HBO to make film of Scientology book, hires 160 lawyers

[bilby]

The problem is that Hubbard lied about being on the Edsall, and this was attested in a court of law by Thomas Moulton who was second in command aboard the illl fated PC-815 and knew Hubbard. This claim is utterly false. And Hubbard made it and that cannot be dismissed.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_career_of_L._Ron_Hubbard

In a 1956 lecture to Scientologists, Hubbard said:

I was flown in from the South Pacific as the first casualty to be shipped out of the South Pacific war back to the States. The war had been started in Pearl Harbor, and I'd been down in the South Pacific and – a lot of things happened down there. And the outfits down there were pretty well wiped out, as you can remember before the US and Great Britain started to fight and go back in. All right.

Most of the guys that were shipped out of there who had been wounded, were shipped out by slow boat. And I didn't, I wasn't that seriously done in. I hooked a ride on the Secretary of the Navy's plane; produced the right set of orders (I hope nobody ever kept them on file) and got flown home.[22]

In another lecture of the same year, Hubbard provided an alternative version of his return to the United States:

I picked up a telephone, called the Secretary of [the] Navy. See, and I said, "I'm tired of this place. I'd like to leave." And he said, "Yeah." I said, "Yeah, I've got some important despatches. As a matter of fact, we've got enough despatches here to practically sink the Japanese navy if they had to carry them. There's a lot of traffic and stuff like that, and so forth." So he sent his plane down and picked me up and flew me home.[23]

The US Navy's files do not record Hubbard spending any time on Java[1] and do not show any evidence of wounds or injuries sustained in combat.[6]

------

Thomas Moulton, Hubbard's executive officer on the USS PC-815, testified in 1984 that Hubbard had said that he had been shot in the Dutch East Indies, and that on another occasion Hubbard had told him that his eyes had been damaged by the flash of a large-caliber gun. Hubbard himself told Scientologists in a taped lecture that he had suffered eye injuries after having had "a bomb go off in my face."[6] He told Robert Heinlein, the science fiction writer, that "both of his feet had been broken (drumhead-type injury) when his last ship was bombed." According to Heinlein, Hubbard said that he "had had a busy war – sunk four times and wounded again and again".[68]
______

Hubbard asserted after the war that he had been "blinded with injured optic nerves, and lame with physical injuries to hip and back... Yet I worked my way back to fitness and strength in less than two years, using only what I knew about Man and his relationship to the universe."[66]

You can hear stories like this in any pub in England, particularly around Remembrance Day. Most of the people who are happy to share their tales turn out to have been in the SAS, which (judging by a quick survey of blokes in pubs) is by far the largest regiment in the British Army, and recruits a surprising number of weedy looking losers for a unit with such a solid international reputation as hard fighting professionals.

It's the Argentines I feels sorry for; before their retirement to the saloon bar of the Rose and Crown, the SAS apparently deployed so many covert operatives to Port Stanley that the Argies were outnumbered several hundred to one before the Paras even landed at Goose Green.

Of course, it is possible that not all of these accounts of derring-do are entirely based in fact. Who knows?

 

[whichphilosophy]

The problem is that Hubbard lied about being on the Edsall, and this was attested in a court of law by Thomas Moulton who was second in command aboard the illl fated PC-815 and knew Hubbard. This claim is utterly false. And Hubbard made it and that cannot be dismissed.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_career_of_L._Ron_Hubbard

In a 1956 lecture to Scientologists, Hubbard said:

I was flown in from the South Pacific as the first casualty to be shipped out of the South Pacific war back to the States. The war had been started in Pearl Harbor, and I'd been down in the South Pacific and – a lot of things happened down there. And the outfits down there were pretty well wiped out, as you can remember before the US and Great Britain started to fight and go back in. All right.

Most of the guys that were shipped out of there who had been wounded, were shipped out by slow boat. And I didn't, I wasn't that seriously done in. I hooked a ride on the Secretary of the Navy's plane; produced the right set of orders (I hope nobody ever kept them on file) and got flown home.[22]

In another lecture of the same year, Hubbard provided an alternative version of his return to the United States:

I picked up a telephone, called the Secretary of [the] Navy. See, and I said, "I'm tired of this place. I'd like to leave." And he said, "Yeah." I said, "Yeah, I've got some important despatches. As a matter of fact, we've got enough despatches here to practically sink the Japanese navy if they had to carry them. There's a lot of traffic and stuff like that, and so forth." So he sent his plane down and picked me up and flew me home.[23]

The US Navy's files do not record Hubbard spending any time on Java[1] and do not show any evidence of wounds or injuries sustained in combat.[6]

------

Thomas Moulton, Hubbard's executive officer on the USS PC-815, testified in 1984 that Hubbard had said that he had been shot in the Dutch East Indies, and that on another occasion Hubbard had told him that his eyes had been damaged by the flash of a large-caliber gun. Hubbard himself told Scientologists in a taped lecture that he had suffered eye injuries after having had "a bomb go off in my face."[6] He told Robert Heinlein, the science fiction writer, that "both of his feet had been broken (drumhead-type injury) when his last ship was bombed." According to Heinlein, Hubbard said that he "had had a busy war – sunk four times and wounded again and again".[68]
______

Hubbard asserted after the war that he had been "blinded with injured optic nerves, and lame with physical injuries to hip and back... Yet I worked my way back to fitness and strength in less than two years, using only what I knew about Man and his relationship to the universe."[66]

You can hear stories like this in any pub in England, particularly around Remembrance Day. Most of the people who are happy to share their tales turn out to have been in the SAS, which (judging by a quick survey of blokes in pubs) is by far the largest regiment in the British Army, and recruits a surprising number of weedy looking losers for a unit with such a solid international reputation as hard fighting professionals.

It's the Argentines I feels sorry for; before their retirement to the saloon bar of the Rose and Crown, the SAS apparently deployed so many covert operatives to Port Stanley that the Argies were outnumbered several hundred to one before the Paras even landed at Goose Green.

Of course, it is possible that not all of these accounts of derring-do are entirely based in fact. Who knows?

This is why I referred to the evidence from recent research.
Don't under estimate the British solider. I'm from an army family and community but the only one of those I knew who did not join the army.
At first glance you may wonder how the British Army won a single battle let alone a war. Many are often put in local Military jails or special punishment duties for being drunk, disorderly and for insubordination.
Yet they have the necessary skills, and unpredictability to do win wars which does not always mean working to the textbook.

 

[whichphilosophy]

The problem is that Hubbard lied about being on the Edsall, and this was attested in a court of law by Thomas Moulton who was second in command aboard the illl fated PC-815 and knew Hubbard. This claim is utterly false. And Hubbard made it and that cannot be dismissed.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_career_of_L._Ron_Hubbard

In a 1956 lecture to Scientologists, Hubbard said:

I was flown in from the South Pacific as the first casualty to be shipped out of the South Pacific war back to the States. The war had been started in Pearl Harbor, and I'd been down in the South Pacific and – a lot of things happened down there. And the outfits down there were pretty well wiped out, as you can remember before the US and Great Britain started to fight and go back in. All right.

Most of the guys that were shipped out of there who had been wounded, were shipped out by slow boat. And I didn't, I wasn't that seriously done in. I hooked a ride on the Secretary of the Navy's plane; produced the right set of orders (I hope nobody ever kept them on file) and got flown home.[22]

In another lecture of the same year, Hubbard provided an alternative version of his return to the United States:

I picked up a telephone, called the Secretary of [the] Navy. See, and I said, "I'm tired of this place. I'd like to leave." And he said, "Yeah." I said, "Yeah, I've got some important despatches. As a matter of fact, we've got enough despatches here to practically sink the Japanese navy if they had to carry them. There's a lot of traffic and stuff like that, and so forth." So he sent his plane down and picked me up and flew me home.[23]

The US Navy's files do not record Hubbard spending any time on Java[1] and do not show any evidence of wounds or injuries sustained in combat.[6]

------

Thomas Moulton, Hubbard's executive officer on the USS PC-815, testified in 1984 that Hubbard had said that he had been shot in the Dutch East Indies, and that on another occasion Hubbard had told him that his eyes had been damaged by the flash of a large-caliber gun. Hubbard himself told Scientologists in a taped lecture that he had suffered eye injuries after having had "a bomb go off in my face."[6] He told Robert Heinlein, the science fiction writer, that "both of his feet had been broken (drumhead-type injury) when his last ship was bombed." According to Heinlein, Hubbard said that he "had had a busy war – sunk four times and wounded again and again".[68]
______

Hubbard asserted after the war that he had been "blinded with injured optic nerves, and lame with physical injuries to hip and back... Yet I worked my way back to fitness and strength in less than two years, using only what I knew about Man and his relationship to the universe."[66]

You didn't look at the military records which are included in the evidence.
Thomas Moulton's evidence is now supported by this new evidence. You're quoting outdated material even though it will remain there for many years to come. Read also about Moulton in relation to the evidence that supports what he said.
In fact you most likely didn't read this at all.

 

[bilby]

You can hear stories like this in any pub in England, particularly around Remembrance Day. Most of the people who are happy to share their tales turn out to have been in the SAS, which (judging by a quick survey of blokes in pubs) is by far the largest regiment in the British Army, and recruits a surprising number of weedy looking losers for a unit with such a solid international reputation as hard fighting professionals.

It's the Argentines I feels sorry for; before their retirement to the saloon bar of the Rose and Crown, the SAS apparently deployed so many covert operatives to Port Stanley that the Argies were outnumbered several hundred to one before the Paras even landed at Goose Green.

Of course, it is possible that not all of these accounts of derring-do are entirely based in fact. Who knows?

This is why I referred to the evidence from recent research.
Don't under estimate the British solider. I'm from an army family and community but the only one of those I knew who did not join the army.
At first glance you may wonder how the British Army won a single battle let alone a war. Many are often put in local Military jails or special punishment duties for being drunk, disorderly and for insubordination.
Yet they have the necessary skills, and unpredictability to do win wars which does not always mean working to the textbook.

Wow. We're you born without a sense of humour, or was it surgically removed?

There are two kinds of people in the world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.

 

[Angry Floof]

Bilby, humor is criminalized in the cult of scientology. "Joking and degrading" has been a crime to the cult's dainty sensibilities since 1977, when L. Ron Humorless wrote it into policy.

But this only applies to jokes about the cult and its founder, who spent his life not only without humor but terrified that paying customers might become aware of his own suppressive personality. Cultists are encouraged to degrade their fellow human beings who don't play along with the wacky delusion.

 

[bilby]

Bilby, humor is criminalized in the cult of scientology. "Joking and degrading" has been a crime to the cult's dainty sensibilities since 1977, when L. Ron Humorless wrote it into policy.

But this only applies to jokes about the cult and its founder, who spent his life not only without humor but terrified that paying customers might become aware of his own suppressive personality. Cultists are encouraged to degrade their fellow human beings who don't play along with the wacky delusion.

Hmmm. I can see how one might degrade oneself; and I can even grasp how somebody might manipulate a person into self-degradation; but ain't nobody degrades me but me, baby. I am immune to external degradation

 

[whichphilosophy]

This is why I referred to the evidence from recent research.
Don't under estimate the British solider. I'm from an army family and community but the only one of those I knew who did not join the army.
At first glance you may wonder how the British Army won a single battle let alone a war. Many are often put in local Military jails or special punishment duties for being drunk, disorderly and for insubordination.
Yet they have the necessary skills, and unpredictability to do win wars which does not always mean working to the textbook.

Wow. We're you born without a sense of humour, or was it surgically removed?

There are two kinds of people in the world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.

I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion "I have no sense of humour" or why you said there are two types of people and mentioned one type.

 

[Angry Floof]

:laughing-smiley-014

Flunk! Start over.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Bilby, humor is criminalized in the cult of scientology. "Joking and degrading" has been a crime to the cult's dainty sensibilities since 1977, when L. Ron Humorless wrote it into policy.

But this only applies to jokes about the cult and its founder, who spent his life not only without humor but terrified that paying customers might become aware of his own suppressive personality. Cultists are encouraged to degrade their fellow human beings who don't play along with the wacky delusion.

As usual you are the authority of non-sequitur in your inability to challenge the new evidence head on. Only Keith and Co has done this. What a shame because you have superior writing skills. (Compliment by the way)

 

[whichphilosophy]

:laughing-smiley-014

Flunk! Start over.

Your conclusion is not supported by any premise.

 

[Angry Floof]

Again...

:laughing-smiley-014

Flunk! Start over.

- - - Updated - - -

:laughing-smiley-014

Flunk! Start over.

Your conclusion is not supported by any premise.

Your cult is not supported by any ethical intelligence.

Thank you for continuing to demonstrate the ethically and intellectually degraded and degrading nature of your belief system.

 

[Keith&Co.]

There are two kinds of people in the world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.

I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion "I have no sense of humour" or why you said there are two types of people and mentioned one type.

Okay, see, if i thought it was at all likely that you were being ironic, here, this would make a good joke on your own part. Maybe you're trying to chanel Spock or T'pol.

I don't think so, though.

The JOKE is in the fact that incomplete data is offered. Then you complain that the data is incomplete. Thus outing yourself as the other kind of person. Hilarious.

What if he'd said: two kinds of people: Those that can finish their assignments.

Or: Two kinds of people. Those with a long attention span and look at that butterfly!

Or: 2 kinds: Professionals and... Hang on, Justin Bieber just sent a tweet.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

From the New Yorker

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/primary-sources-l-ron-hubbard-leaves-the-navy

Hubbard's DD214. This is the form issued when one officially musters out from a US armed forces branch.
It seems that there are two versions floating around for Elron. The official one and a forged version that Co$ has been offering to those questioning Hubbard's version of his WW2 record. Lawrence Wright, the writer of this New Yorker article on Paul Haggis, was given this version by Scientology.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/02/14/the-apostate-3

Davis later sent me a copy of what he said was a document that confirmed Hubbard’s heroism: a “Notice of Separation from the U.S. Naval Service,” dated December 6, 1945. The document specifies medals won by Hubbard, including a Purple Heart with a Palm, implying that he was wounded in action twice. But John E. Bircher, the spokesman for the Military Order of the Purple Heart, wrote to me that the Navy uses gold and silver stars, “NOT a palm,” to indicate multiple wounds. Davis included a photograph of medals that Hubbard supposedly won. Two of the medals in the photograph weren’t even created until after Hubbard left active service.

So we have clumsy cult forgeries floating around coming from Scientology. Something to be aware of if one looks at this controversy. The question is, how many other such forgeries are there?

 

[Rhea]

Wow. We're you born without a sense of humour, or was it surgically removed?

There are two kinds of people in the world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.

I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion "I have no sense of humour" or why you said there are two types of people and mentioned one type.

That was awesome.


Just in case you are the kind of person for whom humor is somewhat elusive and mysterious (some of my favorite family members are autistic - different, not broken) I thought I'd demystify this for you so that you can enjoy the chuckle.

• Bilby outlines a series of reported military service stories that, if all true, would mean that SAS sent covertly to Argentina operatives numbering more than 100 times the actual population of Argentina and no one noticed. He outlines this to show that people exaggerate or fabricate their service.
• You reply, in complete deadpan, never underestimate the British, they are cleverer than you think!
• Which is pretty hilarious and a terrific comic reply. Except you weren't trying to make a joke! You read his story and thought, "yeah, they probably really did send more covert operatives than the entire population of argentina by 100x!"
• So he kinda teases you about that and adds a riddle that requires extrapolating from incomplete data.
• and your failure to notice the riddle or extrapolate from it to detect the answer would be funny enough, but you put a cherry on top by questioning his conclusion that a sense of humor is not being utilized in this exchange!

One of you was speaking tongue-in-cheek, the other was not noticing it.

 

[whichphilosophy]

From the New Yorker

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/primary-sources-l-ron-hubbard-leaves-the-navy

Hubbard's DD214. This is the form issued when one officially musters out from a US armed forces branch.
It seems that there are two versions floating around for Elron. The official one and a forged version that Co$ has been offering to those questioning Hubbard's version of his WW2 record. Lawrence Wright, the writer of this New Yorker article on Paul Haggis, was given this version by Scientology.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/02/14/the-apostate-3

Davis later sent me a copy of what he said was a document that confirmed Hubbard’s heroism: a “Notice of Separation from the U.S. Naval Service,” dated December 6, 1945. The document specifies medals won by Hubbard, including a Purple Heart with a Palm, implying that he was wounded in action twice. But John E. Bircher, the spokesman for the Military Order of the Purple Heart, wrote to me that the Navy uses gold and silver stars, “NOT a palm,” to indicate multiple wounds. Davis included a photograph of medals that Hubbard supposedly won. Two of the medals in the photograph weren’t even created until after Hubbard left active service.

So we have clumsy cult forgeries floating around coming from Scientology. Something to be aware of if one looks at this controversy. The question is, how many other such forgeries are there?

Re separation from service: This is addressed in the evidence I presented. There were errors on some of the forms since all of these were hand written by different people

 

[whichphilosophy]

I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion "I have no sense of humour" or why you said there are two types of people and mentioned one type.

That was awesome.


Just in case you are the kind of person for whom humor is somewhat elusive and mysterious (some of my favorite family members are autistic - different, not broken) I thought I'd demystify this for you so that you can enjoy the chuckle.

• Bilby outlines a series of reported military service stories that, if all true, would mean that SAS sent covertly to Argentina operatives numbering more than 100 times the actual population of Argentina and no one noticed. He outlines this to show that people exaggerate or fabricate their service.
• You reply, in complete deadpan, never underestimate the British, they are cleverer than you think!
• Which is pretty hilarious and a terrific comic reply. Except you weren't trying to make a joke! You read his story and thought, "yeah, they probably really did send more covert operatives than the entire population of argentina by 100x!"
• So he kinda teases you about that and adds a riddle that requires extrapolating from incomplete data.
• and your failure to notice the riddle or extrapolate from it to detect the answer would be funny enough, but you put a cherry on top by questioning his conclusion that a sense of humor is not being utilized in this exchange!

One of you was speaking tongue-in-cheek, the other was not noticing it.

Humour's always a good thing. I was quoting from Military Archives some of which were recently discovered. I have not offered any conclusions because the data is complete. There are some points however that do clarify some issues.
However to some degree you may be able to form theories from incomplete data such as The Theory of Evolution which through time is more and more validated. As for covert operatives in Argentina should that mean 100X the population of the Falkland Islands including sheep?

 

[whichphilosophy]

I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion "I have no sense of humour" or why you said there are two types of people and mentioned one type.

Okay, see, if i thought it was at all likely that you were being ironic, here, this would make a good joke on your own part. Maybe you're trying to chanel Spock or T'pol.

I don't think so, though.

The JOKE is in the fact that incomplete data is offered. Then you complain that the data is incomplete. Thus outing yourself as the other kind of person. Hilarious.

What if he'd said: two kinds of people: Those that can finish their assignments.

Or: Two kinds of people. Those with a long attention span and look at that butterfly!

Or: 2 kinds: Professionals and... Hang on, Justin Bieber just sent a tweet.

The data is incomplete but certain things can be verified as much as possible. Since Hubbard was indeed recorded as a Lt Cnl then the conclusion that he lied about his war record in that basis holds no clear basis.

As whether he flew back to the USA is the most likely scenario given he was not on any of manifests of ships he was supposed to have returned on. His arrival did coincide with a particular flight. So to that degree one cannot dismiss any claims that he flew back to the USA as an outright untruth.

Of course it would not be possible to take any DNA samples from the tea cups since they are most likely not available and the plane is unidentified. This is just the most likely scenario or if you prefer the most possible scenario.

You raised some good points about injuries happening outside the battlefield which could also be considered. It is also a point to note that the current writers have mis-defined the form of conjunctivitis contrary to what is shown in his medical records

In fact my father was in the war. He had a huge long scar on his neck which looks like someone made a bad job of slitting his throat.
What really happened, is he was drunk one night (as usual) lost his footing on the stairs to the bedroom in the early morning and his head went straight through the window of the front door. There he lay till the morning and survived the ordeal.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Again...

:laughing-smiley-014

Flunk! Start over.

- - - Updated - - -

Your conclusion is not supported by any premise.

Your cult is not supported by any ethical intelligence.

Thank you for continuing to demonstrate the ethically and intellectually degraded and degrading nature of your belief system.

Again you haven't demonstrated how this can be true so your conclusion again has no premise.

 

[Keith&Co.]

The data is incomplete but certain things can be verified as much as possible.

Hee hee. You use English funny.
No, you can't 'verify' data that's not there.
Providing data to clear one lie does not make any other lies suddenly true.

As whether he flew back to the USA is the most likely scenario given he was not on any of manifests of ships he was supposed to have returned on. His arrival did coincide with a particular flight. So to that degree one cannot dismiss any claims that he flew back to the USA as an outright untruth.

That's really stretching a point. You claimed we could 'verify' but what you're doing is holding out hope.
And you say 'most likely' when what you mean is 'the explanation I'd prefer to believe.'

And you use a qualifier for 'possible.' Something's possible or it isn't.
You mean 'plausible' if you're trying to gauge more or less.

In fact my father was in the war. He had a huge long scar on his neck which looks like someone made a bad job of slitting his throat.
What really happened,

What difference does it make? The question is about whether Hubbard's claims are supportable. Not your dad's.
And if you're going to try to appeal to 'new evidence' of military forms, you probably shouldn't be talking out the other side of your face saying that the military forms can't be trusted because people missed details. That just makes the whole mess a toss-up.

 

[Angry Floof]

Hee hee. You use English funny.
No, you can't 'verify' data that's not there.
Providing data to clear one lie does not make any other lies suddenly true.

As whether he flew back to the USA is the most likely scenario given he was not on any of manifests of ships he was supposed to have returned on. His arrival did coincide with a particular flight. So to that degree one cannot dismiss any claims that he flew back to the USA as an outright untruth.

That's really stretching a point. You claimed we could 'verify' but what you're doing is holding out hope.
And you say 'most likely' when what you mean is 'the explanation I'd prefer to believe.'

And you use a qualifier for 'possible.' Something's possible or it isn't.
You mean 'plausible' if you're trying to gauge more or less.

In fact my father was in the war. He had a huge long scar on his neck which looks like someone made a bad job of slitting his throat.
What really happened,

What difference does it make? The question is about whether Hubbard's claims are supportable. Not your dad's.
And if you're going to try to appeal to 'new evidence' of military forms, you probably shouldn't be talking out the other side of your face saying that the military forms can't be trusted because people missed details. That just makes the whole mess a toss-up.

Your conclusions have no premise.
Your conclusions have no premise.
Your conclusions have no premise.
Assimilate. Assimilate. Assimilate.