"Incontrovertible proof"?   I could be wrong.  But as far as I can tell, it's pretty incontrovertible. Would be happy to consider any arguments to the contrary.

Soderqvist1:
Soderqvist1:

 

Soderqvist1:you claim falsehood here at Marty Rathbun!

http://markrathbun.wordpress.c...not 11/09/28/an-open-letter-to-tony-ortega/#comment-151485

 

Jon Attack:In an interview given shortly after the creation of Dianetics, Hubbard was morecandid about his war wounds. The December 5, 1950, issue of Look magazinequoted him as saying he had been suffering from "ulcers, conjunctivitis,deteriorating eyesight, bursitis and something wrong with my feet." Thisdescription fits very well with Hubbard's Navy and Veterans Administrationrecords. http://www.xenu.net/archive/bo...

 

Soderqvist1:L. Ron Hubbard makes stronger claims here in his; “My Philosophy” that he wasabandoned by family and friends because he was a burden upon them as a blindhopeless cripple, and he had no help, he couldn’t see, yet he worked himselfback to full health in less than two years!

http://www.ronthephilosopher.o...

 

 

 

 

 

robinlandseadel
robinlandseadel

Maggie: If LRH said it, the statistical probability of the statement being a lie approaches 95 %.

Drop the cans.

DuckBenway
DuckBenway

Weasel worded, Margaret; "highly accomplished" and "incontrovertible proof" is just so lame.

But, I'll give you credit for taking your semantic strolls down Weasel Word Lane, following in the footsteps of your beloved hero, L. Ron Hubbard, a lying sack of shit. You match that sack to a T! Congratulations!

Margaret
Margaret

Arnaldo Lerma wrote: "sounds like you have an issue with the Chief ..."

No, no problem with the Chief from me.  And I don't put too much stock in Prouty's research ... not a big fan of conspiracy theories and all that.

Nevertheless, from my own study of Hubbard's Naval records, there are in fact inconsistencies and/or inaccuracies within the record itself.  But so far, I wouldn't consider them anything more than everyday clerical or similar errors. 

And no, a purple heart would not be needed, especially since we now know that Hubbard had  accurately explained the exact nature of the "blinded and crippled" remark to a broad nationwide audience in 1950.  What would have been nice is some better research (and/or better informed sources) when Russell Miller was doing his book on Hubbard.  Woulda, coulda, shoulda, eh?

Arnaldo Lerma
Arnaldo Lerma

sounds like you have an issue with the Chief of Naval Personnel, not me... but you can continue to emulate Hubbard, of course.

Ill stand by the letter from the Chief of Naval personnel office.

If he were "blinded and crippled" he'd get at least a purple heart...

Oh and that letter you guys have from Fletcher Prouty...about Hubbard's record, was a WORK-FOR-HIRE by Fletcher for scientology... Prouty admitted it.  I have that in storage.Have a nice day. Arnie LermaPS: Get your stats up!

if you look in a directory named hubbard on my site you'll find more good docs, including the letter on foloeus letterhead to the navy that is laughable...

Arnaldo Lerma
Arnaldo Lerma

Sounds like you have an issue with The Chief of Naval Personnel... I'd take his word for it over yours anyday, you can also see the letter from FOLOEUS on foloeus letterhead that is laughable as it includes your own shore stories that you believe in a directory on lermanet.com add a slash and word hubbard and a slash... enjoy!

Margaret
Margaret

BTW Arnie, I couldn't help but notice that you and Gerry (Armstrong) have been the main sources of misinformation on the "degree mill" and "lied about his war injuries" claim on the internet.

Now that these bogus claims have been debunked with pretty solid evidence, are you going to be correcting the misinformation at your sites?  (Not that I'm expecting a sudden change in intellectual honesty or anything.)

Margaret
Margaret

Arnie, no purple heart may in fact be true.  I find it interesting that Hubbard never  mentioned having ever received a "purple heart" in any of his writings or lectures, yet it suddenly shows up at some point in the 70s on a questionable "Naval Separation" document.  I also note that the official Naval Separation document is also inaccurate, as it does not include a number of details that can be found in Hubbard's military record.

Despite all this, it cannot be denied that Hubbard's public statements as to what constituted his war-related medical maladies/injuries exactly match his Naval record.

Arnaldo Lerma
Arnaldo Lerma

Pers-3743-RAD:ja11339218 June 1974

Mr. Roger PaseEastern United States49 West 32nd StreetNew York New York 20001

Dear Mr Pase,

In response to your letter of 28 May 1974, the following medals which former Lieutenant Lafayette R. Hubbard U.S. Naval Reserve earned during his naval service are forwarded ,

American Defense Service MedalAmerican Campaign MedalAsiatic-Pacific Campaign MedalWorld War II Victory Medal

The records in this Bureau fail to establish Mr Hubbard's entitlement to the other medals and awards listed in yourrequest. If he has evidence to substantiate his entitlementto the other awards in question, further consideration willbe given to your request upon submission of such evidence to

The Chief Of Naval Personnel (Pers 374)

Sincerely yours R G Trance Lieutenant Commander , USN HeadCorrespondence and service branch by direction of the Chief of Naval Personnel

malasangre
malasangre

"he said" = he said.  quoting someones own words is not considered authoritative.  if it was the prisons would be empty

Zander
Zander

Thanks again Margaret for discarding the sheep-dip excuse and confirming that Hubbard was a chronic liar.

Margaret
Margaret

Peter,  this comment section is becoming unwieldy, and its literally taking me sometimes 30 mins to simply respond to one comment.  I'm moving this thread (or at least my response) over to today's "Philip Boyd" article here at villagevoice, so we can continue there -- hopefully with less commenting-delay trouble.  Hope you don't mind.  (And that's for you too, Zander).

Peter Söderqvist
Peter Söderqvist

Chris Owen didn’t ignore the 4-Dec-1950 article from LOOK. It is documented in the end of the chapter; “Crippled and Blinded”, and Jon Attack documented it in his book A Piece of Blue sky in thechapter; “His Miraculous Recovery” Page 85. But I cannot findit in Russell Miller’s book and Bent Corydon’s book. He received disability compensation at least up to 1973 according to court documents in the Gerry Armstrong case; “Attached as Exhibit [P] is a letter from the VA stating Hubbard was still receiving the 40% disability compensation in 1973. Exhibit [Q], correspondence between various individuals in the GO, including Mary Sue Hubbard show that the organization and Mrs. Hubbard possessed L. Ron Hubbard's naval documents at least by 1976" Yet Hubbard claimed he had cured himself in less than two years. If he succeeded to cure himself, then he defrauded the Veteran Administration, or if he failed to cure himself, then he lied about his science of mind’s curability!

Margaret
Margaret

Raymond, I have read Chris Owens' "work", in depth.  He had a joke-of-a-website around  1997, and then he updated it around 2004 (where he back-pedaled on earlier claims, but never admitted he was doing so). Both websites were clearly spun to fit Chris' personal opinion of Hubbard, and smack of the same kind of propaganda that the "church" engages in by leaving out or ignoring important facts.

If you'd like to point me to evidence that Chris Owen -- prior to a month ago when I started pointing out the LOOK article -- ever mentioned that Hubbard was completely forthcoming broadly and publicly in late 1950 as to the nature of his war-related maladies/injuries, I'll be happy to reconsider my view.

And if you can't, then why don't you (and he) be honest with yourselves, and admit -- if only to yourselves -- that you've been propagating misleading information about Hubbard.

Zander
Zander

Is Margaret saying that Hubbard's Naval records were *not* sheep-dipped?

Since the middle 1970s, the "Church" of Scientology has been insisting these records were sheep-dipped. And since the early 1980s, the Freezone has been insisting they were sheep-dipped, and more recently, the Independent Scientologists at Marty's blog have been insisting they were sheep-dipped.

Has that changed?

Is Margaret saying that Hubbard's Naval records are his REAL Naval records?

Wow! Now that confirms that Hubbard was a incorrigible liar!

Margaret, being somewhat honest - once - in 1950, doesn't make up for lying hundreds of times before and after 1950. Have you read Hubbard's 'My Philosophy' from 1965? Of course you have. It's one of the first things Scientologists read.

And  thanks for the confirmation that Hubbard was a repeat liar!

Way to go Margaret!

Raymond Hill
Raymond Hill

Margaret: "Chris also ignores the 4-Dec-1950 article from LOOK"

This is yet another confirmation you didn't read Chris Owen's work.

Margaret
Margaret

Ray, I've poured over Chris' silly unbalanced website, before and after pouring over Hubbard's military record myself.  Chris is clearly trying to spin the facts to fit with his pre-conception of Hubbard, just like Miscavige and the other boneheads are doing on their end.

There is not much tremendously exciting in Hubbard's military career (other than possibly the details of the missing first few months in the AU area), but the record shows he was promoted on two occasions.  And his medical record shows that the Navy considered his injuries/maladies to be "service related", that he WAS legally blind and that he also had hip trouble.  Chris ignores and/or downplays these facts.  (Not that the "church" does any better with the unflattering disputes/censures that Hubbard had received during the war.)  Chris also ignores a number of other facts, almost certinaly since they would put Hubbard in a positive light -- such as the fact that Hubbard had enlisted on his own prior to Pearl Harbor.

Chris also ignores the 4-Dec-1950 article from LOOK (to a nationwide audience) -- just as Miller, Atack and Corydon did -- where LRH spelled out the service-related maladies/injuries for which he had received a lump-sum disability payment.  Instead, Chris only uses later Hubbard quotes to make it look like Hubbard had never publicly disclosed precisely what he meant by "crippled and blinded", nor that the medical record clearly supports these statements.

Ultimately, Chris' website comes across as being unbalanced and intellectually dishonest, just as the goofy church website does.

Raymond Hill
Raymond Hill

You obviously didn't read Chris Owen work as I suggested.

"ulcers, conjunctivitis, deteriorating eyesight, bursitis and something wrong with my feet"

vs.

"blinded with injured optic nerves, and lame with physical injuries to hip and back ... permanently disabled physically ... was abandoned by family and friends as a supposedly hopeless cripple ..."

Chris Owen's finding:

Claim and counter-claim

...

* Hubbard was "crippled and blinded" at the end of the war.("What Is Scientology?" 1998 ed., and virtually every other official biographical account)

The immediate cause of Hubbard's hospitalisation in 1945 was a duodenal ulcer, for which he received treatment. He also claimed to be suffering from bursitis, arthritis, short-sightedness caused by "exposure to tropical sunlight" and a variety of other complaints.

Sources: Hubbard's Veterans Administration file; US Navy records of medical examinations of Hubbard

robinlandseadel
robinlandseadel

Nope—this one's an outright, "liar liar your pants are on fire, your nose is as long as a telephone wire", truckload of horeshit. And your continued defense of the Mountebank indicates how very difficult it is for those who have been bamboozled to admit it.

Margaret
Margaret

As opposed to being promoted from Lieutenant (jg), to full Lieutenant, to Lt. Commander.

His superiors must have really hated that slimey bastard.

Suggestion to Chris Owen:  might want to mention those promotions on the next incarnation of your website (oh, and of course the LOOK article from 1950) -- only if you're interested in balance and accuracy, of course.  (MarkStark, perhaps you can mention that to Chris -- his published emails weren't working for me last I tried.)  And if you missed the Lt. Commander promotion, Chris, let me know.  I don't see your mention of it at your latest ... ahem ... "balanced" website.

robinlandseadel
robinlandseadel

I'll take your inability to deal with direct evidence as a prime example of the brain damage the "Tech" inflicts.

The direct evidence is that LRH did fuck-all in the service and it's a miracle [considering his debacle south of the border] he wasn't booted out with a dishonorable discharge.

Margaret
Margaret

I'll take your inability to address the evidence as your admission that you can't.  Thanks for playing though!

Now Trending

New York Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...