§  What's New  ||  Search  ||  Legal Archive  ||  Wog Media  ||  Cult Media  ||  CoW ® ||  Writings  ||  Fun  ||  Disclaimer  ||  Contact  §


Date: 1998/09/08

RE: ARMSTRONG - Faulty Researcher

There have been several briefings from Gerry Armstrong
about the life of L. Ron Hubbard which have been faulty and
show irresponsible research:

Testimony and evidence shows that while Gerald
Armstrong claimed to have been able to document nearly every
day of L. Ron Hubbard's life, he had in fact made very poor
attempts at research, which had resulted in badly distorted

When asked in court "Did you obtain documents from any
official agency of the United States to document day by day
where Mr. Hubbard was during Mr. Hubbard was during the
Second World War?" His answer was "no..."

Armstrong also claimed that Mr. Hubbard had never seen
combat during World War II. The evidence again contradicts
Armstrong's assertions. While commanding PC 815, Mr.
Hubbard and his crew sank one Japanese submarine and
disabled another in an encounter which lasted three days.

When questioned on this evidence in court, Armstrong
admitted that he merely "went through some books on the
subject. But that was it. I never went to D.C. And I
obviously never checked the sources that whoever did this
research was able to check. So I stand corrected."

(Transcripts of May 21, 1984 - Superior Court of the
State of California for the County of Los Angeles).

Public Relations
Church of Scientology International

Date: 1999/04/03

Gerry Armstrong has posted a 1994 program which lays out a plan to
protect the rights of minority religions in Greece.

Nothing better illustrates Armstrong's hallucinatory state of mind
than his assumption that the actions in the program are somehow
illegal. He thinks that all he has to do is make the allegation and it
will stick. This is an old tactic of Gerry's. He is on record as
saying, "we don't have to prove a goddam thing ... we just have to
"allege" it." It's not unlike something the McCarthyist crowd would do
-- seize on anything that supports their hysteria so long as you don't look at the facts.




Armstrong needs to read the U.S. Department of State human rights
reports on Greece to find out what's going on there. The reports show
why any religion would take effective actions to protect religious
freedom in that country.
It is not surprising that Armstrong is oblivious to real human
rights abuses. He faces 14 counts of contempt with a possible 28 days
in jail and a $10,000 bond for not showing up regarding his violations
of court orders. He ought to deal with that.


Date: 2000/01/31

You get an "atta boy" from the "critics" like Lerma, Armstrong and Rice and star doing end zone dances. Hey, these guys are happy any time anyone says anything bad about Scientology. In reality they hate you, too, because you still at least profess to have some respect for the Tech.

Date: 2000/02/25

Since he posts to this newsgroup a lot (especially lately), here are some facts about Gerry Armstrong you should be aware of:

Armstrong is currently in Canada, having fled the United States because
there is a warrant out for his arrest in California. He was ordered to
pay $650,000 to the Church and was held in contempt for repeatedly
contravening court orders concerning spreading his lies about L. Ron
Hubbard and Scientology to the media. He was convicted of 14 separate
counts of contempt, which means 28 days in jail and a $10,000 bond held
over his head if he returns to California.

During the Gulf War, Armstrong once posted a message on the Internet
concerning a letter he sent to Saddam Hussein during the Gulf War. In
the letter, he offered himself to Hussein as a hostage in the Iraqi
war. "If either side failed to perform any part of the agreement, the
other side could execute me," he concluded. Armstrong makes clear in
his posting that he did not think the letter to Hussein was a joke. He
is deadly serious, and quite proudly republishes it and other similar

To further demonstrate how out of touch he is with reality (or cynical -
- take your pick), Armstrong had himself photographed by a newspaper
naked in a newspaper while holding a globe to promote his theories of
destroying all money. This was when he was trying to get out from
under a suit for having fraudulently conveyed his assets. He had to
make it look like more than a common scam.

Yes, there is no doubt that Armstrong can be calculating and
conniving. In former days, he hatched a plot to seize the Church's
assets in collaboration with LA CID agents. When the Church found out
about this, its attorneys obtained permission from a Los Angeles police
officer to conduct an investigation into Armstrong's plans. The




I know what's wrong with Gerry Armstrong, folks. He is a liar. He
never worked with Ron. Those documents, that allegedly belonged Ron,
never did. They were forgeries put there by Scientology infiltrators
for Gerry to take. So, he took them. He knew that he would be sued to
make the impression that the Scientology orgs also would consider the
documents authentic and not just a fraud. But Gerry agreed to the
game, he liked to play Salman. Gerry Armstong is one big fraud and
very stupid, because the U.S. government had L. Ron Hubbard under
surveillance for Ron' protection since at least when his father Dwight
David Eisenhower ran for U.S. President. Everything what Ron did is in
CIA files and everything what Ron did and said is completely contrary
as to what Gerry said about him or what's in the fake documents. It'a
German Nazi set up, nothing else. That is also the reason why Gerry
loves disgusting Germany that much.

Date: 12 Dec 2002

He had also the amiable character of an original Scientologist, that indeed worked with Ron, and did not just lie like Gerry Armstrong that he did.

Date: 17 Dec 2002

Fact is that Jesse Prince has an agenda, and was and is not
truthful to anybody. How about showing some backbone, Jesse and tell
us who you really are and for who you really work? Same applies also
to Gerry Armstrong and some of you other guys.

Date: 26 Feb 2003

I know what must happened with Gerry. After I posted that the
documents that Gerry Armstrong stole from the Scientology orgs are
forgeries, that they are not L. Ron Hubbard's and that him taking the
documents was blessed by those Scientology infiltrators that forged
the documents, he went into hiding.
Gerry Armstrong's documents about L. Ron Hubbard are absolutely false
and absolutely worthless. If I would be still on staff in the orgs, I
would let him those and tell Gerry to wipe his behind with those. They
are the work of criminal non-Scientologists and have nothing to do
with LRH or his life. Gerry knows that and that is why he decided to
rather go into hiding. Isn't that right, Gerry?

Date: 28 Feb 2003

You can call Gerry Armstrong all you want. He went into hiding short
after I posted that the alleged L. Ron Hubbard documents that he stole
from the Scientology orgs are forgeries. He knows that. He took those
documents in secret cooperation with the criminal infiltrators of
Scientology that forged the documents. They filed legal actions




against Gerry to get the documents back to make them look authentic.
Nothing else than a typical German Nazi trick.

His documents are one big fraud, and Gerry knows it. Now he tries to
disappear, nobody should know where he is so that he can't be held
responsible for what was behind him talking the forgeries: To bring L.
Ron Hubbard in miscredit, to ruin is reputation, to paint a completely
different picture of him as he really was.

Gerry regrets in meantime that he posted last November that he wants a
message from me. He really asked for it. I had completely forgotten
about him. He called for my attention. And above is what he got.

Gerry thinks if Bin Laden can hide successfully, so can he.

Date: 1 Mar 2003

Yes, they forged the documents, and it was very much in the sence of
criminal infiltrators within the orgs that Gerry stole those docs.
They put it there for him to take, so that they can sue him and make
the impression that those docs are authentical. That is how they try
to ruin L. Ron Hubbard's reputation, within the orgs and on the
outside attacker line. Don't forget, Gerry was once a socalled
Scientologist, and people with that kind of hate against LRH are still
inside the orgs and set such situations up and frame LRH with
documents that have nothing to do with him.

I don't care what corrupt judges decide that are in on this
conspiracy. I doubt that any judge looked into it if those documents
are authentic, and the C of S helped make those authentic wanting
those documents allegedly back. If they would have told the truth,
that those docs are a big fraud, Gerry's campaign ruining L. Ron
Hubbard's reputation would have been stopped right in the tracks. I
bet several SCN infiltrators deliberately sabotaged and mishandled the
legal case so that it goes lost that Gerry can keep the documents and
distribute them to harm L. Ron Hubbard and SCN with that.

There are so many infiltrators in the orgs that damage LRH and SCN
that Gerry was allowed to take over as outside attacker and made his
"career" on this front. They did not need him on the inside.

Date: 20 Mar 2003

If would be as if Mike Rinder or Norman Starkey would rent estate to Bob Minton or Gerry Armstrong or to
another wild SCN attacker.

Date: 10 Apr 2003




who is still a fugitive in the U.S. Why doesn't he just come back to the US,
deal with it and get over it? It's called personal responsibility.


Oh, Gerrrrr-r-r-r-r-re-e-e-e-e-e!

Damn, GerGer, as of this moment, you haven't answered the last little
cuddlenote I sent, and here I am sendin' you another. I mus' be in LUV! Or
maybe I'm jest on the rebound since my sweetheart, RV, jilted me.

I jest HAD to write, 'cause I wuz SO intrigued by yer missive. You sed:

>I read here on ars of all sorts of people reading their just
>received NOTS packs purchased from Sweden's NOTS Pack Sales and
>Distribution Center.

Yes, Ger, yer suck-buddy, the *other* DM, the ever-fuckin'-lovin' David
Mayo, target of Interpol, confeedahnt to ElRonHubbard, and author of the
squirrelliest diarrhea that ever ran down the back of a leg--NOTs, that
cancer-maker soooopreme, which don't even require a warning label from the
Surgeon General, that sure-fire psychotic-break trigger--well, its author
and yer good friend, David "Constellation of the Cow" Mayo, has got hisself
a goddamned best-seller, now, don't he?

Don't that jest make you proud to have been so close to him, and all?

>The Swedes must have sold millions of these packs (which,
>incidentally, they acquired for free).

Well, don't be shy, Ger! Go on and say it: say, "And I helped." It's okay.
Nobody will think yer being egotistical fer takin' yer rightful place in
the slime parade. Join the throngs. Let's git out the fuckin' confetti.
This is helpin' to make a laughing stock of Scientology and the Old Man,
and you deserve yer share of the credit. Take it, Ger! God, jest THINK of
all them rich IAS loons grindin' away on that shit fer fuckin' YEARS, never
fininishin', gettin' cancer into restimulation, or flippin' the fuck out,
thinkin' they're doin' "Scientology."

I'm jest sittin' here with tears rollin' down my face over what you and yer
fuckin' buddies have pulled off, Ger-bilShit. Am I laughin'?

>The US objected to Sweden's setting up a NOTS distribution
>center, presumably because the ever-greedy US wanted to set up
>its own center.

Why doncha' jest pick up the fuckin' fone and ax yer goddamned buddies why,
and stop presumin', you lyin' fuck.

>One hopes that somewhere (R) a poorer Third World country would
>get into NOTS sales and distribution while there are still a few
>billion people without a pack.

Oh, yes, Ger! One hopes! One sick, deranged, twisted fuck like you hopes.
Hopes more get harmed. Hopes more die. Hopes for more ridicule and




revilement and death and destruction. Hope lives eternal fer the likes of
you, don't it Ger? Keep hopin', fuckhead.

And now, a drumroll fer our rezident mole, fer our purveyor of secrets, fer
our Number One friend and buddy, our close associate, who is about to let a
little black, slimy leech slide out of one corner of his mouth:

>Or perhaps there are other "secret scriptures" (like the
>Admissions) that haven't had such wide sales and distribution as
>NOTS in which other countries can corner the market.

Oh, Ger, you are SO-O-O-O-h smooth. Does it make yer nipples pert when you
slide a greasy one by like that? Has their bullshit scam fallen SO the fuck
far apart that they had to send you slidin' back in here with YAGAR (Yet
Another Gerry Armstrong Revelation)? Ooooooo, Ger-bilShit, has you got
another SeKrIt DoKyOoMeNt, one that's REEEEEEALLY gon' prove what a
low-life lyin' bastard LRH was? Has you gots something NEW you want to show
us? I saw you slip another little "teaser" into one of yer other recent
posts about "The Admissions" <GASP!>. Yer jest SO-O-O-O-O-Oh fuckin'
smooth. How many "teasers" before you drop the bomb? (Oh, and BTW--which
Instruction Protocol is it that specifies the number? I fergit jest now.)

Did this new dokyooooment jest "turn up," like all these new post-mortem
issues "by LRH," the "100% pure" ones?

Oh, Ger, Ger, Ger. You got me jest *pantin'* with anticipation! Will YOU be
releasin' this dokyoooooment, or will it seep out like sewage from some
other leak somewhere? I can hardly *WAIT* fer this new YAGAR to come
slidin' out into public view. Sort of like a snot-hang.

>Share the swag you swifty Swedes.

Nah, Ger. Why don'chou jest go ahead and eat it all yerself.

Date: 9 Apr 2002

> and her unshakeable connection to me.

Oh, there's a thought. "Unshakeable" until such time Caroline exhibits a mind of
her own and doesn't accept all the the Gerrycrap hook, line & sinker. Once Gerry
has had his fill using Caroline, he'll unceremoniously dump her like he's done
with the other women he's wooed and manipulated.
Security reasons..horseshit. You have to be there because you're a loathsome
coward and can't face up to your own responsibilities.

Date: 26 Oct 2002

You and Gerry may be in a lot of killfiles. The
only difference is that Claire had the *audacity*,
the unbelievable *nerve*, and the unmitigated *gall*
to plonk him publicly.

I mean how dare she do such a thing. After all
Claire is just a low life Scientologist and you and




Date: 1 Nov 2002

I really wish you would stop thinking with the Scn Mind Fuck, Gerry.

You could be very helpful to the critical movement if you'd stop
operating like a brainwashed cultist. I know it's difficult and
requires some looking inward and admitting some really horrible things
about yourself, but you are a bright guy. I think you can do it.

Date: 1 Nov 2002

> No wonder CofS doesn't bother having their nutcases post here
> anymore. The resident nutcases are even crazier than they are.


Just like the LRH and the C of S, anyone that crtiticizes Gerry is
part of an evil SP conspiracy. So I guess that would include me as
part of that conspiracy as well. ;-)

Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002

Tigger, trying to communicate with the irrational is wasted effort.
Gerry and Arnie are both irrational people. The post where he accuses
you of "gibberish" after this is an example of his total kookery and
irrationality. If I were you, I'd just ignore him. He isn't worth it.

Maybe if he has no more enemies to attack he'll go back to exposing
the crimes of the CofS. Maybe.

Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002

Although your motives for doing all that work are questionable, I do
thank you for doing it. Whenever I called anyone a whore or an OSA
Whore, there was ample proof to back it up. There was evidence to call
Stacy a whore and to call Minton an OSA Whore and to accuse Bunker and
Keller of being Minton/Brooks whores which boils down to OSA Whores for

Lerma, Tory, Perkins, Minton and Armstrong, on the other hand, call
(called) people OSA whores without any real proof that they are......all
they have to do was say something negative about or disagree with
Minton and/or Brooks and even if what was said was true amd justifed,
they got DA'd and on Lerma's OSA list.

Date: 1 Nov 2002

1. Why are such a coward, Gerry, running from the U.S. to Canada and
now to Germany?

2. When's the last time you were gainfully employed and receiving a
paycheck as of your 56th birthday?




3. Exactly how much money did you received from Bob Minton and Brian

4. How come you never reported the $100,000 you received from Bob
Minton and others to the Canadian tax authorities? So you enjoy being
a tax evader as well?

5. Why do you lie to the women you seduce and then discard them like
trash when you no longer have any more use for them?

6. Why did you give signed pieces of paper to various critics, telling
them to hold onto them until the day you became famous and they could
sell them for big profits?

7. Why did you call everybody that disagrees with you or doesn't
adhere to your personal agenda - OSA, Liars, etc. etc?

8. Why are you such a sociopathic narcissist, Gerry?

Date: 4 Nov 2002

Preaching sugar while practicing poison, Controllers are experts at
concealing their true natures. Hiding bad intentions beneath polished
appearances, they have perfected the art of "looking good." Subtle and
devious in the way he conceals his manipulative nature, he may look
like a rose, but ends up feeling like poison ivy.

Every controller-type man like Gerry Armstrong wants power, but he
must feel it to know he has it. Inflicting control, and witnessing
someone being controlled, is how he succeeds at sensing power. Loss of
control equals powerlessness. And powerlessness, to a Controller like
Gerry feels like death.

There are certain general characteristics that define a mentally
healthy individual. A hallmark of mental health is the ability to
tolerate uncertainty, which is demonstrated in our capacity to
carefully weigh choices before deciding a course of action. Because we
can tolerate the tension that occurs while going through the process
of choosing, we can more accurately make a final decision.

Mentally unsound individuals like Gerry Armstrong cannot tolerate much
tension, which is why their actions tend to be irrational and

Mentally healthy people have the capacity to take appropriate
responsibility. Such individuals know how to see the part they may
have played in creating a problem, can admit their part in it, can
take corrective action to solve the problem and have the capacity to
admit they were wrong. They also know how to realistically recognize
when they have not played a part in creating a problem.

Personality-disordered individuals like Gerry Armstrong cannot make
those kinds of discriminations around the issue of responsibility.

They always blame everything that goes wrong in their life on everyone




I've forwarded Gerry's comments to news organizations, the Dept. of
Defense, the White House and the Iraqi affairs office at the U.N. I
figured they were all in need of a good laugh from this kook.

Date: 15 Nov 2002

In GerryKook's mindset, unless his royal flatulence deems your
question legitimate, then it is not a question.

Date: 15 Nov 2002

And don't you forget it, Gandalf...because I guarantee you that Gerry
never will...and will jump to the occasion to use your apology as a
weapon against you next time you cross hairs with the kook.

Date: 15 Nov 2002

All your deliberate lies, misrepresentation of the facts, and spin
zone treatment thereof, is not going to change that.

You can continue to rely on your suck-up supporters on ARS, but the
time that you will be forced to accept accountability for your actions
is approaching...

Be prepared, Scam Artist.

Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002

Will you be answering questions about the part you played in
assisting Robert S. Minton, Jr. (or, if you prefer, "The Minton Unit")
in money laundering?

Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002

>It all depends.

Depends on what? Your current delusional state?
Ah, but you haven't answered my question. It's lies like that which
trip you up every time.
I don't believe you have enough of a mind left to change.
From the looks of your recent posts, you've reached blithering
idiot status.
You're the liar, Gerry. It's a lie that you are a prophet. It's a
lie that God speaks to you. It's a lie that you are doing God's

You are delusional. Or worse, you may be *pretending* you're




The stupidity here is your claiming you do God's work, Garry
What did you do with that $850,000 if you didn't hide it?

I know you won't answer that, since you wriggle and squirm
like a snake any time you're asked to take responsibility for you
own actions.

It's so much easier for you to lie than tell the truth and suffer
the consequences, after all.
So sue me. Do you have the guts to sue me? I'm sure you don't.

Or will you just continue mewling and puking on usenet?

I'm willing to bet the latter. Anyone willing to bet that Prophet
Gerry will actually be brave enough to back up his words with action?

This newsgroup has seen enough of you to know you're nothing more than
a hypocritical blowhard who doesn't even believe his own shore
It's not a lie, Gerry Armstrong. I know it's the truth, you know it's
the truth, and your God knows it's the truth.

Quit demanding that everyone else believe your lies.

Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002

That was just the start of how self-centered and self-serving you come
across. Don't tempt me.

BTW, I have a weird test for you to perform. It's really funky: Next time
you post something, ask this question:

(1) Did that help someone else directly?

(2) Did that help you directly?

(3) Did that help you directly and might vaguely, kind of help someone else?

Don't give me this God-directed bullshit. It makes a mockery of people who
have genuine spiritual beliefs.

Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002

I kid no one. I point to the obvious. And when you move to the next level of
injuring anything and anyone in your way to advance your own agenda, well
guess what?

More and more people are going to be calling you on your bullshit. In
fairness, you didn't start this exchange, but you've continued it.




instead off in his paranoid, Scientological world with his cult of one.

Date: 17 Nov 2002

You are not telling the truth. You put up that web page and call
it "goOn SquAd" because you don't think anyone should dare to
criticize you. This is the very same mindset as a Scientologist.
You know very well what happens to anyone that has the "audacity" to
criticize Scientology and yet you apply the very same policies and THEN
LIE ABOUT IT just like they do.

What's next? Posting the url's of the people that visit those pages?

Read the sig line gerry, it applies to you.

Oh and btw, I am quite sincere when I tell you to lose the picture on
your home page. You look stark raving mad in that photo.

Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002

Does it bother you at all to have sunk to the
level of a brazen liar? What accounts for this unaccountable lunacy?

Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002

So in other words, if you lie and act like a fucking kook, it's "doing OSA's
work" not to just smile and pretend it isn't happening?

Sorry. That kind of kook logic doesn't work in the real world. The only
thing in common between all those people is that they've disagreed with
you. Only to a cult mentality does that justify calling them OSA. It's
disappointing you think that lying about and dead-agenting people for
disagreeing with you is appropriate.

The one acting like OSA here is you.

Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002

No, it isn't funny. It's actually quite sad. It shows how you've
completely abandoned any attempt to be rational. You've plunged
headlong into a murky pool of paranoia, and you've dragged
a few others into that muck along with you.

Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002

The only war that's taking place is inside your head, Gerry Armstrong.

Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002

I think the only reasonable inference is that Armstrong is accusing the
people featured on his hate page of being OSA or connected to OSA.




I find this to be frankly lunatic behavior.

Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002

Perhaps the Scientology has soaked into your brain so far that you
can't do anything but spout Hubbardspew when challenged on your
harebrained assertions. This is a problem you, Gerry and Gandow
all seem to share.

Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002

Here's the post in question. I'm sure Gerry will be glad to point out
the "parallel to OSA methods" in it. Funny, I don't see anything remotely
OSA-like in it, but then I'm not a Profit of God like Gerry Jihad.

Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002

Way to go, Gerry Jihad.

You should put a fat lady there, too, singing an aria for the death
of your credibility.

Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002

To be fair, I once thought better of Gerry Armstrong, but he's fallen
into cult thinking like a good two thirds of this ng, where once if a
psycho posted, most of the time it was an OSA mouthpiece (not always, of
course). Grabdough has been an embarrassment to his church since his
first post or two, name calling (would he keep pointing out to a Jew or
a Muslim that they were such the way he keeps saying "witch" as though
it's an epithet, one wonders? ) and petulant whining. He isn't the first
poster to do so, but when he posts as a supposed representation of his
Christ on earth, as pastors or reverands are supposed to do when of his
religion, and then acts distinctly in totally unChristlike manner, while
at the same time pointing fingers at others, it's dispicable. Gerry
seems to have fallen prey to the same disorder. Maybe he already had it
in him a long time ago. There is a certain element of critical thinking
lacking in those who fell prey to the cult for so long--many of whom
carry it over into their later years. Gerry is doing an extreme form of
it--putting up webpages with people he disagrees with is the same thing
the CofS does, and his denials of that are hypocritical in the
extreme--but I once thought better of him. Oh, well, I once thought
better of a number of people on this ng who have shown themselves to be
hypocrites, liars and intolerant of others' opinions without being able
to rebut them aside from DAing them.

Date: 18 Nov 2002

> Indeed, Gerry is a great guy. And Caroline seems to fit :-))

She'll fit until she's no longer any use to the aging scam artist and
then she'll be viewed as yesterday's rubbish by the scam artist.




Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002

If you believe what your Prophet of God [R] tells you is the truth,
you're in worse shape than I thought.

Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002

Armstrong hid his money by giving it away.
Gerry Armstrong tried a variety of maneuvers (including establishing a
bogus corporation) in an effort to protect the proceeds he received
in his settlement with the Church of Scientology.

When that didn't work, he transferred the proceeds to others. That's
when he began his "witty" ruse that he was a Prophet of God [R].

Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002

Gerry Armstrong says:


Unless someone has a lot of time to waste, likes hitting his/her head
against a stone wall, has the patience of a saint, believes in
miracles, etc............IMO it would be a waste of time, to engage in a
"debate" with Gerry Armstrong who (if his recent "debates" are an
indication) has confused "debate" with "diatribe".

Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003

It'd probably be a good idea to drop the 'Rev' bit too Damien, we've
already got 2 brain-mangled idiots playing at being Reverends on the
ng already - Fried Rice and Alternative-Charlemagne Gandow. To be the
third in that particular 'Three's a company' is something you really
should try to avoid.

Hell, I forgot - Gerry Armstrong's already filled the spot anyway.

Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003

>Beverly Rice wrote:
>> And then there a people who can turn being a victim into "Cash and
>> Carry".
>Do You have any example for that concept?

Gerry Armstong.

Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2003




you. How does the Evangelical Church of Berlin-Brandenberg feel
about you preaching Armstrong's religion in their churches? Or has
Your Prophet[TM] told you that Christians are also antisemi-literatic

You must feel so smug and superior, Grabdough. You fool the
church-supported government into believing you're a Christian
minister while you use their money and their resources to preach
the gospel of Gerry Armstrong, your one and only Prophet[TM].

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003

Strange, I always thought this thread was about Gerry Armstrong.

He IS Your Prophet[TM], isn't he, Grabdough?

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003

Grabdough's made something of a name for himself attacking
anyone and everyone who criticizes his Prophet[TM], Gerry Armstrong.

I've never seen Grabdough even mention the word Scientology let alone
criticize the Church of Scientology here for a long, long time.
Grabdough's nothing more than a deluded cultie.

Date: 19 Feb 2003

> anyone have a valid email address for Gerry?


Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003

I'm afraid Gerry Armstrong is a cad and a bounder who can not be
relied on for behavior befitting a decent human being.

Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003

>Well, I know that many US people hate me because I'm criticizing your
>president and some ways of life, but listen, PTSC: you're hatable
>regarding what you say about Gerry.

Fuck you. Put up a hate page on me, as Gerry has done, and you'll
hear of it too. I don't hear you complaining about Gerry's kooky nutty
page lying about people being OSA, either.
Gerry lies outright when he puts me on a page with a flashing "OSA"
on it, accusing me of being OSA, but not even having the minimal balls
necessary to admit that's what he is doing. Instead he pretends that
having a flashing "OSA" on his hate page is somehow entirely meaningless,
something I don't find very believable. In fact, he's a fucking liar.




Until you have something to say about Gerry's brazen lies about
me, I do not give a flying fuck what you think, you ass-kissing Frog
fuckhead. If you want to say anything I've said about that two-faced
slimy little weasel is untrue, pick it out and argue it.

I also don't dump women and then mock them over the
suicide of their husband, as that dirty fucker Gerry Armstrong has done.
No decent person would treat Bev as Gerry treated her. That was
some genuinely low-class shitty behavior, the behavior of a scoundrel
and a coward. No man with any self-respect would trick a lover into
destroying his email to her, meanwhile keeping her own email to him
and using it as a blackmail threat against her. That's truly dickless.
I suppose that kind of behavior is considered okay in France, but here
it is not popular.

Gerry is, to repeat, a cad and a bounder who can not be relied on for
anything worthy of a man. I bet his former "helpmeet" Lorien Phippeny has some
stories to tell, too, should it ever come to that.

Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003

>In article <kn3a5vcj6vpll41eqtnutqg91kgk9rbbrg@4ax.com>, ptsc says...

>>I also don't dump women and then mock them over the suicide of their
>>husband, as that dirty fucker Gerry Armstrong has done.

>Gerry in fact did not mock Beverly over the suicide of her husband.
>His words regarding the heads of the hydra in fact referred to the
>corporate octopus known as Scientology. Gerry explained this back
>on April 11, 2002 in his post "Re: CLamelon Challenge No. 3 (or is
>that 4?)".

While I already know you will mindlessly support anything Gerry says
or does, Bev happens to disagree with you vehemently on that subject.


'nuff said on that. It was pathetic and despicable. Your support of it,
however, is merely pathetic and stupid.

I will also cite your completely brainlessly going along with the dipshit
"OSA" page as indicative of the way you will without the slightest bit
of self-awareness sign off on literally anything, no matter how stupid or
foolish it is, as long as it's signed "Gerry Armstrong." Hip hip hooray!

Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003

The fact is, I didn't say you were pathetic and stupid. If I had wanted to
say you were pathetic and stupid, I would have said it. I did, however, not
say it. I said your support of Gerry Armstrong's imbecilic, pathetic, kooky,
fucked-up hate page on his critics was pathetic and stupid. Not you

The rest of your post merely demonstrated your mindless knee-jerk support




of all things Gerry, including his despicable treatment of Bev and his
OSA-style hate page on his critics in which he has the flashing letters
"OSA" which we are supposed to believe are totally meaningless and
not really what they appear to be, which is a flagrant lie that the people on
the page are OSA.

Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003

Which is why I feel slightly less bad about dragging it out than I do.
I did think as to whether I should mention that again for a minute,
but I'd hardly be able to even coherently express what I think is
wrong with Gerry and his behavior without mentioning this particularly
core display of despicable behavior, which was the first thing that
started to give me pause about Gerry. The second was things
relating to Minton and seeming money-laundering. The third was
the kooky hate page. Then I decided to test him to see if he'd
put me on the kooky hate page if I criticized it, so fourth was when
he put me on his kooky hate page for criticizing his kooky hate

At that point, I wrote him off as a loon, something I probably should
have done years ago.

In any case, sorry to drag this up again, but you posted it yourself
in the first place, so I'm slightly less sorry to have done so than I
otherwise would have been. It's a very important part of why I'm
pissed off at the man (or whatever he is) and fits in to the generally
repugnant conduct of Gerry as of late, as well as that which has
merely recently come to light.

Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003

On 20 Feb 2003 13:05:31 -0800, Warrior <warrior@xenu.ca> wrote:

>In article <mkca5vgs5vsq9bod6rhau8r1ponstrbrvr@4ax.com>, ptsc says...

>And if Gerry is not near his computer and thus unable to read his
>email, it would be pretty normal behavior to not be able to respond,
>but leave it to ptsc to post in his usual -- attack attack attack,
>call names and sling some insults -- manner.

You mean like falsely accusing people of being OSA? How the fuck
SHOULD I respond to that shit? By kissing that fucker's ass? FUCK
Gerry Armstrong and his shit-for-brains OSA site, and FUCK YOU.
Guess what, people don't LIKE IT when you lie about them. Is that
really very fucking difficult to understand?

Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003

You really are going out of your way to be stupid, aren't you. What's hateful
about this post, which is on the idiot hate page you slobber all over yourself
defending? All it says is that Armstrong's idiot hate page is an idiot hate





Here is my homage to the Profit of Ghod:


Dear PSTC:

Now all you need is a pair of cement shoes!

Date: 20 Oct 2003
More Cerridwens, fewer self-styled prophets, please.
> Strawman argument. This is a sign of your weak position.

Bullshit squared. Have you looked at some of the posts on Gerry's
megalomaniac hate page? Anyone who raises any criticism of The Gerry, no
matter how mild in phrasing, eventually makes it on the list. And in a
depressingly high number of such incidents, you traipse into the thread
after Gerry has thoroughly entangled whatever point he was trying to make
with his tortured philosophizing, and attempt to rationalize the irrational
and defend the indefensible. If you can't see that, nothing that anyone,
Cerridwen included, can say will remove the Gerry-shaped blind from your
What is pathetic is that she *needs* to say it, to Gerry and, by inference,
to you, but what's even more pathetic is that apparently, she needs to say
it again, since you're pathologically incapable of recognizing that Gerry
is a thin-skinned paranoid egomaniac with zero sense of humour or ability
to see himself as the shaggy incoherent wanna-be guru that he so clearly

Date: 21 Oct 2003
The selection of posts on the megalomaniac hatepage
lovingly maintained by Gerry Armstrong demonstrate clearly that he believes
any criticism of himself to be tantamount to a deliberate OSA attack. That,
in case you were wondering, is loony.
My brain is just fine, no worries; the problem is with Gerry's writing, and
what I hesitate to call "logic", as it meets none of the minimal standards
to so qualify. The pattern has become all too familiar: Gerry kooks out
about something, some unwitting a.r.s. denizen corrects him, he flies into
a paranoid hissy fit, and posts 400 line screeds of pseudo-intellectual
claptrap that bears a remarkable resemblance to the insights offered by
burned out hippie barflies throughout the ages and across the world, and
after he's worked himself into a truly entertaining fit of pique, you show
up and try to blame everyone else for not being properly indulgent of his
Well, I'll leave any masochists still perusing this thread to read some of
Gerry's writings, and determine for themselves whether this description is
accurate or not. This thread, in fact, would be an excellent example, since
rather than simply graciously admit that his speculation was at best




most similar to Diane's, and people who abhor his arrogance are
right on the money, no matter what his other admirable

Date: 29 Oct 2003

Hey guys, I've chimed in with a couple of posts on this thread,
but I simply can't go along with this approach towards Gerry.

I really believe he is hurting, and not handling things very
well at all, maybe even self-destructing. While I've long
thought he was a bit 'kooky' in a harmless 'eccentric' sort of
way, I now think it's more serious than that.

Maybe I'm wrong, and I hope I am, but as I've said recently I
hope those who claim to be his friends look out for him, rather
than just 'egg him on' in his current strategy towards ars.

And I also hope these comments of mine don't come across as in
any way condescending towards Gerry because that's not what I
feel at all.

Date: 29 Oct 2003

<snipping bulk of Gerry's insanity, which I'll leave to Martin to reply, if
he so desires>

> On 29 Oct 2003 14:42:55 GMT, Jess Lurking <pass@that.thanks> wrote:
>>Gerry Armstrong <gerry@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote in
The rest of the post is replete with similarly kooky,
delusional and paranoid snippets. I've snipped all but my personal
favourite, in the interests of not causing any unwary readers' heads to
explode at the leaps of illogic and pervasive persecution complex that make
up the bulk of your reply ...

> Or, you and Kady, prove me wrong. What Bob testified to about Ken
> Dandar is not nearly as vicious and false as what Kady would testify
> to against me if given the opportunity by Scientology. She doesn't
> even do anything about it now before she is supoenaed to clean up the
> record she's made.

Okay, I lied; I'm including two snippets. The above is, in fact, indicative
of a kind of mental rot the likes of which is rarely seen outside of
environments where the inhabitants are kept away from sharp objects. Then
again, I wouldn't want to be around Gerry if there were any sharp objects,
but that's a separate issue.

The attentive reader will notice that not only does Gerry try to draw a




parallel between someone critizing him on a USENET group and someone
commiting perjury on the stand, accusing a lawyer of perfidious conduct in
order to assist Scientology in having him disqualified from the case, and
the case itself thrown out of court, but he actually suggests that the
USENET criticism is "not nearly as vicious and false".

To continue with the snippage ...

> But listen to what you are saying. I state a simple fact: That people
> who profess to be critics of the Scientology cult can serve the cult's
> malevolent purposes with unmerited attacks on the cult's opponents.
> You say that it's the same crap Scientology tells its members about
> criticisms. You are accusing me of acting the same as Scientology,
> which is false. But when I state the truth when it's true, you say
> it's complete bullshit. Now that is bullshit!

Gerry, for the love of whatever God is acting as your second chair and
chief witness today, get help. You are clearly utterly unable to comprehend
the difference between a "lie" and a difference of opinion. There is really
no reason in continuing to discuss anything with you, given this gap in
your mental processing, but since you're now suggesting that I'm in league
with Rosen to destroy you, I'm going to reply to this for the benefit of
anyone who is masochistic enough to follow this thread.

> [End Quote]
> How about if you tell us what Kady will say on the stand in response
> to Rosen's questions.

How about if you tell me, the person with whom your creepy obsession is
becoming clear in this monstrous reply, complete with hallucinatory
dialogue, on what possible ground such an exchange would ever take place?

If your legal strategy rests entirely on the thesis that I don't think
you're insane, you're in trouble. I don't think it does, however, since it
would be pretty stupid for you to carefully gather all evidence to the
contrary, and host it on your website, if you think that it serves the
purpose of OSA.

If your legal strategy is to demonstrate that somehow, "OSA made her do
it," with regards to my opinion, I think that the fact that I deny that
this is the case in virtually every post so enshrined, and have even
challenged you to show one example of how my opinion of your complete and
utter insanity is derived, in whole or in part, from Scientology sources,
would also argue against this being the basis of your defence.

Unless you're trying to do OSA's work yourself, presuming that OSA's work
somehow involves calling me to the stand to confirm that I think you're a
lunatic. The mobius loop of fractured logic makes my head hurt.

> E.g., "Ms. O'Malley, you write that Gerry Armstrong's so-called logic
> doesn't meet any of the minimal standards to so qualify. Do you
> believe this to be true?"
> I bet she'll lie and say, "Yes."

How, pray tell, would that even be a "lie" if it is, in fact, what I've
written, and is, in fact, what I think? More to the point, what possible
relevance does my opinion of your sanity have to the case against you,
which is over your breach of contract with the Church of Scientology? It
would in no way help Scientology's case, since I believe that their
argument is that you knowingly and deliberately violated the gag order into
which you entered. My opinion that you are insane would in no way help
Scientology to demonstrate that you are doing so deliberately, but would,
in fact, help *your* defence, presuming said defence was insanity.

Again. Head hurting. Must .. make ... it ... to ... end ... of ... post ...

> E.g., "Ms. O'Malley, you write that there's an all too familiar
> pattern with Gerry Armstrong, where you say that he kooks out about
> something, some unwitting a.r.s. denizen corrects him, he flies into a
> paranoid hissy fit, and posts 400 line screeds of pseudo-intellectual
> claptrap that bears a remarkable resemblance to the insights offered
> by burned out hippie barflies throughout the ages and across the
> world? Do you believe that to be true?"




> I bet she'll lie and say, "Yes."
> Rosen: "And you've characterized what Gerry Armstrong calls the GOoN
> sQUaD FOLLIES page as "demented, paranoid hate pages," is that
> correct?"
> KO: "Yes."
> Rosen: "And you believe that to be true?
> KO: "Yes."
> Rosen: "And what are your qualification for these observations and
> conclusions about Gerry Armstrong?"
> KO: "I'm a journalist."

No, in that case, in this fantasy interrogation which would never occur in
real life, since it's not like there is a shortage of people who have read
your words on USENET and have concluded that you're a loon, I would state
that my only qualifications for making such observations is that I am a
regular reader of a.r.s., and I knows kooks when I sees 'em.

> Rosen: "And you've read everything Gerry Armstrong has written and
> posted to the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology, correct?"
> KO: "Yes I have."
> Rosen: "And as you sit here, under oath, you are very certain that
> Gerry Armstrong's so-called logic doesn't meet any of the minimal
> standards to so qualify, that there really is an actual all too
> familiar pattern with Gerry Armstrong, where he, as you say, kooks out
> about something, some unwitting a.r.s. denizen corrects him, Armstrong




> flies into a paranoid hissy fit, and posts 400 line screeds of
> pseudo-intellectual claptrap that bears a remarkable resemblance to
> the insights offered by burned out hippie barflies throughout the ages
> and across the world, and that what he calls his GOoN sQUaD FOLLIES
> page are demented, paranoid hate pages, is that correct?"
> KO: "Yes I am."
> Rosen: "No further questions."
> Now do you think that Kady O'Malley's testimony, as postulated above
> using only her already published words, which testimony she is daily
> locking in by refusing to deal honestly and straight across with her
> lies and black PR about me, will serve the Scientology cult's
> malevolent purposes towards me?

It wouldn't. It would, in fact, hurt their case, which would require that
your alleged breach of contract was done deliberately, and in sound mind.
But don't let that cramp your style, or impinge on your cunning efforts to
equate your imagined enemies, like me, with OSA, even to the point of
speculating that I would work with Rosen.

Perhaps you have mistaken me for Bob Minton, who did, in fact, work closely
with Rosen to tell *actual lies* - ie untruths about factual matters, not
opinions - in a futile effort to destroy Ken Dandar, in which case, perhaps
you might take this entire argument and apply it to Arnie Lerma, who has on
his website many such attacks on Ken Dandar, and was even publicly
predicting his imminent disbarring on the front page of his website.

I don't seem to recall you flying into high dudgeon at that sorry little
episode, which rather than simply involving criticism and a difference of
opinion, included allegations of theft, fraud, perjury and other actual
criminal acts, all of which were soundly disproven.

> Or perhaps Kady would like to change her testimony in advance of that
> day with Rosen on the stand or in deposition.

If anything, your most recent post demonstrates that you're a hell of a lot
crazier than even I thought.

Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003
He's crazy! He's really crazy! I don't think there's probably any help
available for his kind of crazy, though

Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003
Maybe Gerry is collecting all of these
posts where people call him a kook because he expects at some point to need
an insanity defense and he wants to be able to point theses posts and say,
"See? Everyone thinks I'm crazy!"

Date: 29 Oct 2003






§  What's New  ||  Search  ||  Legal Archive  ||  Wog Media  ||  Cult Media  ||  CoW ® ||  Writings  ||  Fun  ||  Disclaimer  ||  Contact  §