J. Swift wrote:
Hamilton knows her action and objective are preposterous.
Caroline, I do not think it is preposterous to ask for evidence of DM's crimes, particularly if Indies have connections to law enforcement. Any actual data collected on DM has no value unless it is given the authorities or published online to expose his actions.
Law enforcement doesn't need Lisa Hamilton to threaten would-be witnesses into coming forward. DM's victims have been talking about his violent and antisocial behavior for many years. There's no evidence to suggest that law enforcement is outsourcing their criminal investigation of Scientology to these Scientologists. Besides, don't Rathbun and Rinder already have enough evidence on DM to go to law enforcement?
Where are their interogs?
I'm sure that among the many disorganized Scientologists there are some with connections to law enforcement. I have seen no evidence, however, that any are reporting Scientology's crimes to their law enforcement connections. New leader Rathbun has stated rather emphatically that he would *not* go to the FBI, which would be the proper law enforcement agency to go to.
J. Swift, it's pretty odd to suggest that Hamilton's interog has some relation to a legitimate investigation by legitimate authorities. Where's law enforcement's authorization? At least the original Loyalists had fake
authorizations, like this one:
No, Hamilton didn't state that she's going to go to law enforcement with the intelligence she gathers. She's applying her Hubbard ethics tech.
Arnie Lerma posted an undated report from "Scientology Insider" about Hamilton's application of ethics tech:
Scientology Insider wrote:
The typical Committee of Evidence goes like this. An order comes down from some senior staff member to 'kick someone out' or 'put someone's ethics in' or 'handle' someone. The outcome of the committee is known before the charade takes place. Someone makes up a list of particulars -- alleged 'crimes' the person has committed. They are usually inane and silly. Like the person complained about the air conditioning being broken or the elevator not working. This is made out to be a 'high crime' -- spreading malicious rumors about senior Scientologists. The senior management are extremely hyper-sensitive to any criticism. Say something negative about David Miscavige or write a report critical of management and you will get into a lot of trouble pretty quickly in L.A.
As you are getting into trouble you may run in to Lisa Hamilton, the Director of Inspections and Reports for the Continental Liaison Office Western US. She is about 5' 4", has medium length, medium brown hair. Seems very cordial. She is there to extract information from people about other people. Often the only way a person can get out of trouble with Scientology and avoid being kicked out and shunned is to rat on another Scientologist. Lisa is the one who gently urges people to 'give the dirt' about their friends. She also likes to have people call other people in a very friendly manner while she listens in on the conversations. Memo from an Insider
Lawrence Woodcraft wrote a declaration dated 24 January 2001 about Hamilton and her ethics application:
Lawrence Woodcraft wrote:
12. I wrote a letter to the International Justice Chief and requested a hearing over what had happened. This was denied and I was told I would have to be interviewed by a church employee called Lisa Hamilton. I went in to the Los Angeles Head Scientology Office for this in Oct 2000. I had an interview, which was conducted with me connected to an e-meter (presumably in an attempt to see if I was being truthful.) Among other things, I was asked to list all my friends who were scientologists, what conversations I had had with them, what if any articles I had posted on the Internet, had I ever been on the Internet, had I ever seen anti-scientology web-sites, who was my service provider, what was my screen name. I was asked at length questions about the circumstances under which my daughters left the church. I was told that I would have to attend many more such interviews and purchase “security checks” (invasive interrogation) so they could get to the bottom of what was going on. I declined to attend unlimited interviews; for one thing I had to concentrate my efforts on rebuilding my business, with two daughters and a granddaughter to support, while a concerted attempt had been made to cause me financial ruin.http://www.xenutv.com/blog/?p=110
Here's an anonymous report forwarded to Tory
by someone who mentioned Hamilton's rollback tech ca. 2002.
Hamilton knows, of course, that she and the other Loyalists could easily be found guilty of High Crimes if the tables were turned and they were made Interested Parties in Scientology "justice" actions. Some examples:
L. Ron Hubbard in Introduction to Scientology Ethics wrote:
Public disavowal of Scientology or Scientologists in good standing with Scientology organizations.
Public statements against Scientology or Scientologists but not to Committees of Evidence duly convened.
Reporting or threatening to report Scientology or Scientologists to civil authorities in an effort to suppress Scientology or Scientologists from practicing or receiving standard Scientology.
Writing anti-Scientology letters to the press or giving anti-Scientology or anti-Scientologist data to the press.
Hubbard, L. R. (1968-1998) Introduction to Scientology Ethics. (1998 ed., pp. 294-307.) Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.
Hamilton must also be familiar with Hubbard's writing regarding the non-workability of Scientology outside of official control:
L. Ron Hubbard wrote:
4. It must be kept in mind and brought forward emphatically that Scientology does not work in the absence of official control and, no matter who sought to use its principles, has uniformly failed in the hands of non-Scientologists and organizations not controlled by the Central Organizations of Scientology or myself.
Hubbard, L. R. (1965, 14 June). Politics, Freedom From. Organization Executive Course Basic Staff Volume 0 (1991 ed., Vol. 0, pp. 159). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.
So, is she now saying with Rathbun that "The church is dead man
" and that they (the Loyalists) are
the official control? Pfft?!
Just like that?
Lisa Hamilton wrote:
It is true that Mark and I blew from the Sea Org in July 2008. At this point, I am not going to get into a lot of specifics as to why, but I felt that I could no longer fulfill my responsibilities as a Sea Org member and maintain my own personal integrity unless I stated what I know.
Now that's weird. She can't maintain her personal integrity unless she states what she knows. Yet she hasn't stated almost anything she knows from her years inside the cult, and isn't ready to state what she knows. But she's demanding the rest of us report to her on what we
know? Preposterous. You do the interog, Lisa, and let's see what you've got.
To DM, Lisa Hamilton wrote:
This will probably seem preposterous to you – me a lowly ex-SO veteran, offering you, COB, a hand. But be that as it may, it IS that sincerely. On an Ethics Review gradient, I am also taking a VERY light gradient here, but know that without honest action and change, this will QUICKLY go up the Ethics and Justice gradients – and I know how to apply those standardly. This may seem like it will have no effect, but as you know LRH himself mentions calling a Committee of Evidence on widely known non-Scientologists to effect change. So, as you ARE a high-ranking and widely-known Sea Org Scientologist, this WILL have an effect even more so.
Hamilton knew that her actions would seem ineffective. Nevertheless, she referred DM to what Hubbard wrote in HCOPL 27 March 1965 Justice of Scientology Its Use and Purpose Being a Scientologist (posted above by Sea Horse.)
Hamilton undoubtedly knows how to apply Hubbard's Ethics Review
gradients. With the information already out there, she doesn't need an interog for the purpose she states.
J. Swift wrote:
Caroline earlier wrote:
This is not about DM of course. This is about collecting more people who have natter on DM. Rathbun and Rinder want the intel, and they want (and need) more people to help them with their actual or DM-approved Loyalist "coup."
With all due respect, why would DM want this kind of coup where he is exposed as a physically abusive dictator and CoS itself exposed as an insane, fascist organization?
Scientology has long been exposed as a totalitarian organization and a threat to democratic society. Rathbun and his Derailroad Co. are giving away very little new of value, as much as they'd like their followers to believe otherwise.
There's no evidence to suggest a coup would succeed. But of course a failed "coup" has benefits that DM would want, not the least of which is intel that the Loyalists are gathering on his and Scientology's victims.
J. Swift wrote:
For example, Marty just came out and said that OT IX and OT X do not exist. He denounced the levels as a fraud and a contrivance of Pat Broeker. What Marty said is staggering because it ends the Bridge at OT VIII forever. From a purely CoS perspective alone, that is a huge loss of future income if this is all part of a coup as you argue. I rather see it as an admission that OT VIII is the best CoS can deliver -- and this is on top of numerous OT VII's and VIII's blowing. Why would a manufactured coup end the Bridge at VIII and write off future income from OT XIII -- XV? Marty's revelation fits the theory: OT IX and OT X have never been released because they do not exist in any form that can be sold.
Marty saying OT IX and X don't exist is a welcome admission to many who still have hopes of becoming Übermenschen, but Rathbun's "revelation" is actually a no-brainer. When did he find out? In any case, nothing Rathbun's come out with has been staggering, like Jason Beghe's "Show me a $E^%$&^%$^*Clear" is welcome, but not staggering.
J. Swift wrote:
Caroline earlier wrote:
Scientology does not and cannot ever effectively deal with its own power-hungry sociopaths because the SP doctrine effectively hides and protects them. It hid Hubbard, it has hidden DM, and it hides Rathbun and Rinder.
Freedom Magazine just spent 95 pages trashing Anderson Cooper, Mike, Marty, and many other Indies. Tommy Davis just trashed the Headley's and Marty in his letter to the SP Times. Freedom Rag and OSA have attacked Amy Scobee, Tom De Vocht, Marc and Claire, Jeff Hawkins, Nancy Many, and many other Indies. Many of the Indies have had the contents of their folders used against them. The Headley's valiantly tried to prove that human trafficking exists inside of Sea Org. As I see it, the Indies and other former SO are locked in the fight of their lives against an oppressive regime that is quite willing to destroy all of them. Whether it is able to is another matter.
All this trashing has been standard operating procedure for DM, Rathbun and Rinder for decades. Check out these Freedom articles they put out on Gerry Armstrong:Freedom 61Freedom 62Freedom Special edition April/May 1985Freedom Vol 17 No. 10
Gerry weathered six Scientology lawsuits
, all of which were instigated under Rathbun, Rinder and Miscavige, the same Rathbun, Rinder and Miscavige who ran the original Loyalist Op on him. This covert op and the first lawsuit were also during the Hubbard regime. These Loyalists are still applying the SP doctrine, and are still insisting on their rightness and on Hubbard's rightness about who the bad guys are. It's pretty much all
preposterous if you ask me.
J. Swift wrote:
The SP Doctrine is not protecting or hiding any of the Indies. In fact, yet another book is slated to come out exposing David Miscavige, OSA, and indicting CoS in general. This is Jeff Hawkins' book.
I don't see any of this as a part of a coup. I see all of what is happening as a genuine schism in which a the Cult of DM is being exposed as such.
Caroline, do you think that DM and OSA have anything less than pure blind hatred for Marty and Mike and the rest of the Indies and former SO and OT's who are all speaking out?
If the Indies and other Scientologists were able to realize that the oppressive regime they're fighting against was spawned from the very malignant narcissist they insist on supporting and defending, i.e., L. Ron Hubbard, they would be able to deal with their oppression effectively, and would have a real chance at recovery. Right now, they're embarrassing themselves and prolonging their own hell.
I'll take this opportunity to reference Gerry's letters to Rathbun and Rinder, and the real issues that Rathbun, Rinder and the Loyalists should confront. Lisa Hamilton is obviously a smart person in a position to address their ethics on this situation:
14 April 2010
31 May 2009 Open letter to Mark C. Rathbun
7 July 2009 Letter to Rathbun for help getting back stolen manuscript
12 July 2009 Sitting Bull blowing smoke
14 August 2009 Letter to Mark Rathbun re: Black PR to the IRS
18 August 2009 To Mark Rathbun: Help on Black PR
4 September 2009 Letter to Rathbun: Apology not needed or wanted
6 September 2009Letter to Rathbun: Seeking Understanding from Wogs
14 April 2010 To Mike Rinder