Customize

26 Page New Yorker article about Paul Haggis and scientology Possible FBI investigation

Discussion in 'Media' started by Anonymous, Nov 26, 2010.

  1. Anonymous Member

    Roone Arledge was president of ABC Sports, and later ABC News. Scientologist Terry Jastrow is also friends of Disney CEO Bob Iger, and his assistant, Alex Wallau.
  2. Etain Member

    This poster points it out on the thread about the cancellation of the Navy ceremony for L. Ron.

    This is, and I agree, a better idea than having all of us bombard these sites with info.
  3. WillyWonkanon Member

    i would just like to thank the academy, and Agent Pubit.
    • Like Like x 2
  4. Anonymous Member

    COB could turn this all off ... preventing it from going viral, simply by changing the subject. Dave Miscavige could release the data (with dox) behind the Miss Bloodybutt attack, showing it was an unauthorized rogue Mike Rinder / Marty Rathbun operation that he didn't know about, or authorize. Since this operation was a fraud on the court (RTC v Netcom), there is no statute of limitation on this crime, and Dave Miscavige could get Rinder and Rathbun incarcerated for it for a long, long time. That is, if COB wasn't the dumb ass that he is ... hahaha!
    • Like Like x 3
  5. grebe Member

    ^^This guy seems legit. Patriot Guard RidersFTW!
  6. CaptainAhab Member

    Could someone please identify for me what the other medals and ribbons shown in the photo are? (apart from the Purple Heart obviously...)
    • Like Like x 1
  7. DeathHamster Member

    At least one set of fakes were assembled while Hubbard was alive. From Bare-Faced Messiah, p.289:
  8. Miranda Member

    I'm sure that was true for him, in a delusional sort of way.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. DeathHamster Member

    Judges have already basically said that in a later Sklar case. Unfortunately that wasn't they were ruling on.
  10. kezi Member

    On LRH's medals: It's clear that the man was a fraud and that he stole valor. This fact won't budge his followers, though, as they can retreat into the unverifiable. This is the case with most religious beliefs. The laws of science and the available evidence doesn't support Creation stories, but God can do whatever. God is not falsifiable. LRH medals and separation docs are fake, but he was whatever-dipped because of his deep undercover work. Of course, no low-level military aparatchik would be authorized to reveal the important roles that LRH played in the war or his continuing work undercover against the commies. There's always a level of self-deceit that one can sink to when one WANTS to believe.
  11. Triumph Member

  12. Just like last time...
  13. Anonymous Member

  14. Miranda Member

    Hey now that's not what I said! lol

    But... cruising around Hollywood late at night on a candycycle... draw your own conclusions.
  15. DeathHamster Member

  16. Zizany Member

    I for one would welcome Tommy back with open arms.
  17. See below. They are generic campaign medals and the World War 2 victory medal. As I understand it the former are given to anyone who participated in that particular theater of the war and the latter was awarded at the war's conclusion to all who participated. In other words they are not awarded for distinguishing oneself.

    edit: It's also my understanding that the small metal stars on the ribbons denote a medal being awarded multiple times. One star equals two medal awards, two stars equal three. So it seems odd that anyone would be awarded multiple campaign medals but someone else may be able to shed more light on that being legitimate or illegitimate.

    hubbardstolenmedals2c.jpg
  18. Anonymous Member

    You'll have some competition from Smurf on that.
  19. Offical CoS Version:



    Reality:

    • Like Like x 1
  20. Xoanon Member

  21. Puppetmama Member

  22. Anonymous Member

    +1 internets to the anon who registered as Louanne:
  23. tikk Member

    Some random thoughts on the Wright article.

    1. Paul Haggis’ lucid and thoughtful retelling of his time in Scientology serves as a great hook to build this story for many reasons--the length of his tenure and relative celebrity being the most obvious. But more importantly he is an exemplar of the rich "public" Scientologist in sharp contrast to the miserably treated staff members. Scientology has always hewed to a rigid caste system with celebrities and "success" stories on one side, and shocking mistreatment of heavily indoctrinated staff members on the other. The former has always given them ample cover to commit the latter, and it's a dichotomy not many people easily grasp--both factions are cult members, and accordingly undergo significant indoctrination, but in a religion where wealth and fame are practically considered virtuous, the publics and celebrities enjoy far better treatment. I think Wright managed to convey this without ever spelling it out.

    2. In most extensive articles on Scientology, the church inevitably makes flailing attempts to influence the outcome with both carrots and sticks, but mostly sticks. These interactions with the author inevitably become part of the story, and this time was no different, Tommy Davis showing up to The New Yorker’s offices with a slew of binders and four attorneys for the ostensible purpose of responding to the requests of New Yorker fact checkers. The big difference this time, though, was that Davis made an astonishing statement, positing that if Hubbard hadn’t in fact cured himself of war wounds using Dianetics, that the basis for Scientology was essentially bankrupt. Well, yeah: he hadn’t, and it is… but why in hell did Davis feel the need to say this? His lawyers must’ve cringed. And then cringed again when the article came out. (I’m not suggesting that Davis incurred liability, just that the lawyers accompanying him would have quickly recognized Davis’ bombastic stupidity in daring Wright to prove Hubbard a liar.)

    3. Davis’ proffered trump card to resolve the fact that Scientology appears to have provided Wright with forged military records for Hubbard—the Fletcher Prouty Affidavit—doesn’t even purport to explain away the discrepancies. Perhaps Wright felt no need to press home the point, but it’s nevertheless worth noting a few things about the Fletcher Prouty affidavit: (1) it was proffered as *expert* testimony, not fact testimony, meaning that Prouty did not even claim to have knowledge of whether the military kept two records on Hubbard; and (2) Fletcher Prouty is something of an unreliable kook, which Google will bear out if you have the time and inclination.

    3.a. As Chris Owen noted in the indispensable Ron the War Hero, one basis for Fletcher Prouty’s testimony that two military records for Hubbard existed was the Notice of Separation provided to him by Scientology, which Owen suggested was likely a forgery. Prouty took the veracity of the document at face value in forming his testimony, and was then unaware of the second Notice of Separation Wright subsequently obtained from the military. Thus, Prouty was correct in at least one sense—Hubbard did have two military records: one from the military and another forged by scientology. Not only does the newly produced Notice of Separation fail to explain what Tommy Davis suggests it does, it tends to prove precisely the opposite. In other words, Prouty’s testimony doesn't explain away the forgery—the forgery helps explain Prouty’s testimony!

    4. Scientology is forever being forced to make up lies to explain away discrepancies with past statements or other factual realities that become too gargantuan to ignore. Most non-initiates will fail to appreciate the gravity of the issue of Hubbard’s words being altered in subsequent editions (it is doctrine that Hubbard’s words are unalterable), but the conversation between Davis and Wright regarding the disappearance of certain statements made by Hubbard is made more hilarious because it’s so consequential. Davis’ claim that a “bigot” maliciously inserted statements that weren’t in fact made by Hubbard, a fact discovered once the tapes were properly dictated, is evidence of a deeply held delusion that he can somehow snow Wright, whose comment that “the bigot’s handiwork was not fully excised” (re Dianetics’ present-day defining ‘sexual perversion’ to include homosexuality) shows that he was having none of Tommy’s bullshit.

    5. It’s interesting that Wright chose to revisit so much of Hubbard’s biography, an aspect which few articles have delved into, and certainly none with the fact-checking firepower of The New Yorker. Russell Miller’s book, Bare Faced Messiah, published in 1987, does a fantastic job of accurately depicting Hubbard’s life in polar contrast to Scientology’s hagiography, but the out-of-print book is mostly out of the public’s reach and view, so Wright’s decision to revisit the official version is welcome. But I wonder how welcome it is in the Marty camp, who were no doubt thrilled with all other aspects of Wright’s article.

    6. Fascinating depiction of the lineup of celebrities showing up to Haggis’ home to convince him to rescind his letter, and great that Wright was able to hear from both sides. And it was great to see that Haggis let his visitors know about the St. Pete Times expose from 2009.
    • Like Like x 13
  24. Anonymous Member

    Thank God Wright didn't get tinged misinformation from Patricia Greenway and her crowd, like Andrew Morton did.
  25. Anonymous Member

    and there is more... with dox.

    Read more http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2011/02/l-ron-hubbard-leaves-the-navy.html#ixzz1DUJ9DDzK
  26. Diablo Member

    Tikk, I like your take on some of the issues in the article. When I was reading that dissertation I had 100's of those types of thoughts that just tied a lot of their bullshit all together and there were so many "gotcha" moments. Can the midget actually get rid of TD or would it be too obvious at this point that he disappeared????
  27. tikk Member

    I can't help but think that it's a telling coincidence that the signature of the non-existent "Commander Howard D. Thompson" appears on the forged Notice of Separation, and a Commander Joseph "Snake" Thompson is often referred to by Hubbard as being an instrumental childhood mentor and influence. "Snake Thompson" was a real figure, but like everything else with Hubbard, you have to take his characterization of the relationship with much salt. Whoever lazily forged the document likely found it easier to append a new generic first name to the already known "Commander Thompson" instead of creating a new one from whole cloth (a tactic consistent with Hubbard's pattern--he would more often self-servingly modify known truths than create new lies from the bottom up).
  28. DeathHamster Member


    He's almost there:
    1142919298_2884c97487.jpg
    • Like Like x 1
  29. DeathHamster Member

    A Scientologist, who escaped the ban on Wikipedia, spent a lot of time buffing up the Joseph Cheesman Thompson article. (One of the cites: "L. Ron Hubbard's unpublished autobiography, 1972" LOLWUT?) I wonder how much effort Scientology has expended trying to tie up all loose ends of Hubbard's claimed past? I guess that it's a bit too late to Snow White Hubbard's record at the Navy...
  30. CaptainAhab Member

    Thanks for identifying the non-stolen ones, but what are the other medals and ribbons - the stolen ones?
  31. Yeah but its the kind of lie that they got away with for fifty or so years. Back then you had to do a lot of hard yards (visiting libraries and governement offices in person) if you want to disprove one of their lies. And really who could be bothered.

    Now of course you dont have to leave your house to research. Except to go pick up a bucket of chicken. And this is killing them. It seems they still havent grasped that every statement they make is most likely going to get fact checked by anon. I mean this particular lie is so sloppy - medals that didnt even exist at the time of his service - it is laughable. Nothing ever changes for the CULT they are unable and unwilling to change even in the face of their personal Vietnam.
  32. CaptainAhab Member

    "L. Ron Hubbard's unpublished autobiography" is real and exists. I've got a copy somewhere. Its proper title is "Autobiographical notes for Peter Tompkins" and it was written on June 6, 1972. It wasn't an autobiography, strictly speaking. A Scientology PR, Peter Tompkins, sent Hubbard a list of biographical questions to which Hubbard provided a series of written or dictated responses. It was never published but was used as the basis for Flag Information Letter 67, "L.R.H. Biography", issued October 31, 1977. You can find a copy of that document at http://www.lermanet.com/barwell/flagorder-67.txt. It's been used as the basis for official CoS biographies of Hubbard ever since.
  33. Miranda Member

    This struck me as well. The portrayal of Haggis is compassionate while remaining quietly open-eyed about the influences related to ambition and privilege that must have contributed to his remaining in for so long, and influenced his ability to see what was wrong. In the NPR interview, Wright states that the question of what Scientology gave Mr. Haggis motivated him to write the article. He is a subtly tenacious and thoughtful writer, and I don't believe for a second that he meant that merely in the usual "wins" sense. In a way, he takes Haggis at his word with respect to his "I'm not perfect" disclaimer, and without attacking or discrediting him, lets that play out. It's impressive that Haggis contributed so frankly to this piece, and demonstrates intelligence and commitment to personal integrity.

    And Tikk, your comments are always so meticulously thoughtful and informed--thank you.
    • Like Like x 3
  34. TrevAnon Member

  35. Triumph Member

    • Like Like x 1
  36. Anonymous Member

  37. tikk Member

  38. Rockyj Member

    Wow, pant, pant, long thread! Back around 200 posts ago, someone mentioned that the FBI may have been infiltrated by Scientology spies. What if its really the other way around?

    2009-8-5-Spy_vs_Spy.jpg
    • Like Like x 1
  39. Anonymous Member

    Oh yeah and when they show up in the comments saying that they didn't do enough research show them this
    http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/02/the_new_yorker_sent_scientolog.html

  40. Miranda Member

    All that sputtering incredulity that first strikes ordinary people exposed to Hubbard's word salad may soon enter the realm of conventional wisdom (or, conventional jaw-dropping astonishment). I hope for a few WTF?! [interrobang] editorials over the next few weeks.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins