(Section 3 of Part 2 – “Determining the Validity of Internet Data”)
Here’s another thing that doesn’t make sense: the Church’s response and rebuttal to The Truth Rundown that was supposed to show the falseness of all the claims brought against David Miscavige.
In this rebuttal, Tommy Davis (who was spokesman for the church at the time) admits that there was a culture of violence at the Int Base when Marty Rathbun was there. He and other current Int execs said that it was all perpetrated by Marty Rathbun and the reason that David Miscavige didn’t stop it was because he wasn’t there for a few years. Get that: they admit that there was a culture of violence. What does that mean, “a culture of violence”?
Well, what it means to me is that if I am working in a culture of physical violence, I am routinely witnessing or experiencing someone getting physically beaten. And I’m wondering if I’m going to be next and I’m wondering when will be the next time it happens. I could imagine being in a state where I am wondering day-to-day whether or not I am going to get physically beaten in some way. And this is happening at INT MANAGEMENT OF THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY! And they’re confirming that this actually was going on!
Look, whether or not you or I (or anyone who wasn’t actually there) thinks that Marty Rathbun did all the beatings or that David Miscavige did them or everybody was beating up everybody else or whatever, the point is that the management of our church was involved in EXTREME out-ethics for such a culture of violence to be occurring. Seriously, let’s look at the Knowledge Reports PL, and please remember while reading this, that my point is not about who did it, it is about a severe out-ethics indicator on the part of our senior management as a group:
“To live at all, one has to exert some control over his equals as well as his juniors and (believe it or not) his superiors.
“When misconduct and out-ethics is occurring in a group, it is almost impossible for other members of the group not to know of it. At least some of them are aware of the outness.
“When a group has down stats, it is not true that all of them are trying to fail. Only a few are dedicated to not doing their jobs.
“The question one can ask of any group that is not doing well is this: Why did the other group members tolerate and ignore the loafers or out-ethics cats in it?
“In analyzing countless numbers of groups with whom it has been my good fortune – or misfortune – to be associated, I finally isolated ONE factor which made an upstat group upstat and a downstat group downstat and a horror to be around.
“The single most notable difference between an upstat, easy-to-live-with-and-work-with group and a downstat, hard-to-work-with group is that the individual group members themselves enforce the action and mores of the group.
“That is the difference – no other.
“In an upstat group, at the first pinprick Joe would probably have a black eye!
“In a downstat group Joe could go on and on with his pins, each group member watching and shrugging.
“In a group where members have some concept of controlling their environment and their fellows, you don’t have loafers or out-ethics cats. Because the rest of the group, on an individual basis, just won’t tolerate it.
“Those who would have a tendency to wreak havoc or loaf don’t dare. And the group becomes easy to live with and work with.
“IT IS A FAILURE OF THE INDIVIDUAL GROUP MEMBERS TO CONTROL THEIR FELLOWS THAT MAKES A GROUP HARD FOR ALL TO LIVE AND WORK WITH.”
(HCO PL 22 July 1982 Knowledge Reports, OEC Vol 0, page 617)
So, as I would think that most Scientologists have read this policy before, I have to say that I think that any Scientologist who knows that a representative of the church admits that there has been a culture of violence at Int Management, should be asking what the hell is going on here? An ethical group would not have something like this happening.