Making Light of Black PR, Part 6,
Armstrong Declarations re Miscavige Lies.
[6 March 2000]

Executed at San Anselmo, California, on February 20, 1994.

From: Gerry Armstrong <>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Making Light of Black PR, Part 6, Armstrong Declarations re Miscavige Lies.
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 08:15:36 GMT
Message-ID: <>

Making Light of Black PR, Part 6,
Armstrong Declarations re Miscavige Lies.


I, Gerald Armstrong, declare:

1. I am over 18 years of age and a resident of the State of
California. I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth
herein and if called upon to testify thereto I competently would.

2. I am making this declaration in response to certain statements,
principally those concerning me, made by David Miscavige in his
declaration executed February 8, 1994, and filed in the case of
Scientology v. Fishman & Geertz, United States District Court for
the Central District of California, Case No. CV 91-6425 HLH(Tx).

3. Mr. Miscavige states that I am a proven liar because he has
found a discrepancy between a finding of Judge Paul G. Breckenridge
Jr. in his decision rendered June 20, 1984 in the case of Scientology
v. Armstrong, Los Angeles Superior Court No. C 420153 (Armstrong I),
and a statement allegedly made by me and secretly recorded by Mr.
Miscavige's covert intelligence operatives in the fall of 1984.
(Miscavige dec. p. 31, l. 22 - p. 32, l. 5). Mr. Miscavige is employing
one of Scientology's confusion techniques the organization's founder
L. Ron Hubbard dubbed "dropped out time." Mr. Miscavige's
incidents, which he has linked for purposes of confusion, are years

4. In this civilization fear is generally accepted to be an emotion
or state of mind which can either be present or not present, or
perhaps present in degrees. It is fairly well accepted that a not
abnormal person can be afraid one day, when, for example there
are a couple of unidentified men at four a.m. outside the person's
bedroom window where no men ought to be at four a.m., and not
afraid on another day, when the person is, for example, watching
the Dodgers beat the Giants. That the person claimed to be afraid
at four a.m. Sunday and not afraid at the Wednesday ballgame does
not make that person a proven liar. In my case there were more
than two years between one time when I was afraid and the next
occasion when Mr. Miscavige says I said I was not afraid.

5. In his decision, a true and correct copy of which is appended
hereto as Exhibit A, Judge Breckenridge states:
"From his extensive knowledge of the covert and intelligence
operations carried out by the Church of Scientology of California
against its enemies (suppressive persons), Defendant Armstrong
became terrified and feared that his life and the life of his wife
were in danger, and he also feared he would be the target of
costly and harassing lawsuits."

.... "It was thereafter, in the summer of 1982, that Defendant
Armstrong asked Mr. Garrison for copies of documents to use in his
defense and sent the documents to his attorneys, Michael Flynn and
Contos & Bunch.

After the within suit was filed on August 2, 1982, Defendant
Armstrong was the subject of harassment, including being followed
and surveilled by individuals who admitted employment by [Scien-
tology]; being assaulted by one of these individuals; being struck
bodily by a car driven by one of these individuals; having two
attempts made by said individuals apparently to involve Defendant
Armstrong in a freeway automobile accident; having said individuals
come onto Defendant Armstrong's property, spy in his windows,
create disturbances, and upset his neighbors." (Ex. A. Appendix
p. 14, l. 6 - p. 15, l. 3)

6. It is clear that Judge Breckenridge in his statements about my fear
of organization legal and extra-legal attacks is referring to my state
of mind in the period between the organization's publication of its
"Suppressive Person Declares" on me in early 1982 and
its filing of Armstrong I in August, 1982. This fear was not
irrational or unfounded as the organization itself proved when it
harassed my wife and me as Judge Breckenridge found, and did file
harassing and costly lawsuits against me. All of these harassing and
criminal acts were carried out during Mr. Miscavige's control of such
activities, which he claims to have wrested from the Guardian's
Office, which, itself, just as he himself, according to Mr. Miscavige,
"used unscrupulous means to deal with people they perceived
as enemies of the Church." (Miscavige dec. p. 17, l. 17).

7. Mr. Miscavige's new Guardian's Office, the Office of Special Affairs,
did not end its criminal and abusive tactics with the incidents listed
by Judge Breckenridge, but has added ten more years of "fair game"
attacks since the 1984 decision, including, but not limited to:

a. attempted framing by entrapment and illegal videotaping;

b. filing false criminal charges with the Los Angeles District

c. filing false criminal charges with the Boston office of the FBI;

d. filing false declarations;

e. bringing contempt of court proceedings on three occasions based
on false charges;

f. making false accusations in internationally published media of
crimes, including crimes against humanity;

g. culling and disseminating information from my supposedly
confidential auditing (psychotherapy) files;

h. relentlessly attacking my attorney, Michael Flynn of Boston, Mass-
achusetts with some 15 lawsuits, baseless bar complaints, theft of
office documents, infiltration of his law practice, framing him with
the forgery of a $2,000,000 check, an international black PR campaign,
threats to him and his family, and, according to him, attempted
assassination; all for the purpose of driving him out of the
organization-related litigation in order to leave his clients
undefended against the organization's attacks;

i. fraudulently promising to discontinue "fair game"
against me if I settled my cross-complaint against the organization,
knowing full well that it would continue to attack me in the courts
and the marketplace of ideas once I signed its settlement contract,
which I did in December, 1986, and once it had contracted with Mr.
Flynn to not defend me in future litigation;

j. following the settlement, publishing a false and unfavorable
description of me in a "dead agent" pack relating to
writer and anti-Scientology litigant Bent Corydon;

k. filing several affidavits in the case of Church of Scientology of
California v. Russell Miller and Penguin Books Limited, case no. 6140
in the High Court of Justice in London England which falsely accused
me of violations of court orders, and falsely labeled me "an admitted
agent provocateur of the U.S. Federal Government";

l. delivering copies of an edited version of an illegally obtained 1984
videotape of me to the international media;

m. threatening me with lawsuits on six occasions if I did not abet its
obstruction of justice in the Miller case, in the case of Bent Corydon v.
Scientology, Los Angeles Superior Court No. C 694401, wherein Corydon
had subpoenaed me as a witness, and in the case of Scientology v.
Yanny, Los Angeles Superior Court No. C 690211;

n. threatening to release my confidences, which it had stolen from a
friend, and which had been specifically sealed by Judge Breckenridge
in Armstrong I if I did not assist it in preventing Corydon from
gaining access to the Armstrong I court file;

o. on February 4, 1992, filing a lawsuit, Scientology v. Gerald Armstrong,
Marin Superior Court Case No. 152229 ("Armstrong II"), transferred
to Los Angeles Superior Court and given Case No. BC 052395, alleging
contract breaches, which it itself precipitated, for the purposes of, inter
alia, obstructing justice, suppressing evidence, assassinating my
reputation, retaliation and intimidation;

p. on July 8, 1993, filing a lawsuit Scientology v. Gerald Armstrong &
The Gerald Armstrong Corporation, Los Angeles Superior Court Case
No. BC 084642 ("Armstrong III") for the same purposes as
in o. above;

q. on July 23, 1993, filing a lawsuit, Scientology v. Gerald Armstrong,
Michael Walton & The Gerald Armstrong Corporation, Marin Superior
Court Case No. 157680 ("Armstrong IV") for the same
purposes as in o. above;

r. twice more bringing contempt of court charges against me based
on false sworn statements.

8. The videotapes from which Mr. Miscavige claims to quote were
made in November, 1984. In order to provide a context for how I
came to be involved with his operatives who set up the videotaping
and to clarify the words of both the operatives and myself which were
recorded, and a few of which Mr. Miscavige claims to quote, I am
appending hereto as Exhibit B a copy of a declaration/screenplay
outline I have just completed and called "Find a Better Basket."

9. When I state on the 1984 videotape that I am not afraid, I am
answering one of the operatives' questions or challenges which he
has been drilled to state. In responding the way I did I am honestly
communicating one of the changes I had perceived in my psyche
over the almost three years since I left the organization. Because
the organization teaches its members to put their faith in what cannot
protect them; e.g., data, wins, attacks, hatred, disconnection,
leverage, lawsuits, private investigators, fair game, L. Ron Hubbard
or David Miscavige; it leaves them with a seemingly irreducible fear.
Those who put their faith in God, Wherein lies perfect protection,
give up their fear. There will still be times when fear will arise,
but the reestablishing of faith in God will every time cause that fear
to disappear into the nothing it is. I was beginning to learn that
wisdom by the time of the 1984 videotaping. In fact it was that
learning which seemed to move me to associate with the operatives
who only sought my destruction. I have stated many times that I have
an undeniable concern that before it comes to its senses or saner minds
prevail in the organization its power structure headed by Mr.
Miscavige will have me assassinated or do something else diabolical
and dangerous, and this has produced in me an awareness of threat
and is a fact of my present psychological condition. The power
structure is quite capable of violent and criminal acts, or of purchasing
such acts. The power structure is armed, and its head PI Eugene M.
Ingram has threatened to kill me. The power structure makes a
religion of terrifying countless vulnerable and innocent people who
do not have my certainty and do not have my skills to fight the
organization's tyranny. For these reasons I oppose its tyranny and
its suppressive doctrines and practices. Mr. Miscavige should not be
pointing out imagined inconsistencies in whether one of his victims
in one year or another was afraid or not of his vicious organization,
but should be eliminating all of its viciousness so that no one ever
again is made afraid by it.

10. Mr. Miscavige calls the videotaping of me "a police-sanctioned
investigation." (Miscavige Dec. p. 31, l. 28) This is a lie Mr. Miscavige
must tell as if his life depends on it. I provided the truth in "Find a
Better Basket."

"Organization lawyers, Earle Cooley and John Peterson, claimed
(during the 1985 trial of Julie Christofferson v. Scientology, Circuit
Court of the State of Oregon, Multnomah County, No. A7704-05184,
that) the Armstrong operation had been authorized by the Los Angeles
Police Department, and they produced a letter dated November 7,
1984, ..... signed by an officer Phillip Rodriguez, directing organization
private investigator Eugene M. Ingram to electronically eavesdrop on
me and Michael Flynn.

On April 23, 1985, Los Angeles Police Chief Daryl F. Gates issued
a public statement, ..... denying that the Rodriguez letter was a
correspondence from the Los Angeles Police Department, denying
that the Los Angeles Police Department had cooperated with Ingram,
and stating emphatically that all purported authorizations directed to
Ingram by any member of the Los Angeles Police Department are
invalid and unauthorized. On information and belief, the officer,
Phillip Rodriguez, who signed Ingram's letter was paid $10,000.00
for his signature. Also on information and belief, following a Los
Angeles Police Department Internal Affairs Division investigation
and a Police Department Board of Rights, Officer Rodriguez was
suspended from the Los Angeles Police Force." ("Better Basket,"
p. 13, paras. 22 and 23) A copy of Officer Rodriguez's "authorization"
is appended hereto as Exhibit C, and a copy of Chief Gates' public
announcement is appended hereto as Exhibit D.

11. Mr. Miscavige claims that his illegal videotapes of me capture me
acknowledging my real motives, to overthrow his organization's
leadership and gain control of it. (Miscavige Dec. p. 32, l.1 - l.3) This
is absurd. His own people, operated by him, came to me with their
idea, approved by him, as outlined in "Better Basket," of wresting
control of the organization from what they called the "criminals"
running it. I have never had a desire control the Scientology organization
or Scientology, although I recognize that its leaders should be restrained
from further abuse of anyone. My real motive in my day-to-day
relationship with its leaders is to get it out of the litigation business
and get it to cease its assault on the justice system, its abuse of
innocence and its threatening of me, my friends and people of good
will everywhere. I know David Miscavige personally. I know him to
be a bully, a liar and a perfect replacement for L. Ron Hubbard at the
controls of his empire. I also know that God is in him as He is in
everyone else and that bullying and lying are just mad and useless
efforts to fight that fact.

12. Mr. Miscavige states that I advise one of his covert operatives to
accuse the organization of various criminal acts and when I am told
that no evidence exists to support those charges I respond to "just
allege it." (Miscavige Dec. p. 32, l. 5 - l. 8) "Better Basket"
describes something of the context in which I make a statement
differentiating between "allegations" and "proof." The
operative I'm talking to is Mike Rinder. Before this meeting I had
already, on request of the "Loyalists," provided them with a
"bare bones" draft of a complaint. Complaints contain allegations.
Complaints do not contain proof. Rinder, who had been represented to
me as the Loyalists' "best legal mind" couldn't seem to get the
distinction between allegations and proof in the complaint, and I was
frustrated in our conversation because he seemed so dense. Now, of
course, his denseness is fully understandable. He had to appear
stupid and had to deny that there was any "proof" of the sort of
allegations that would be made in a complaint because he knew he
was being recorded on a videotape which was going to be used to
attack, and if possible destroy me. Even what the organization has
done to me alone (see, e.g., crimes listed by Judge Breckenridge and
the list in paragraph 7 above) is enough for actual true-hearted
reformers to bring a lawsuit to take control of the organization from
the criminals now in charge.

13. During Mr. Miscavige's videotape operation a briefcase
containing a book of my original drawings and writings and other
documents was stolen from the trunk of my car. My attorney made
a demand on the organization for the return of these materials. The
organization denied having them. I have recently been advised by
Vicki Aznaran, a former organization executive who carried out
operations against individuals on Mr. Miscavige's orders, that he
told her at the time of their theft that he had them and he described
them to her. Knowing that this declaration will be seen by Mr.
Miscavige, I herewith renew my demand to him for the return of
my materials to me.

14. I will also take the opportunity to advise this Court that Mr.
Miscavige's organization considers that it has me under a contract
whereby it may sue me for filing this declaration, not because it is
untrue or libelous, but because that is what the organization insists
its contract permits. This contract was obtained by Mr. Miscavige
as the result of his organization's years of attack on my attorney
Michael Flynn, as stated in paragraph 7 subparagraph h. above. In
order to get the organization to cease its fair game against Mr. Flynn
I had to sign its contract, which, according to Mr. Miscavige, allows
him and his agents to say whatever they want about me in any court
proceeding or in the media and I may not respond. If I do respond
I become subject to a $50,000.00 liquidated damages provision for
every utterance, and the target in another Miscavige-ordered costly
and harassing lawsuit. The three lawsuits, Armstrong II, III and IV
described in paragraph 7, subparagraphs o, p and q, and the contempt
of court proceedings at subparagraph r, are all pursuant to this contract.
The contract is against public policy and illegal. Mr. Miscavige, more-
over, entered into a separate illegal contract with Mr. Flynn, which
prohibits Mr. Flynn from assisting me in any litigation against the
organization. If Mr. Flynn were to assist me he would again be subjected
to "fair game." Mr. Miscavige would be wise to rescind all these
illegal contracts and discontinue his abuse of the legal process and
totally eliminate from his organization the doctrine and practice of fair
game, and not merely deny its existence.

15. Mr. Miscavige claims to know a great deal about the IRS dropping
me as a witness because of his videotapes. In truth I was not dropped
as a witness at all, and my credibility, despite more than twelve years
of his organization's attacks on it, is intact. One of the conditions of the
1986 "settlement" with Mr. Miscavige's organization was that in
order for the organization to discontinue the "fair game" against
Mr. Flynn I had to sign a knowingly false affidavit, essentially stating
that Mr. Miscavige's new regime had discontinued the organization's
criminal activities. Mr. Flynn claimed that the organization had already
tried to murder him and he felt his life and his family were in danger.
I fully believed Mr. Flynn because I had myself been the target of fair
game for five years by then and had likewise been threatened with
murder. I, along with several other of Mr. Flynn's clients, therefore
signed these false affidavits which the organization had prepared.
The organization then filed the false affidavits in its IRS litigations.
Mr. Miscavige makes much of the IRS granting his organization tax
exempt status. Our government's turning its back on this organization's
thousands of victims and apparently ignoring its obnoxious, irreligious
and criminal core nature, however, does not make this victimization
and antisocial nature either right or religious.

16. Mr. Miscavige also claims that Scientology's philosophy and practice
of opportunistic hatred, called "fair game" by L. Ron Hubbard, its
originator, doesn't exist. It does.

I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of
California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed at San Anselmo, California, on February 22, 1994.




A Literary Work Created and Written

Copyright © 1994 Gerald Armstrong
All Rights Reserved

© 2000 Gerry Armstrong


I, Gerald Armstrong, declare:

1. I am making this declaration in response to allegations made by
Scientology organization leaders, attorneys and agents in court
proceedings and public media around the world concerning a 1984
organization intelligence operation targeting me, which has been called
the "Armstrong Operation." I am copyrighting this document prior
to its use in court because it will, in addition to putting the organization's
allegations into a proper context, form an outline for a screenplay I am
writing. It is my story.

2. After I left the organization at the end of 1981, the organization
intelligence bureau assigned Dan Sherman, a Los Angeles spy story
writer and intel operative, to get close to me and become my friend,
which he did. I had been the intelligence officer on board the "Apollo"
with the organization's founder and supreme leader L. Ron Hubbard,
had studied his intelligence policies and Guardian's Office[n.1]
intelligence materials, had an appreciation for that literary genre, and
I was myself a writer, so Sherman and I had a real basis for a real

[[n.1] The Guardian's Office ("GO"), headed from 1966 to
1981 by Mary Sue Hubbard, who reported to and was controlled by
L. Ron Hubbard, consisted of five bureaus: Intelligence, Public Relations,
Legal, Finance and Social Coordination (front groups). The GO was
responsible for hiding its money and its actual command lines,
defending the organization against attacks and for eliminating all
opposition to its progress. Hubbard patterned its intelligence
bureau, B-1, and the organization's total espionage mentality on the
work of Reinhard Gehlen, Hitler's spy master. On Hubbard's orders,
after the conviction of 11 top GO intelligence personnel, including
Mary Sue, for criminal activities against the US Government,
Scientology's second major arm of power, the Sea Organization, in a
1981 putsch took control of the GO's functions and subsequently
renamed the GO arm the Office of Special Affairs, "OSA."] .

3. Sherman told me he was no longer involved in Scientology, wanted
nothing to do with it, saw it as a personal waste of time, and also saw
that its leaders were ruthless and dangerous, and claimed to be afraid
of them finding out that he was friends with me. Sometime in 1982
or 1983 he told me that he was still in communication in a limited
way with some of his old friends still in the organization. He described
these friends as smart, reasonable and not fanatics. They were still
Scientologists and worked on staff, but felt that organization leaders
were criminals. Having no allegiance to these leaders, Sherman's friends
would occasionally tell him about conditions inside and their desire
to end the organization's criminal activities. They said the conditions
inside were oppressive and chaotic and they were at risk even talking
to him because sec checks [n.2] were rampant.

[[n.2] Sec checks are accusatory interrogations using Hubbard's
electropsychometer or E-Meter as a lie detector. Sec checks could be
brutal, could go on for many hours or days, could involve several
people asking questions, threatening and badgering, and could have
disastrous results for the interrogee.]

4. During the 1984 trial of the organization's case against me, Church
of Scientology of California and Mary Sue Hubbard v. Gerald Armstrong,
Los Angles Superior Court no. C 420153 ("Armstrong I"), Sherman
told me that one of these friends, whom he called "Joey," had told
him that there was an actual group inside the organization who were
dedicated to reforming it because management had become suppressive.
They called themselves the "Loyalists," claiming to be "loyal"
to the preservation of the ideals of Scientology, "what worked."
They also recognized that its leaders were criminal, crazy, dangerous,
and not dedicated to those ideals but were acting to destroy them.
The "Loyalists" wanted to take control in a well-planned, effective
and peaceful action before some tragedy happened. They claimed to
know of criminal activities and a key part of their plan was the
documenting of these activities.

5. Sherman said they were 35 in number, or at least there were 35
who knew they were "Loyalists," all smart, reasonable and not
fanatics. Some of them were his old friends from B-1. Such persons
tended to be smart, reasonable and often were not fanatics. The people
whom I knew to be, including Hubbard, the organization leaders,
prided themselves on their recognition of unreasonableness as a
virtue, and maintained an abiding fanaticism to justify their abuses
and keep their positions of power. Sherman was smart and gave every
appearance of being reasonable and unfanatical. He said the Loyalists
knew he was in communication with me and wanted to talk with me
but were afraid for their lives. This was not surprising to me because
I knew from my own experiences that the organization had a brutal
side and its leaders were dangerous, armed and desperate. Thus the
first communications with the Loyalists were a few messages relayed
by Sherman. They said that I had a proven record against the
organization, that my integrity had been unshakable and they wanted
my help.

6. A few days after the Armstrong I trial ended, Joey, who, I later
learned, was actually one David Kluge, made the first direct contact
with me, a phone call to my home in Costa Mesa, California. He said
the Loyalists knew I wanted my pc folders,[n.3] that my folders were
being moved on a certain day and that I could get them if I wanted.
I told Kluge that even though the folders were mine the organization
would claim, if it was discovered I had them, that I was accepting
stolen property, so I had to decline his offer. I was also already
booked, on the same day the Loyalists said they would get me my
pc folders, to fly to London to testify in a child custody case [n.4]
involving Scientology, and I told Kluge that I couldn't change my

[[n.3] Pc folders, also called preclear or auditing files or folders, contain
the record of processes run and questions asked by the auditor (psycho-
therapist), E-Meter reads, and answers given and statements made by
the preclear (or patient) during Scientology auditing (or psychotherapy)
sessions. It was well known that I had opposed and exposed the organ-
ization's misuse of information divulged by the organization's "preclears"
(what were essentially psychotherapist-patient confidences) in auditing.
I had been attempting to get the organization to deliver to me my pc
folders throughout the Armstrong I litigation, and the misuse of auditing
information was an issue in the Armstrong I trial. Judge Paul G.
Breckenridge, Jr. stated in his decision following the 30-day Armstrong
I trial: "[Mary Sue Hubbard] was the head of the Guardian
Office for years and among other things, authored the infamous order
'GO 121669' which directed culling of supposedly confidential
P.C. files/folders for the purposes of internal security." "The practice
of culling supposedly confidential 'P.C. folders or files' to obtain
information for purposes of intimidation and/or harassment is
repugnant and outrageous. The Guardian's Office, which plaintiff
[Mary Sue Hubbard] headed, was no respector of anyone's civil rights,
particularly that of privacy." ]

[[n.4] This Royal Courts of Justice case, known as Re: B and G
resulted in a Judgment on July 23, 1984 issued by Justice Latey in
favor of the non-Scientologist parent. The Judgment, which was upheld
on appeal, contained a scathing condemnation of organization policies
and practices.]

7. When I returned from the UK, where, incidentally, I had been
harassed by a pack of English private investigators working for the
organization, Kluge reestablished contact, and I communicated with
him or Sherman several times over the next few months. I was
happy to be in communication with them, because I'm happy to be
in communication with anyone, and my relationship with the Loyalists,
who were admitted Scientologists, seemed a spark of hope in the
seemingly hopeless and threatening Scientology situation.

8. I have believed and stated that when Scientologists have the freedom
to communicate to the people their leaders label "enemies,"
Scientology will cease to have enemies. The organization's leaders
prohibit their minions from communicating with me, thus I am their
enemy. This prohibition is enforced with severe "ethics" punishment,
which could easily include "declaring" the person who dared
to communicate with me a "suppressive" person, thus making him
the target of the organization's philosophy and practice of
opportunistic hatred Hubbard called "fair game."

9. I had lost my law office job because of the Armstrong I trial, which
really ran from April into June, 1984, and I did not get another job for
some months, so had considerable time on my hands in the fall of 1984
to meet with Sherman and the Loyalists and do some of the things they
wanted. I had begun to draw and write seriously during this period,
and some of my writings concerned the Scientology battle and the
Loyalists. My situation with the organization and the Loyalists was
bizarre and psychologically traumatic, and this is reflected in my
writings of the period. Thanks to, I believe, my growing faith in God,
I was given the gift of a healthy sense of humor and that too is a facet
of my communications and writings during the period.

10. In late July, 1984 the organization fed to the media the story, and
filed papers in various court cases, including Armstrong I, charging,
that Michael Flynn, who had fought the organization's fair game tactics
for five years, who had been my friend and attorney for two years and
had just successfully defended me in the Armstrong I trial, was behind
a plot to cash a forged check for $2,000,000.00 on one of Hubbard's
accounts at the Bank of New England. Sherman and Kluge communicated
that the Loyalists knew Flynn was not involved, and that the organization
leaders knew Flynn was uninvolved but were framing him with the
forgery. The Loyalists said that they were working inside the organization
to acquire the proof of the frame-up, and that when they proved
Flynn's innocence they would be in a position to effectuate the reforms
they sought. This was fine with me, because I fully believed that Flynn
was innocent, and that the organization was framing him just to be able
to attack him to eliminate the threat he represented to its antisocial
practices and nature.

11. Over the next few months Sherman and Kluge communicated with
me regularly about the Loyalists' progress in documenting the truth
about the Flynn frame-up. They claimed that all staff were searched before
they could leave OSA or management offices, so it was hard to get any
documents out. Nevertheless, on a couple of occasions Sherman and Joey
gave me a page or two that had been smuggled out. I learned that a US
Attorney in Boston had become involved in the investigation of the frame-up,
and I passed whatever I got from the Loyalists to him through Flynn.

12. One of the ideas which developed with the Loyalists in the early
fall of 1984 was the possible filing of a lawsuit to take control of the
organization from the "criminals." I saw this as an idea with merit,
and could be the effective action the Loyalists said they were looking
for to avert a major organization tragedy. I told Flynn what they
wanted and he drafted a "bare bones" complaint which I passed to
them. Sherman, Kluge and I discussed the lawsuit concept on
several occasions, both of them asking me for my ideas and I helped
as I could within the limits of my knowledge, ability and imagination.

13. The Loyalists then began discussing with me finding a financial
"backer" for their lawsuit, basing this need on the likelihood that the
bringing of the suit would freeze organization accounts, and the Loyalists
would need operating capital. They claimed that the leaders had lots
of money they had skimmed from the organization and squirreled
away in their own bank accounts, and the Loyalists were all staff
members and thus broke. I couldn't help them with money, and knew
of no one who might finance whatever they did, so they said that,
because I understood the situation so well, and had a proven record,
they wanted me to talk to and encourage some prospective backers
with whom they were in touch. One day I got a call from Kluge, asking
me to fly to Las Vegas to meet with such a person, a "rich Scientologist"
who had been mistreated by the organization and was aligned with
the Loyalists on their goal of reformation. Although on Kluge's
instructions I purchased a plane ticket, I called off the trip before
leaving because my lawyers warned me that I could be walking into
a trap.

14. There were many times during this period when I considered the
possibility that I was walking into a trap. The thought arose in all my
meetings with Kluge, and later with Mike Rinder, the second Loyalist
I would meet. Their communications often didn't jibe with what they
or Sherman had said on earlier occasions, and sometimes they said
things which were downright stupid. I had no way of originating a
communication to them, had no telephone numbers, no locations, no
names, and no idea what any of them did. They had my address,
phone number, knew exactly what I did, and could call me any time
they wanted. They told me almost nothing, and wanted to know
everything I knew. They claimed I had to be kept in the dark because
of their fear for their lives, and for that reason I went along with their,
even to me, strange behavior.

15. Because of their fear for their lives they depended on secrecy,
duplicity and intelligence procedures and goals. Although I had been
in intelligence in the organization and had the essential quality for the
field; i.e., native intelligence, I had, after leaving the organization, come
to the conclusion that Scientology's brand of intelligence; i.e., the secret
world of data, duplicity, stealth, hidden intentions and hidden identities,
was ineffective, unhealthy, unholy, and not my choice for how I would
make my way through life and deal with my problems. Even inside
the organization, which is an intelligence-based group, I had urged
those who were in positions to do something about it to open up, stop
lying, disclose its leaders, divulge its secrets; because I felt that its lies,
secrets, and secret orders from its secret leaders would only bring upon
it more problems. After leaving the organization, a factor in my life
which led to my faith in openness and freedom as opposed to secrecy
and leverage, was all the testifying I did, in trial in Armstrong I and in
B & G Wards, and in many days of depositions in several more Scientology-
related cases. Also I knew that the organization's leaders, who had an
undeniable determination to harm me, possessed my pc folders which
contained every embarrassing incident or thought in my life, and my
lives back umpteen impossibillion years. These facts had resulted in
a tendency in me at times during this period to not care what happened
to me and to act a little wild and silly.

16. Sometime during 1984 it came to me that what I was following,
and what was a far superior technology and faith than intelligence, or
perhaps perfect intelligence, was guidance. I had been given, before
and after my asking, a desire to know my Creator, and I believe I
received during this period some of His communications to me.
Hubbard in his writings put no faith in his Creator, but put it in
something of his own making, an intelligence apparatus in which he
was the secret leader with secret bank accounts, secret communication
lines, secret codes, secret intentions, and secret lawyers to keep them
all secret. I had come to know God a little, and understood that no
matter how scary things got I was in hands in which I was in no real
danger. I could be shot, my body could be destroyed, I could be
defamed and ruined, and I would still be in no real danger. And things
did get scary for me in my dealings with Sherman and the Loyalists
during this period. I picked up surveillance on a number of occasions,
and there was the nagging strangeness of the Loyalists' communications
and the movie-like quality of this play in which I was being played
with. I still retained my intellect and acted with good sense most of
the time, but a shift was occurring in my mind and soul. I began to
walk deliberately into danger, but I was also new at this approach to
life, and as yet a little foolhardy and undisciplined, and these facts
too are reflected in my writings and actions of the period.

17. Sherman's and Kluge's interest was intelligence and they didn't
want to hear much of my philosophy of guidance, courage and openness,
so I turned my mind to the intelligence game, and as always happens
when I turn my mind to any subject, I had ideas. Some of these ideas
I communicated to the Loyalists, some I wrote down, some were only
funny. Our meetings had a secretive, spy story feel to them, partly
because of the danger the Loyalists said they were in and the danger
I was in anyone would say, partly because of the subject matter we
discussed, and partly because of the settings in which we met. Sherman
insisted that I couldn't come to his home, so we met on many occasions
in the bird sanctuary in Griffith Park. My first meeting with Kluge was
in a cemetery in Glendale. I met him two more times in early November
at different locations in Griffith Park, and then met with Rinder two
times in late November at two more locations in the park.

18. Sherman told me around October, 1984 that the Loyalists had found
a potential backer, a woman named Rene, another "rich Scientologist,"
who he said had been horribly hurt by the organization. He said he
knew her personally and considered her a good and trusted friend.
He said that she owned a publishing company which printed calendars,
that he had told her about my artwork and writing, and that she wanted
to see some of my materials for possible publication. Following our first
meeting in Griffith Park Kluge took me to the Sheraton Grand Hotel in
downtown Los Angeles to meet her. I took along a file of some of my
work and left it with her. In my meeting with her she wanted to know
my perspective on the lawsuit idea and my thoughts on removing the
organization's criminal leadership.

19. While claiming that the Loyalists wanted to take legal action to
bring about a safe transfer of power, both Sherman and Kluge also
claimed that they didn't know anything about legal matters, nor any
of the organization's litigations, and that there were other people higher
up in the Loyalist network who were trained in legal, stayed abreast of
the organization's litigation battles, and had an understanding of the
Loyalists' legal options and an overview of their plan which Sherman
and Kluge didn't have. Coupled with their claimed need to keep me in
the dark for fear of their lives, their assertions of ignorance of legal
matters caused considerable frustration in me and in our communications.
As a result, I requested in a number of communications to speak to their
"best legal mind."

20. Finally the Loyalists said that their legal expert would meet me and
a rendezvous was set up, again in Griffith Park. The "legal expert"
turned out to be Mike Rinder, a person I had known in the organization,
who had held various lower level administrative posts. Rinder, it turned
out, also professed ignorance of legal concepts, and my meetings and
communications with him were even more frustrating.

21. Some time after my last meeting with Rinder, which occurred
November 30, 1984, I received a phone call from Kluge, advising me
that the Loyalists did not trust me and would not be communicating
with me again. I then wrote them my final communication, a copy of
which is appended hereto as Exhibit A, and gave it to Sherman to give
to them.

22. During my cross-examination in the spring, 1985 trial of Julie
Christofferson v. Scientology, Circuit Court of the State of Oregon,
Multnomah County, No. A7704-05184, the organization broke the
fact that Sherman, Kluge and Rinder had been covert operatives, the
Loyalists were invented, and that my meetings with Kluge and Rinder
had been videotaped. The organization called the whole more than two
year affair the "Armstrong Operation." Organization lawyers, Earle
Cooley and John Peterson, claimed the Armstrong operation had been
authorized by the Los Angeles Police Department, and they produced a
letter dated November 7, 1984, a copy of which is appended hereto as
Exhibit B, signed by an officer Phillip Rodriguez, directing organization
private investigator Eugene M. Ingram to electronically eavesdrop on
me and Michael Flynn.

23. On April 23, 1985, Los Angeles Police Chief Daryl F. Gates issued
a public statement, a copy of which is appended hereto as Exhibit C,
denying that the Rodriguez letter was a correspondence from the Los
Angeles Police Department, denying that the Los Angeles Police
Department had cooperated with Ingram, and stating emphatically
that all purported authorizations directed to Ingram by any member
of the Los Angeles Police Department are invalid and unauthorized.
On information and belief, the officer, Phillip Rodriguez, who signed
Ingram's letter was paid $10,000.00 for his signature. Also on
information and belief, following a Los Angeles Police Department
Internal Affairs Division investigation and a Police Department Board
of Rights, Officer Rodriguez was suspended from the Los Angeles Police
Force. Eugene Ingram had himself some years before been drummed
out of the Los Angeles Police Department. He is reputed to have been
busted for pandering and taking payoffs from drug dealers. He is a
liar and a bully who has been involved in organization intelligence
operations against its perceived enemies for many years. During the
period I was involved with the Loyalists Ingram called me at my
home and threatened to put a bullet between my eyes.

24. Initially the presiding judge in the Christofferson trial Donald F.
Londer refused to admit the tapes because they had been obtained
illegally. Then he viewed them in chambers and when he returned
to the bench stated that "the tapes are devastating, very devastating
to the church." Then he admitted them into evidence.

25. Despite Judge Londer's ruling and comments, and despite Chief
Gates' repudiation of the Rodriguez "authorization," the organization
has continued in press and courts around the world to claim that the
videotape operation was "police-sanctioned." The organization has
continued to claim that I originated the "plot to overthrow " church"
management" and that I initiated the contact with the organization
members, who merely played along with my plan while remaining
"loyal" to the organization. It also has continued to claim that the
videotapes show me plotting to forge documents and seed them in
organization files to be found in a raid, show me creating "sham
lawsuits," show me urging the Loyalists to not prove anything but
"just allege it," and show me seeking to take control of the
organization. The videotapes show none of those things. The tapes
show that in the fall of 1984, during the reign of the organization's
present supreme leader David Miscavige (DM), the fair game doctrine
was alive and as unfair as ever. The tapes show a mean-spirited,
mendacious and malevolent organization using well-drilled operatives
and electronic gadgetry to attempt, unsuccessfully, to set up an
unwitting, funny, sometimes silly, clearly helpful, at times foul-mouthed,
but otherwise ordinary human male.

26. The organization's refusal to stop telling these lies is not surprising,
however, because its leaders have put so many of their eggs in their
dirty tricks basket. These leaders are unbalanced and in a very pre-
carious situation. Having lied about the Armstrong Operation in so
many courts and publications and to so many people, including their
own followers, these leaders risk their positions of power, and in their
minds their very lives, if they ever admit the breadth of those lies.
Yet it is in the acknowledgement of the truth behind those lies where
ultimately their safety will be found.

27. It has not ceased to be embarrassing to me whenever the
organization trots out the Armstrong videotapes, because I do say
some silly and raunchy things. But the organization has never been
able to embarrass me into silence and it won't now.

28. The Scientology legal war has almost run its course.
The organization's leaders can never rewrite all history.
Scientologists of good will everywhere can be free.

I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the
State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed at San Anselmo, California, on February 20, 1994.


© 1994, 2000 Gerry Armstrong

Copyright © Gerry Armstrong - All Rights Reserved.