Alt.religion.scientology Week in Review Volume 0, Issue 43 02/18/96 by Rod Keller [firstname.lastname@example.org] copyright 1996
The articles in A.r.s Week in Review are brief summaries of the articles. Many include an excerpt, and all include message IDs for the articles I cover. This may or may not be useful to you, depending on how long your site stores articles in the newsgroup before expiring them.
Free A.r.s Week in Review subscriptions are available, just email me at email@example.com It is archived at:
http://www.amazing.com/scientology/ars-summary.html http://users.aimnet.com/~jdiver/scieno.htm http://www.thur.de/religio/publik/arsfaq.html http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/ars-summary.html http://www.eecs.nwu.edu/~mallen/scn/arswr/ars-summary.html#####
Steve Fishman this week posted a statement he submitted to the court on February 14th in his case against the cult. The key details:
"On Thursday, February 8, 1996, I received a phone call from a woman in a mature voice who said she was from Sonny's Pest Control Services. She offered me a free pest control spraying of both inside and outside the house, at no cost or obligation. I told her to send her representative to spray the house on Saturday afternoon, February 10, 1996.
"On Saturday afternoon, about 3:00 P.M., two pest control workers arrived at the house. They introduced themselves as Eddie and Amy, and said they were from Sonny's Pest Control.
"Eddie began spraying the inside of the house and Amy suggested I show her which plants outside had the most ants. She was also very knowledgeable about plants and was very friendly and congenial. She was smiling a lot and I found her attractive so we spoke for about ten minutes outside.
"I turned on my computer and I found the screen blank except for the words c:\format c: and underneath it 100% formatted. Everything on my hard drive had been erased, including the rough drafts of my opposition motion to defendants’ notice of motion to quash service of process of David Miscavige and my opposition motion to defendants’ notice of motion and special motion to strike the second amended complaints of plaintiffs pursuant to C.C.P. § 425.16 (SLAPP Suit). Furthermore, all of my research, including my original complaint and all of my Internet files were simultaneously destroyed when my hard drive was formatted.
"I had $40 in my wallet which was on a table in plain view in my bedroom and nothing was stolen from out of it. The sole purpose of these two pest control sprayers was to reformat my hard drive and render it impossible for me to send in my motions and also go on the Internet. I cannot prove that these individuals were Scientologists or connected with the Office of Special Affairs. I do not even have their last names or even know if Eddie and Amy are their correct first names."
Arnie Lerma Update
Arnie Lerma, who had his computer equipment removed in a raid by the cult, reported this week that he has yet to get his equipment back. This, despite Judge Brinkema's admission that the raid was ill-conceived, and the cult had "dirty hands" in their request for a writ of seizure.
"I supposedly could get my stuff after the cult dropped its appeal, in anticipation of appealing the whole wad or whatever after the last ruling. Well as the outfit that has my 2 1 gig drives, and pile-o-diskettes has been directed by the cult to not release my material.
"I have been without my 'sanitized copy' for a very long time, the copy provided by I-Net crashed ... And the copy from Ross Dixon crashed ... And I need my records, I'm doing tax stuff and I need my records. I need to drum up some business, I need my phone numbers, I need the artwork for my letterhead, I need my resume, I need the wiring diagram, and I need it now."
Ron Newman posted this week to report that the cult canceled a series of articles containing a repost of Scamizdat 11, containing most of the OT materials.
"At least 10 unauthorized cancels have been sent from the account firstname.lastname@example.org (Bill Spelling), canceling messages from anon.penet.fi cross-posted to the newsgroups 'alt.religion.scientology' and 'alt.cyberspace.rebels' Here is one of the cancels:
"Control: cancel <024315Z11021996@anon.penet.fi> Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.cyberspace.rebels Path:light.lightlink.com!news.netrail.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com! newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com! netcom.com!spells From: email@example.com (Bill Spelling) Subject: cmsg cancel <024315Z11021996@anon.penet.fi> Message-ID: <spellsDMn1I4.L45@netcom.com> Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 01:01:15 GMT Lines: 4 Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org"CANCELLED BECAUSE OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT"
"Margaret (email@example.com) informs me that Netcom has suspended this account, just as it has with the previous Cancelbunnies.
"I'd like to see Netcom do a little more this time, however. How about preventing Netcom users from canceling messages that aren't from Netcom (easily identifiable by the Message-ID)?"
The first Internet posting by Monica Pignotti was made to a.r.s this week. Monica is known for her affidavit, which I found at http://thok.let.rug.nl/danny/scarff/monica1.html. Monica's address is firstname.lastname@example.org.
"For those of you who don't know me I am a EX 6-year member of the CofS who wrote an account of my experience which was posted on ars My Nine Lives in Scientology.
I was involved from 1970-76, which included time done on the Apollo, Clearwater, AOLA and the Salt Lake City mission. I'd love to hear from anyone who knew me back then and anyone else who would care to write. I've been out for nearly 20 years now -- the anniversary date of my leaving and getting back my freedom was August 22nd, 1976. I've never for a moment regretted my decision to leave and I am a very happy SP, even though current members believe this is an oxymoron."
New Era Publications
Morten Welinder posted portions of an article in the February 9th issue of Politiken from Denmark. It examines New Era Publications, one of the cult's publishing arms. The figures show a company in decline.
"The latest closed year is 1994 and the public accountants in a very unusual note distance themselves from part of the accounting:
"(1) 20.3Mkr ($3.5M) is unaccounted for. (2) The value of things the company owns with intent to sell (books, tapes, E-meters) is artificially inflated. New Era claims it is worth 34.4Mkr.
"The turnovers: 1989: 224 Mkr 1992: 139 Mkr 1994: 67 Mkr
"The board was changed in 1994. All activities in South and Central America has been handed over to a US company. The branch in Spain is being dissolved. In 1994 the company has 79 employees earning 40Kkr on average. That's something like half of unemployment benefits."
Karin Spaink posted a series of letters related to the cult's attempt to sue several Dutch Internet providers, and Karin personally, over continued availability of the Fishman materials on dozens of web pages in The Netherlands.
The cult is having difficulty producing the Notary who compared the web pages with a version of the actual OT documents. Some excerpts; material in brackets is mine.
"From: Mr Pors [Planet Internet lawyer] To: Mr Hermans, Mr Morel [cult lawyers] Conc: Planet Internet / RTC cs Date: February 6, 1996
"I hereby send you a copy of the letter I sent to the President of the Court this morning. Mr. Van Manen and myself feel rather misled by you.
"Even though you did indeed not explicitly promise in your letter of January 17, 1996 that you would show us the evidence with which you try to substantiate your claim, the first draft of the subpoena you sent us most certainly gave the impression that this evidence was available. Moreover, in my fax of February 1, 1996 (which led to our appointment on February 6, 1996) I explicitly asked for duplicates of this evidence. You could have at least informed me in advance that you partly do not posses the evidence and partly would not be willing to hand it over to me on February 6. As a result, my client was forced to make expenses, while at the same time he still doesn't have the information he needs to make a decision. In my opinion, the Court should not go in session before we have had the chance to view the evidence announced in the subpoena.
"This morning, it transpired that up until now no legal document has been produced in which the documents that have been published on the Internet through the intermediary of my client, Planet Internet, are being described. I did see such a document regarding XS4ALL, dated November 6, 1995, but Mr. Morel did not want to provide us with a copy of this document either. I did not see any declaration by a notary and according to Mr. Morel, such a document indeed does not exist. I therefore have not been able to ascertain of which parts of documents that my client is involved with, a notary has determined that they literally match the copyrighted works of your clients.
"From: Mr. Pors To: Pres. Court of The Hague, Mr. Van Delden Conc: Planet Internet / Religious Technology Centre et.al. Date: February 6, 1996
"[O]n January 17, 1996, Mr. Hermans informed me that his clients had filed a new short-term lawsuit. It states that a notary has been asked to compare the alleged originals and the alleged infringing documents. The notary *did mark* on masked copies which parts could be literally found in the infringing Internet publications. In doing so, it became *obvious* - according to the subpoena - that considerable parts of the works OT II and OT III had been copied. Plaintiffs announce to submit this comparison by a notary as evidence in the lawsuit.
"According to the fax from Mr. Hermans on December 11, 1995, the first lawsuit has been withdrawn because plaintiffs were not able to produce the evidence in the matter mentioned above. Now, both the draft and the final version of the new subpoena explicitly state that this evidence was available when the subpoena was written, or at least on the moment when it was issued. Therefore, Planet Internet could rightfully assume that this evidence would be available to Planet Internet and myself from that moment on.
"This morning, my associate Mr. Van Manen and myself have visited the office of Mr. Hermans. Unfortunately, we found out that there was no declaration by a notary, that we could not get a copy of it and that it had not even been written yet. This is all the more remarkable, because the history of this case would lead to the assumption that a subpoena would only be issued when all the evidence was available.
"Furthermore, they did not have of a copy of the Fishman Affidavit, as it has allegedly been published on the Internet by Ms. Spaink."
March 9 Protest
Grady Ward posted this week that he will be picketing in San Francisco on the same day as the planned protest in Clearwater, Florida.
"I'm planning to be at the San Francisco Org with video camera and with a long-playing tape of pure Hubbard to confront the scientology criminals. For radio amateurs I will be monitoring a simplex frequency in both VHF/UHF to be announced later (do bring your portables since they would have been useful at the SF Org last time to report on what the criminal cult of scientology was doing on the other side of the building in a 'counter picket'. Radios also help to reinforce the criminal cult belief that they are at the center of a coordinated global conspiracy of alien implants.)
"There is plenty of room for leafleteers, pickets, refreshment support, video and sound documentary, chatting up Quiros and the buxom Sea Org matrons, and general lurking."
Tom v. Linda
Tom Klemesrud posted a transcript from a December 6th, 1995 hearing. The case was brought by Linda Woolard, who spread blood about Tom's apartment in an attempt to intimidate him and cut off Internet access to Dennis Erlich. The new transcript describes Linda's claim that Tom is continuing to harass her, and the judge's action restraining harassment by both parties. Wager is Linda's lawyer, Leipold is Tom's lawyer.
"WAGER: There was a subsequent incident in May of 1995 in a bar and then there was an incident in which she saw him outside her home, both of which incidents he denies. And then she has be receiving a number of -- not on a daily basis -- but a number of hang up calls or other kind of disturbing call, none of which did she ever receive before this incident.
"LEIPOLD: If you look at what Mr. Klemesrud's response to this on the ex parte application to amend the restraining order, you will find out quite clearly, unequivocally because there is a notice of the burial of his father attached as Exhibit '3' and '4' -- Mr. Klemesrud on the date that says she saw him at or near closing time at a bar in Burbank, which so upset her that she began bleeding, was in Thompson, Iowa attending the funeral of his father. I happen to know that's a fact because I was his attorney back then too and I talked to him several times in Thompson, Iowa. He was quite clearly there. Second of all, Mr. Klemesrud works a job from 3:00 in the afternoon 'til approximately 2 in the morning. She says she saw him outside of her house on November 16. Mr. Klemesrud was at work that day and could not have been outside of her house and denies ever being outside of her house.
"COURT: Did Mr. Klemesrud post some stuff on the Internet?
"LEIPOLD: This is an ongoing controversy concerning a federal case that is filed in Denver. Another case that's filed in the Eastern District of Virginia. Another case that's filed in Holland. This is a huge international controversy of which this is a tiny, tiny part. This involves the rights of access providers to the Internet, etc.
"COURT: Wait a minute. If he's posting stuff on the Internet after this incident in January, it looks to me like it's harassment.
"LEIPOLD: But that's not harassment Your Honor. That is a prior restraint of First Amendment rights. He's simply putting out his version of events. He has not put out her name, he has not put out her address. He has simply put out his version of events and I can incidentally state that the plaintiff gave a declaration.
"COURT: Alright. I'll tell you what I'll do. I'll tell you each of them that they should not alarm, annoy, or harass on another. Each is restrained. I'll tell each of them to not threaten, strike or contact the other one. I'll tell each of them not to put one another under surveillance."
Snorri Helgarsson (aka Newkid) posted a summary of a February 15th, 1996 conversation with Jennifer. Snorri was set up by Jennifer last year, losing his job at the U.S. Embassy in The Netherlands following a flawed scheme in which he pretended to have secrets he wished to sell to the cult.
"I spoke with Jennifer who informed me that the FBI/CIA has been in contact with her since late January and that an investigation is being conducted against me. The theory which seems to be pursued is that I received a large amount of money from the Co$ on the evening of my suspension. The story is that in spite of attempting to set them up, somehow I rendered service. More specifically the tale is that Frank Marshall asked about my address.
"Jennifer seems convinced that Marshall and myself made a deal, either to share the funds, which were send over from L.A., to pay for the documents I would have had, or some other deal was struck between me and the Co$.
"Jennifer told me that, last week, she went to Switzerland together with the investigating team to check for a hidden bank account on which, I deposited the money I supposedly received from the Co$. Jennifer told me that even if no evidence can be found, evidence may be constructed. My only option would be to cease all activities on the Net and sell that what I still have leave my wife and run.
"There is one problem Jennifer can indeed cause some potentially serious problem's for me, there is a tape with which she has been blackmailing me. This tape has no bearing on anything which took place in my attempt to frame the Co$. It contains illusionary information relevant to certain persons in the Embassy and the activities they were engaged in."
AOL Folder Dies
News was posted this week that one of the cult's folders on America Online has met it's end.
"After languishing for about 3 weeks, the 'Scientology Community Outreach' folder has been pulled. With a paltry 14 posts within it, mostly from critics, the $cienos must have come to the conclusion that this folder wasn't the great PR vehicle they thought it would be."
Chris Owen, who previously posted the Anderson Report, which led to the cult being banned in parts of Australia in 1965, this week posted materials documenting Hubbard's response to the report.
"[I]n issue 31 of 'The Auditor', LRH made the following statement:
"Principals of the Victorian government such as the 'Prime Minister', Anderson the 'Q.C.' and hostile members of the 'Victoria Parliament' are continued [sic] as suppressive persons and they and their families and connections may not be processed or trained and are fair game."
Also posted, this wire from Hubbard to Premier Bolte in Melbourne.
"REGARDING THE SCIENTOLOGY MATTER OUR SOLICITORS HAVE NOT TOLD YOU OR CABINET THAT ACTIONS ARE AT THIS MOMENT IN PROGRESS AGAINST ANDERSON FOR FAULTY JURISPRUDENCE COLLUSION CONDONING PERJURY AND OTHER MATTERS. YOU ARE NOT COVERED BY ANY PRIVILEGE OF ANY KIND OUTSIDE VICTORIA. IF THE STATE OF VICTORIA DOES NOT REPRIMAND ANDERSON IT BECOMES PARTY TO SCANDALOUS PROCEEDINGS AND WILL BE SUED 10,000,000 STERLING WHICH IT IS CERTAIN WE WILL COLLECT. ONLY A FAIR TRIAL IS COVERED IN THE DEFAMATORY ACT. IF YOU REPRIMAND AND DISOWN ANDERSON YOU WILL SAVE VICTORIA 10,000,000. HE WILL BE DISCREDITED FULLY IN PROCEEDINGS NOW BEGINNING AND LEGISLATION BASED ON THE QUICKSAND OF A SCANDALOUS PROCEEDING IS SUBJECT TO DAMAGES THE MOMENT IT CAUSES DAMAGE OUTSIDE ITS AREA WHICH IT HAS ALREADY DONE."
Also this wire to Australian legislators.
"IN THE SCIENTOLOGY MATTER YOU HAVE NOT BEEN INFORMED BY YOUR GOVERNMENT THAT THE STATE OF VICTORIA IS BEING SUED OVERSEAS 10,000,000 STERLING FOR LIBEL AND SLANDER RELEASED BY IT IN OTHER COUNTRIES. THEY WELL KNOW THAT PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE DOES NOT COVER THE CRIMINAL ACTIONS CONDONED BY THE GOVERNMENT IN THE CONDUCT OF THE INQUIRY SUCH AS COLLUSION INTIMIDATION AND PERJURY A DIRECT PARALLEL TO THE PROFUMO CASE. WHILE LEAVING YOU IN THE DARK AS TO YOUR PERSONAL POLITICAL LIABILITY WHEN ALL THIS COMES OUT THEY ARE YET ASKING YOU FOR YOUR PERSONAL COOPERATION IN GETTING A BILL PASSED. EVEN IF YOUR GOVERNMENT WILL NOT TELL YOU THIS YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW THAT THE PASSAGE OF A BILL WILL INCREASE DAMAGES AND MAKE YOU PARTY TO THESE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS. THE WHOLE MATTER IS NOW OUT OF THEIR HANDS AND OUT OF CONTROL AND ALL PAPERS AND PROOFS SUPPORTING THE SCIENTOLOGISTS ARE NO LONGER IN YOUR JURISDICTION BUT ARE BEING PRESENTED AGAINST YOUR GOVERNMENT IN THE COURTS OF SEVERAL COUNTRIES INCLUDING ENGLAND WITH EVERY INDICATION OF SUCCESSFUL LITIGATION. YOU TOO HAVE BEEN BETRAYED IN THIS MATTER."
An amusing post from Andrew McPherson this week illustrating the depth of Hubbard's knowledge of anatomy.
"From Professional Auditor's Bulletin #111, May 1, 1957, EYESIGHT AND GLASSES:
"It is interesting to know that a thetan doesn't look through his eyeballs. He has two little gold discs, one in front of each eye lens. These are not the lenses of the eyes, but, as you might say, mocked-up energy. They are little gold discs that are superimposed over the eye and he looks through these. The eyeballs merely serve to locate these discs.
"An eyeball isn't even a good camera. Some people, dissecting eyeballs to find out how people looked with them, have been totally baffled since the first time this was done because it is about the worst camera that anybody ever had anything to do with.
"What the ophthalmologist doesn't know is that the individual looks through these little discs - the ones in front of each eye - and when things begin to deteriorate, or when the anchor points of the body deteriorate, they are liable to follow suit. They become distorted one way or another.'"