Down the Rabbit Hole With Gerry Armstrong

  • Thread starter Deleted member 198
  • Start date

Karen#1

Well-known member

pineapple

仮面の男
If it weren't for Gerry Armstrong we wouldn't know about the Affirmations, right? For me, that was the thing that revealed Hubbard for what he really was. They were the single most important thing in forming my present view of scn. If I hadn't seen those, I might see scn in a somewhat different light.

I read the article and I understand that Gerry could and maybe should have done differently. But I can't really see him as a bad guy. A bit of a nutter, yes. But I'm not ready to condemn him, which it seems is what the article wants me to do. No, sorry.
 
Last edited:

Karen#1

Well-known member
When I came out of the cult, I had no animosity to Gerry whatsoever. Heck, we were fellow Apollo crew, we crossed the Atlantic together, we experienced the Apollo being stoned at Funchal (Maderia) We lived through life with Hubbard. Normally, there is a natural bond with those that lived through the Apollo years.

But Gerry targetted me right away for being friends with Marty and Mike. The war was on OCMB and then got exported to ESMB but Emma shut him down.
Gerry and Caroline called me an ENABLER AND COLLABORATOR (Of Mike Rinder) and set out to attack me for 9 years straight.
Gerry has fueled his #1 fan and sycophant ALANZO to further attack me.

Nobody gets off the hook for present time harm because they did one good deed.
I am very glad this Essay was written
 
Last edited:

J. Swift

Active member
No one can ever take away from Gerry the fact that he put the Affirmations into the court record and showed the world the evil of L. Ron Hubbard. Conversely, no one can deny that Gerry took an $800,000 payday from Scientology. Had Gerry stopped there and abided by the contract he signed, his legacy would have been established.

Instead, he breached a legally enforceable contract and the Cult took him to court and won. Gerry lost in Appeals Court; the California Supreme Court rejected his petition to be heard. Gerry's legal case came to a dead end. Gerry fled the US rather than serve 28 days for contempt of court. Since he breached his contract with Scientology, Gerry has always been free to speak, write, and travel as he pleases. His only restriction is that he cannot enter the US because he is a fugitive with an arrest warrant.

No one can undo Gerry's fugitive warrant as it is a matter between Gerald Armstrong and the State of California. Further, the only party that can release Gerry from the contract he signed is the Church of Scientology International and that will never happen. Ken Moxon just renewed CSI's judgment against Gerry for another ten years. With interest, Gerry now owes CSI ~$950,000.

Gerry tied his own hands. He can't file any legal actions in the US because the Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine prevents him from doing so. Fugitives cannot evade the law and also seek to use the law to their benefit.

When Mike, Marty and the others came out in 2008, Gerry began a series of attacks that have never ended. Gerry demands justice for himself when he, in fact, got $800,000 in justice. Gerry has attacked too many good people for three decades now because we don't agree with him or his arguments. Gerry has been at war with good people for a long time and uses his blog to continue his personal attacks, slanders, and lies. Gerry is running a classic program on those he deems to be enemies.

Gerry has protested for decades that he was illegally recorded by OSA operatives in Griffith Park. And yet when Corey Andrews illegally recorded Karen, Gerry quickly posted the illegal recording on his blog. This makes Gerry a staggering hypocrite and fraud in my book. He screams about injustices done to him while he is a scofflaw; a fugitive from justice; and has now acted in concert with others as an accessory to a crime, to wit:

California's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of all parties to the conversation. See Cal. Penal Code § 632. The statute applies to "confidential communications" -- i.e., conversations in which one of the parties has an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation. See Flanagan v. Flanagan, 41 P.3d 575, 576-77, 578-82 (Cal. 2002). A California appellate court has ruled that this statute applies to the use of hidden video cameras to record conversations as well. See California v. Gibbons, 215 Cal. App. 3d 1204 (Cal Ct. App. 1989)... In addition to subjecting you to criminal prosecution, violating the California wiretapping law can expose you to a civil lawsuit for damages by an injured party. See Cal. Penal Code § 637.2.
 
Last edited:

JustSheila

Well-known member
When I came out of the cult, I had no animosity to Gerry whatsoever. Heck, we were fellow Apollo crew, we crossed the Atlantic together, we experienced the Apollo being stoned at Funchal (Maderia) We lived through life with Hubbard.

But Gerry targetted me right away for being friends with Marty and Mike. The war was on OCMB and then got exported to ESMB but Emma shut him down.
Gerry and Caroline called me an ENABLER AND COLLABORATOR (Of Mike Rinder) and set out to attack me for 9 years straight.
Gerry has fueled his #1 fan and sycophant ALANZO to further attack me.

Nobody gets off the hook for present time harm because they did one good deed.
I am very glad this Essay was written
I completely understand. I'm sick to bits of exes attacking exes for exposing Scientology. It's disgusting.

You have been an absolute pillar of support to those leaving the cult. I had no idea that Gerry had received such a large amount of money for his silence. :omg: The Caroline identity made it sound small.

Though I appreciate all the documents Gerry and Caroline have provided, their war against other ex-Scns is ridiculous and needs to end. It's vicious, malevolent and wrong-target. It is the cult of Scientology that forwards illegal activity and human rights abuses. Gerry's cruelty to you and Mike Rinder needs to end.
 

Karakorum

Broke ranks over 10 years ago, never looked back
When I came out of the cult, I had no animosity to Gerry whatsoever. Heck, we were fellow Apollo crew, we crossed the Atlantic together, we experienced the Apollo being stoned at Funchal (Maderia) We lived through life with Hubbard.

But Gerry targetted me right away for being friends with Marty and Mike. The war was on OCMB and then got exported to ESMB but Emma shut him down.
Gerry and Caroline called me an ENABLER AND COLLABORATOR (Of Mike Rinder) and set out to attack me for 9 years straight.

<snip>
Yeah I fully agree with you on the last part. This has gone way too far and of all people in the ex-scn community, you are the last person that deserves to be treated in this way.

NOTE: as you all might know, my feelings towards Mike and Marty are rather frosty to say the least. I don't think anyone who remembers my posts from ESMB can accuse me of making this post just because I'm a "collaborator/enabler/friend/supporter" of either Mike or Marty. I don't trust either.

But I stand again at what I said: Karen is not (and according to my limited knowledge of the recent ex-scn past) never was a part of the problem. Gerry is out of line here.





Having said all of that, I want to give the devil his due and I want to say that the article is not being fully coherent or objective. What I don't like about it is that it first says that 800,000 $ is "blood money" and that Gerry is bad for making that agreement. But then it goes on to say that Gerry is bad for braking said agreement. To me holding both of these views does not make sense.

Myself, I'm glad that Gerry got that 800,000 and not CoS. I'm sad to hear CoS got some of that cash back and has chances to get more. Even if Gerry would have spent 50% of that on hookers and flushed the other 50% down the john, it would still have been MUCH better than letting the CoS have even one lousy buck back.

Any action that causes CoS to lose money or leads to it revealing some of its ethics documents is GOOD. Regardless if that action is legal in some jurisdiction or not. I will support any action by any person that would lead to the CoS losing money and/or control over ethics documents.

That's my version of fair game on them. I'm just sad that I can't do more to make it happen.
 
Last edited:

ILove2Lurk

Lisbeth Salander
I ran across this thread because Tony Ortega mentioned
something on his site today. And I'm the curious type, so
I ended up here.

Caveat: I don't have a dog in this particular fight controversy.

I understand why some stand in the open, take the arrows
and battle. There need to be warriors.

I understand why some would decide to take the money and
remain on the down-low. Most recently Marty, Debbie; before
them Mayo and (possibly) Pat Broeker. And so many, many more,
especially from the early-to-mid 80's era, which I'm aware of from
extensive reading but not personal knowledge.

My Stable Datum:
It never seems to end well in and around Scientology. Never
a clear right or wrong. Everything is pretty muddy and messy.

Life is not fair. Scientology is less fair.

An endless war, not the utopia we were promised.

ias-event2.jpg

:evillaugh:
 
Last edited:

Karakorum

Broke ranks over 10 years ago, never looked back

Harold#1

A VERY STABLE SUPER GENIUS!!
I'm kind of baffled that for years I've not been able to come to a conclusion either way on this topic.

(Stafani's article that she linked to in the op was gone when I made this post.)

Tony Ortega wrote:

"We feel compelled to speak up after a ludicrous attack on Gerry Armstrong appeared online yesterday. It’s not worth reading if you haven’t already discovered it. Its chief infraction is that it tries to reduce Gerry’s extremely complicated legal saga to a simplistic and misguided charge that Gerry deserved being nearly destroyed by Scientology because he agreed to take some money in the Michael Flynn super-settlement of several different lawsuits in 1986."

continues: Riffer madness: Scientology in a tizzy days before next week’s hearing in Masterson suit | The Underground Bunker
 

Paul Adams

(Dulloldfart on ESMB)
@StefaniAnn I read and appreciated your article: it gave me information I didn't know. Tony Ortega didn't like it. It's not on your blog any more. Have you removed it for ever? Are you going to replace it with another one, more nuanced (i.e., less harsh) or something?
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation.
@StefaniAnn I read and appreciated your article: it gave me information I didn't know. Tony Ortega didn't like it. It's not on your blog any more. Have you removed it for ever? Are you going to replace it with another one, more nuanced (i.e., less harsh) or something?

It isn't available in the OP of this thread any longer either and yet there is no sign that the post was edited. It was there originally, I definitely didn't have to go to StefaniAnns blog to read it.

Very odd.

:confused:
 

Paul Adams

(Dulloldfart on ESMB)
It isn't available in the OP of this thread any longer either and yet there is no sign that the post was edited. It was there originally, I definitely didn't have to go to StefaniAnns blog to read it.

Very odd.

:confused:
Are you sure? I never saw it inline here. I clicked the link to her blog and read it there.
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation.
Are you sure? I never saw it inline here. I clicked the link to her blog and read it there.
I was quite certain but I just went and checked my history for yesterday to be absolutely sure and (ahem) I must have clicked the link too and it took me to her blog.

How embarrassment!

Sorry.
 

JustSheila

Well-known member
Tony Ortega wrote:


"We are reminding readers of this today even though in recent years we have come under pretty steady attack from Gerry’s pen. He seems to have little regard for this website or for our work in general. It’s disappointing to us that he has taken this line, but whatever our feelings about it, we think it’s wrong in the extreme for anyone to mischaracterize the incredible journey of sacrifice that Gerry has been through at the hands of Scientology. When we see his ordeal being minimized and ridiculed, we feel a responsibility to say something.

— The Proprietor"




That's fair to Gerry. What would be especially nice is if Gerry followed the same peaceful line and stops his vicious, hateful attacks of Karen, Tony and Mike Rinder. Enough is enough.

Personally, I've had enough of exes and even those who once worked to raise awareness of Scientology abuses now attacking exes or attacking Tony or Karen or any other ex, anon or Bunkerite who came forward to expose the abuses of the cult of Scientology and I want it to stop. None of us had an easy time in the Cult of Scientology AFAIK, or we wouldn't have left. We were all victims of human rights and other abuses.

Tony posting his article and StefaniAnn pulling her write-up shows they both prefer peace and cooperation between everyone. Stefani is a talented writer and can and has written some thought-provoking, insightful articles before this. Hopefully we'll all see more of those sorts of articles in the future, but it seems her entire blog is gone.
 
Last edited:

JustSheila

Well-known member
Her blog is still there @Sheila ... but you need to hit the top right menu button to navigate it.

Here is a link to another very recent article which also mentions Armstrong (amongst others).

Link.
Thanks, ITYIWT.

Ouch. That's not a good write-up, either. :no: I hope she pulls that one, too.

Though it's her/his right to point out all the abuse the three of them spew. Actually, there's about six of them now. One of that hate groups' newer members is a (former?) heroin addict who has been stalking me for over eight years and used to have over 2000 exes on his FB blog. He still stalks me on the Internet, and we never even met. I've also been harassed relentlessly on the Internet, and I haven't even protested openly in years. One of them (probably my stalker) is the one that took my writeups from the original ESMB and other places and pretended to me, posing as "CharleneHux" on Tony Ortega's blog and twisting and perverting my stories while stating she/he was me.

I am not CharleneHux. CharleneHux is a copycat version in a carnival mirror.

So I can understand StefaniAnn losing his/her temper over this and I empathize. Still, I hope she pulls the other writeup on Gerry. It's just pulling her down to their level and I'm sure StefaniAnn has better things to do.
 

Type4_PTS

Well-known member
If it weren't for Gerry Armstrong we wouldn't know about the Affirmations, right? For me, that was the thing that revealed Hubbard for what he really was. They were the single most important thing in forming my present view of scn. If I hadn't seen those, I might see scn in a somewhat different light.

I read the article and I understand that Gerry could and maybe should have done differently. But I can't really see him as a bad guy. A bit of a nutter, yes. But I'm not ready to condemn him, which it seems is what the article wants me to do. No, sorry.
In my book, Gerry's actions in making the Affirmations public was one of the most important acts of a Scientology whistleblower ever. And for that I feel immense gratitude towards him for that. Understanding Hubbard in a way in which the Affirmations allow one to do is huge in breaking the spell put on Scientologists.

That said, Gerry is not beyond criticism. Just like the rest of us, he's a flawed human being. He's been very critical of many of us in the critic community. And while he certainly has the right to express his opinion, others have the same right to respond.
 

Karakorum

Broke ranks over 10 years ago, never looked back
In my book, Gerry's actions in making the Affirmations public was one of the most important acts of a Scientology whistleblower ever. And for that I feel immense gratitude towards him for that. Understanding Hubbard in a way in which the Affirmations allow one to do is huge in breaking the spell put on Scientologists.

That said, Gerry is not beyond criticism. Just like the rest of us, he's a flawed human being. He's been very critical of many of us in the critic community. And while he certainly has the right to express his opinion, others have the same right to respond.
I strongly agree with all you wrote and this sums up my opinion on the matter. As usual, you are far better with words than I am :)
 
Top