Scientology pages index  |  Contact

(to other Scientology pages)

>> Do you want to help me with my research? <<  Consult my want list here !

Please note that words with an asterisk (*) are defined at the bottom of this page! Only first appearances are marked.

L. Ron Hubbard vs A New Order  (page 2)

On this page I assembled information found in the writings of L. Ron Hubbard somehow relating to the viewpoint of a New Order or New Word Order concept. I relate from information found elsewhere and from personal experiences/observations within the Church of Scientology. Included are topics that may give the impression or could be perceived as having been staged in some manner in order to discredit the subject of Scientology.

Go to ‘L. Ron Hubbard vs A New Order’ index

The source of the ‘Affirmations’ (aka ‘Admissions’) (1947)

	Foreword
	What are they? Overview and summary
	(a) The involvement of one Gerry Armstrong
	(b) Court proceedings and overview of developments during 1980-84 & 86
		- Chronological overview of events according to news media and court
		- Court proceedings held in 1984
		- Signing and breach of 1986 settlement
	(c) Mention of the ‘Affirmations’ in 1987 (Ron DeWolf)
	(d) The ‘Affirmations’ emerging in the year 2000
	(e) Views from a Swedish psychiatrist (2005)
	Inconsistencies
		- Allowing a biographer access to ‘damaging’ papers? - L. Ron Hubbard versus biographies
		- Conspiracies
		- The ‘Affirmations’:  The domain of the imaginary  vs  The position of the Church of Scientology
		- The ‘fear’ of one Gerry Armstrong
		- A prank?
		- Are the ‘Affirmations’ at odds with the published writings of L. Ron Hubbard? (1) - “Men are your slaves. Elemental spirits are your slaves. ...”
		- Are the ‘Affirmations’ at odds with the published writings of L. Ron Hubbard? (2) - Who actually wrote the ‘Affirmations’? - A note about Gerry Armstrong
	The incidence of the November 1984 tapes, and the defense of Gerry Armstrong
	Overview of the responses received from Gerry Armstrong (and others) concerning this write-up and further evaluation of his person
		- The Swedish psychiatrist again  &  Responses from Gerry Armstrong prior to release
		- Various responses received ‘after’ release of the write-up
		- Responses from Gerry Armstrong and Monica Pignotti ‘after’ the release of my write-up
		- A counter-action from Gerry Armstrong

 
Foreword

This is a sort of sensitive matter. I have hesitated addressing this. See, if I was to address these writings I could not ignore the person who basically brought them to our attention. He listens to the name Gerry Armstrong, and one could say that he sort of has been spearheading the anti-Scientology movement. Regarding these Affirmations one usually only sees their version being presented. Well, my write-up could be seen as the other side of the coin. I can not confirm or deny who would be the author of the Affirmations, all I can do is carefully track their history and share my observations. I simply figured that someone should write down the story in the way as I have done now. It wasn't available, now it is. These Affirmations (as offered by Gerry Armstrong in 2000) are available at some places out on the Internet, I however have refrained from linking to them. I primarily focus on their history, not so much about what is written in them.

An observation that can be made about the whole thing is though that it rather effectively has drawn the attention away from what the subject of Dianetics and Scientology actually is about and what its aims are. Most particularly the Gerry Armstrong episode is about attacking and discrediting the person L. Ron Hubbard with supposedly authentic papers, and therewith to persuade the public to discard of the subject of Dianetics and Scientology wholly, before they got to know anything about it. The Gerry Armstrong episode could thus be perceived as an act of distraction. One should keep this in mind!

 
What are they? Overview and summary

A notice should be made here that these Affirmations in particular are promoted as being authentic by those that actively oppose to the subject of Scientology and thus wish to target the person L. Ron Hubbard. Neither of these individuals, as I have seen, ask any questions concerning their authenticity or for proper verification. It is as simple as that it is blindly accepted/believed that they just are! Indeed these Affirmations do not give any flattering picture of the person that actually wrote them. The question would however be, who actually has written/compiled them!

 
(a) The involvement of one Gerry Armstrong

	“We don't have to prove a goddam thing. We don't have to prove sh-t. We just have to allege it.”
	– Gerald Armstrong
	(Immortalized on video tape in November 1984, using a telephoto lens and a long range microphone that, amongst other, picked up this quote. Since, the 10 video tape recordings that were made, have become part of court record.)

“He believed that the only way he could defend himself, physically as well as from harassing lawsuits, was to take from Omar Garrison those materials which would support and corroborate everything that he had been saying within the Church about LRH and the Church, or refute the allegations made against him in the April 22 Suppressive Person Declare. He believed that the only way he could be sure that the documents would remain secure for his future use was to send them to his attorneys, and that to protect himself, he had to go public so as to minimize the risk that LRH, the Church, or any of their agents would do him physical harm.” (from ‘Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. C 420153.’, Decision by Judge Paul G. Breckenridge Jr., 20 Jun 84)

Strangely enough it had earlier in this same article been referring to Gerry Armstrong as “this unemployed, penniless man living on a disability pension in the middle of nowhere in British Columbia”. It is rather unclear what he had done with this settlement benefit amounting $500,000. A bit later in the article it then said: “Financially broke, Armstrong is unable to hire lawyers and has for the past several years represented himself.”. Be it noted here that he was then, as he is at present, residing in Canada escaping court justice. A country where the US has no jurisdiction. As far as known Gerry Armstrong has never accounted for what he had done with his benefit settlement. When I had the opportunity to inquire in person with him a while back, he simply chose to ignore answering to this. It has been proposed to me that these funds would have been spent on expenses for judicial support. This argument however does not appear very plausible simply due to the fact that he all these years has been hiding in Canada. In addition if Gerry Armstrong would actually have been right about matters, then why did he not receive any further earnings from judges that ruled in his favour? As it appears followers of Gerry Armstrong are very quick to only refer to court decisions that had been favourable for him, and with the same ignore all the rest. Or they may resort to simply put the blame on the supposed intimidation of the Church of Scientology on the courts. Subsequently it is ignored that if he today would be penniless, broke, and living from a disability pension, that it casts also doubt on his claimed effectiveness while employed within the Scientology organization. His path in life really hasn't been very successful since after he had left the organization.

 
(b) Court proceedings and overview of developments during 1980-84 & 1986

• Chronological overview of events according to news media and court
• Court proceedings held in 1984
• Signing and breach of 1986 settlement

 
Chronological overview of events according to news media and court

Various information is found in the ‘Appendix to the Memorandum of Intended Decision by Judge Paul G. Breckenridge Jr.; Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. C 420153; dated 20 Jun 84’. Very likely part of it is biased and based on the version told by gerry Armstrong. Nonetheless we can learn interesting information from it and we can see a particular chronology. It can be consulted in full here (link will open as a pop-up window).

The Church of Scientology then resorted to file for a civil lawsuit in August 1982 accusing Gerry Armstrong of stealing documents, which at that time were held by the court's clerk and were thus far sealed from the public.

(from ‘Los Angeles Herald’, Friday,11 Feb 83 “Hubbard's ‘Request’ For Papers”)

(from ‘Los Angeles Times’, Wednesday, 27 Apr 83 “Scientologists Fail to Obtain Hubbard's Files”)

 
Court proceedings held in 1984

A rather interesting data that comes to light per the quotations in the previous section is that the materials that came forward into court were no originals. They were simply photocopies that were assembled by Gerry Armstrong into binders. Apparently this is all they were.

	“From the October 28, 1983 deposition transcript, page 264, line 2 through line 21:
	"QWell, maybe you can explain it to me. Was there within the archives materials that you were working with while you held the archives position some documents that had been labeled or identified 'Affirmations'?
	"AThat is correct.
	"QCan you explain to me what these were.
	"AAffirmations were handwritten materials, handwritten by L. Ron Hubbard, which went over various of his problems, and they were self-hypnotic commands that he was writing to himself, affirmations. And they were from the late 1940's, and they referred to his work career, his physical and mental condition, that sort of thing.
	"QThen, were these separate documents, or were they all one document? How were they physically compiled?
	"AThey were assorted. There's a number from the same kind of period or same style of writing.
	"QAnd these were handwritten --
	"AYes.
	"Q-- by Mr. Hubbard?
	"AYes."
	From page 264 beginning at line 27, going to page 265, through 20 of the same deposition transcript:
	"QAnd these were in the nature of personal notes or personal thoughts or ideas? Is that essentially what these documents consisted of?
	"APersonal writings.
	"QApproximately how many different documents are we talking about?
	"AMaybe six.
	"QAnd they all come roughly from the late 1940's?
	"AYes.
	"QWhile you were holding the archives post, where did you obtain these documents?
	"AThey originally came from the boxes in Del Sol on the Gilman Hot Springs property.”

	“MR. LITT:Let me clarify it, as Mr. Armstrong knows, does the court have all of the affirmations? Mr. Armstrong, do you know what the affirmations are?
	MR. ARMSTRONG:Yes.
	MR. LITT:Has the full set of the affirmations, including the book been brought up here and the introductory part to it which is about 30 pages?
	MR. ARMSTRONG:Let me give you some numbers; okay? I'll give you some -- it is 4-D, 4-E, 4-F, 4-G, 4-H, 4-I. That is it. 4-I fits in that category. It is not part of that particular set of documents, but --
	MR. LITT:Do those things together constitute the totality of the affirmations?
	MR. ARMSTRONG:As far as I know, it does.
	MR. LITT:Your Honor, could we take a look for a moment just to determine for ourselves?
	MR. FLYNN:Your Honor, if it doesn't we have no objection --
	MR. LITT:We just want to know what the court has.
	MR. FLYNN:-- to the plaintiff bringing up whatever they want to bring up. Our feeling, Your Honor, is all the records --
	THE COURT:I know what your feeling is.
	MR. FLYNN:-- are relevant.
	THE COURT:I have heard it. Well, We are in recess until 9 o'clock.
	MR. HARRIS:Very well.
	MR. LITT:If Mr. Armstrong could come here for a moment and tell me what document goes with what, I think we can put then in proper order for the court.
	MR. FLYNN:We want them it that order, Mr. Litt, for a very specific reason.
	MR. LIT:But the order that they appear in is not the order that they were in in the original binders, so I would like for the court's review for them to be in the order that they were in in the original binder. Thank you, Mr. Flynn.
	MR. FLYNN:The original binder was created by Mr. Armstrong.
	MR. LITT:I am quite aware of this.
	THE COURT:Okay, okay, just relax.”

“THE WITNESS [Gerry Armstrong]:Those 4D through 4G are the documents that we have called at various times the affirmations or the admissions, ...”

	“MR. LITT:Is the Court going to permit a reading from this?
	THE COURT:Those excerpts and, of course, if you want in later testimony to develop the context or something to affect it, you may do so. Please identify the exhibit that you are referring to before you do it.
	MR. FLYNN:4D, 500 4D.
	QIt states, ‘Men are your slaves.’
	Is that correct, Mr. Armstrong?
	AYes.

	“MR. FLYNN:(Reading:)
	‘Elemental spirits are your slaves.’
	QAnd referring to exhibit 4F it states, ‘You can be merciless whenever your will is crossed and you have the right to be merciless’; is that correct, Mr. Armstrong?
	AYes.

 
Signing and breach of 1986 settlement

“Plaintiff agrees never to create or publish or attempt to publish, and/or assist another to create for publication by means of magazine, article, book or other similar form, any writing or to broadcast or to assist another to create, write, film or video tape or audio tape any show, program or movie, or to grant interviews or discuss with others, concerning their experiences with the Church of Scientology, individuals and entities ... Plaintiff further agrees that he will maintain strict confidentiality and silence with respect to his experiences with the Church of Scientology and any knowledge or information he may have concerning the Church of Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard, or any of the organizations, individuals and entities ...”

 
(c) Mention of the affirmations in 1987 (Ron DeWolf)

“All men shall be my slaves!
  All women shall succumb to my charms!
  All mankind shall grovel at my feet and not know why!”

The above lines we find in the publication ‘L. Ron Hubbard: Messiah or Madman?’ by Bent Corydon and L. Ron Hubbard Jr. a.k.a. Ronald DeWolf, issued in 1987. This is the 2nd time we get some more phrases that are claimed to be deriving from these affirmations. Interestingly these phrases are different. Now this book was published with L. Ron Hubbard Jr. (aka Ron DeWolf) as the co-author, yet he himself denounced this authorship in an affidavit written prior to the release of the book. In this affidavit (dated 20 May 1987) he writes: “To the extend that any portion of the book is based on my previous manuscripts, ..., the book is complete and utter fantasy without the slightest figment of truth.”.

	“According to Ron Jr. his father used drugs and self-hypnosis in order to beef up his WILL:
	For years he used even in the thirties sound scribers. I think you would call it that....The original dictaphones, and IBM had one tot, ..., And he would read these what he called the ‘Affirmations’ into the dictaphone. This is when they were non-erasable. You know, the old Edison with the wax cylinder. He would write these up, or he'd take quotes from the Book of the Law, and other places; then he'd take whatever he had in the way of drugs and play 'em back. Usually he used headphones.
	Hardly anyone believed Ron Jr. when he told this story; but the ‘Affirmations,’ in their original hand-written version, were brought into evidence in open court in Los Angeles in mid-1984, and are part of the court record.”

 
(d) The ‘Affirmations’ emerging in the year 2000

Here below I copied some further sections of his lengthy explanation foregoing these Affirmations and let them follow with my comments.

	“In 1984 I read portions of them into the record at my trial in $cientology v. Armstrong, Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. C 420153.”

 
(e) Views from a Swedish psychiatrist (2005)

There is this Swedish psychiatrist that posted an evaluation on a newsgroup on the Internet in August 2005 entitled: ‘A psychiatric view with comments on the Admissions by Lafayette Ronald Hubbard’. This evaluation was performed on these writings as they were presented by aforesaid Gerry Armstrong in the year 2000. In this evaluation this Swedish psychiatrist starts with expressing “a Big thanks to Gerry Armstrong who brought this confessional writings to the public.”. After which he lays out how he went about this evaluation, he writes: “Lets go through the text one step at the time and I will make comments on the way from a psychiatrists perspective.”. And thus he went through some phrases and let them directly follow with his comments and adjudications, and so on ...

 
Inconsistencies

• Allowing a biographer access to ‘damaging’ papers? - L. Ron Hubbard versus biographies
• Conspiracies
• The ‘Affirmations’:  The domain of the imaginary  vs  The position of the Church of Scientology
• The ‘fear’ of one Gerry Armstrong
• A prank?
• Are the ‘Affirmations’ at odds with the published writings of L. Ron Hubbard? (1) - “Men are your slaves. Elemental spirits are your slaves. ...”
• Are the ‘Affirmations’ at odds with the published writings of L. Ron Hubbard? (2) - Who actually wrote the ‘Affirmations’? - A note about Gerry Armstrong

 
Allowing a biographer access to ‘damaging’ papers? - L. Ron Hubbard versus biographies

It also is rather noteworthy to mention here that L. Ron Hubbard was never that keen to have a biography written on him. It was considered a distraction from the subject of Dianetics and Scientology. It had always sufficed to have a short biography included at the end of some book publication, and that was about it. A chronology of this can be consulted in a separate article that I wrote as part of my ‘The whereabouts of L. Ron Hubbard’ study, see article entitled“The era of adoration celebrates its birth (3) - L. Ron Hubbard vs Biographies or The presentation of his person through the years (1961-present)”, consult here (link will open in separate window).

 
Conspiracies

This simplest of deduction and evaluation may hint at if there may not be a story behind this collection of happenings and occurrences. For instance various illogical sequences can be pointed out in this ‘Appendix to the Memorandum of Intended Decision by Judge Paul G. Breckenridge Jr.; Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. C 420153; dated 20 Jun 84’ (see on this page: chapter (b), 1st section). Now, could Gerry Armstrong have been some sort of patsy? Was this possibly all staged by some person(s)? Then for what reason? To effectively discredit the person L. Ron Hubbard and thus (more importantly) the subject of Dianetics and Scientology? All these hassles with Gerry Armstrong created a considerable consternation in the media. From the newspaper coverage in particular starting from the year 1984, at the time when these incidents occurred, we see that the Church of Scientology steadily establishes itself as being referred to as ‘the sect’. One should also not forget that it was not until the beginning of the Gerry Armstrong episode that the past of L. Ron Hubbard seriously got questioned in regards to his credits and achievements. This is because these Affirmations, and various other papers that came with Armstrong's 21 boxes, were entered into court. And primarily because of this little fact, and not because of proven authenticity, they suddenly received credibility. We had already the happenings with the Clearwater Hearings (May 1982) and the revelations of the oldest son of L. Ron Hubbard in the magazine Penthouse (June 1983). The Armstrong incident only threw more oil onto a fire that by that time already was burning steadfastly. It appears that in particular during this time period that the repute and authority of the person L. Ron Hubbard received a rather serious setback. Strange in a sense as L. Ron Hubbard could not be contacted and had not appeared in public for quite some time. Since years it was said that he was living in seclusion, however some voices were heard that questioned if he actually was still alive at that time. These voices frequently appeared in the news media and the newspapers during these early 80's.

Those that oppose the subject of Scientology are quick to quote and refer to this ‘Memorandum of Intended Decision by Judge Paul G. Breckenridge Jr.; Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. C 420153; dated 20 Jun 84’. Indeed it does not say very nice things about the Church of scientology and the person L. Ron Hubbard. One should however not overlook that this decision is largely based on the sayings and claims of Gerry Armstrong. Also this court decision is just one out of many rulings that since have been made regarding Gerry Armstrong. Scientology antagonists out on the Internet as a rule fail to mention all that happened afterwards and those rulings that were not particular in favour of Gerry Armstrong. Indeed this is rather interesting as the integrity of Gerry Armstrong has been seriously questioned by a variety of courts since the original 1984 ruling.

 
The ‘Affirmations’:  The domain of the imaginary  vs  The position of the Church of Scientology

It may be perceived here that we thus find ourselves in the land of fairy tales. Some person utters: “They're authentic!”, then some other fellow follows with: “Yes, they're authentic!”. Soon after we'll all end up singing in choir: “Yes, they're authentic!”. When in actual fact, all that these writings do, is confirming the preconception various persons already had perceived previously about the person that is attributed to have authored some papers. Then the calculation is being made by some that they thus must be authentic as their nature and message conveniently matches the preconception. And now we're hooked! Well, just inform yourself properly, and don't get hooked.

“Did you know you can let an entheta* despatch drop right there and create less entheta by doing so? Try it sometime.”          LRH
         (from HCO PL 31 Jan 65 “Dev-T”)

The authenticity of these Affirmations has, to my knowledge, never effectively been questioned by any of the Church of Scientology representatives. Then, does this confirm their authenticity? Not necessarily, although it may be found odd that if they obviously would not be authentic, then why has the rumour not been killed in its core? It is much more likely probably though that it has been chosen here to be silent about matters (the rumour being true or not true, authentic or not authentic), for the very simple reason to not attract any attention to these matters. If the Church of Scientology officials would act against these matters they for sure will receive counter reactions and additional media coverage. As it appears the only intention the organization had was to retrieve the materials that Gerry Armstrong said he had taken, and not to go in discussion about them.

	“Plaintiff agrees to return the following:
	(a) All originals and copies of the manuscript for the work ‘Excalibur’ written by L. Ron Hubbard;
	(b) All originals and copies of documents commonly known as the ‘Affirmations’ written by L. Ron Hubbard; and
	(c) All documents and other items surrendered to the Court by Plaintiff and his attorneys pursuant to Judge Cole's orders of August 24, 1982 and September 4, 1982 and all documents and other items taken by the Plaintiff from either the Church of Scientology or Omar Garrison. ...”

 
The ‘fear’ of one Gerry Armstrong

 
A prank?

See, it is all a bit too simple, it can as easily have been concocted to actually frame some person. On the other hand it could also be so that someone simply played a prank. In regards to this it is not to be overlooked that many imitated the mannerisms, handwriting and so on of L. Ron Hubbard during the time that he was around (that's what people so very often resort to doing). It would really not be so hard to find such an imitator and fabricate something. It may very well be so that Gerry Armstrong could be truthful about the authenticity of how he got this material, but simply had been had. And he could have been had a second time in 2000. There is only one thing however that can be conclusive about this, and that is getting the original materials and enforce a proper handwriting analysis on them. These are at present kept by the Church of Scientology, so that is not likely going to happen.

 
Are the ‘Affirmations’ at odds with the published writings of L. Ron Hubbard? (1) - “Men are your slaves. Elemental spirits are your slaves. ...”

It has been Gerry Armstrong's claim, with reference to the things that are written in the Affirmations/Admissions, as if it would have been that L. Ron hubbard wishes to turn everyone till his slave. Various contradictions in regards to this in fact can be found in these very Affirmations as forwarded by Gerry Armstrong in 2000. You see, we do find some reference in these Affirmations to this person named Jack Parsons. Often, and in particular by those that oppose the subject of Scientology, he is referred to rather unfavourably with reference made to black magic and related. Here below I assembled some quotations from these Affirmation/Admissions, Jack Parsons, and with reference from L. Ron Hubbard. It doesn't all really add up ... . It clearly appears that these Affirmations as brought into the light by said Gerry Armstrong contain a whole variety of contradictions. And interestingly enough the Affirmations seem to stress and confirm the common interpretation of Jack Parsons as taken and frequently propagated by the anti-Scientologists. Indeed, this very observation is more than just interesting ...

	Chapter 1
	“For numberless centuries society accepted the proposition that certain men were created to be slaves. Their natural function was to serve priests, kings and nobles, men of substance and property who were appointed slave-masters by almighty God.
	Against this doctrine, some two hundred years ago, rose the most astonishing heresy the world has yet seen; the principle of liberalism. In essence this principle stated that all men are created equal and endowed with inalienable rights, which belong to every man as his birthright.
	It seems necessary to redefine Freedom in the terms understood by Voltaire, Paine, Washington, Jefferson and Emerson.
	Freedom is a two-edged sword of which one edge is liberty and the other, responsibility. Both edges are exceedingly sharp and the weapon is not suited to casual, cowardly or treacherous hands.
	No man, no group and no nation has the right to any man's individual freedom. No matter how pure the motive, how great the emergency, how high the principle, such action is tyranny and is never justified.
	These rights must be counterbalanced by certain responsibilities. The liberal accepting them must guarantee these rights to all others at all times, regardless of his personal feelings or interests.”

	“We of the Church believe:
	That all men of whatever race, color or creed were created with equal rights.”
	“That all men have inalienable rights to their own lives.”
	“That the souls of men have the rights of men.”

 
Are the ‘Affirmations’ at odds with the published writings of L. Ron Hubbard? (2) - Who actually wrote the ‘Affirmations’? - A note about Gerry Armstrong

	“I am also posting the Admissions openly to confirm their authenticity. The copy I received was not clear in places, and it is now gone.”
	– Gerald Armstrong
	(from his introduction to his release of the Affirmations from 11 March 2000)

It may be found rather unlikely that these Affirmations (as they surfaced in 2000) would have been written by L. Ron Hubbard, for the simple reason that they are not in alignment with the approach and style of his published writings. Claims (unsupported) are being made that they would, but when asked to back this up there is this ever returning silence. Associations may be forwarded by some person about science fiction or sorts, but mind also that one first has to determine the actual writing style and secondly the data/suggestions that are being forwarded through these writings.

These affirmations may or may not resemble his own state of mind judging from his style of communicating/writing as we see it posted on newsgroups and various other places. He writes in his message posted 11 March 2000 on that newsgroup: “I'm but a simple messenger, with staggering inabilities, and at times admittedly silly.”. Various examples of his communications and responses are collected given in the last section in this article.

 
The incidence of the November 1984 tapes, and the defense of Gerry Armstrong

	“The judge in the Julie Christofferson v. Scientology case, where the cult broke the Armstrong Op videos, initially would not allow the cult to use them because they were obtained illegally. He also stated, after watching them in chambers, that the videos ‘are devastating, devastating against the church.’
	An attempt to discredit a witness testifying against the Church of Scientology in a fraud trial hit a snag Thursday when a Portland judge called surreptitiously made videotapes an ‘amateurish performance’ and refused to let them be shown to the jury.
	‘I think they are devastating, devastating against the church,’ Multnomah Circuit Judge Donald H. Londer said out of the presence of the jury after viewing 108 minutes of tape recorded in a Los Angeles park last November.
	[...]
	After viewing the tapes, Londer told attorneys he thought it was ‘very questionable’ whether the concealed recordings were made under legal authority in California by a private investigator. He also said the method used in the tapes ‘borders more on entrapment than anything else.’ [from newspaper article ‘Oregonian’, 5 Apr 85]
	Because they showed that Scientology's fair game practice was alive and well, however, Christofferson's attorneys dropped their objection to the videos being put into evidence, and they were played for the jury. And the jury returned a devastating judgment for Julie. And the Judge, a month later, for some reason that he apparently took to his grave, declared a mistrial.
	The cult, of course, after the 1986 ‘settlement’ continued to use the illegally obtained videos and to twist and wring anything they could out of them to fair game me.
	That worked about as well as the rest of Scientology's tech, didn't it?
	© Gerry Armstrong

	“Made by police impersonator Eugene Ingram, and edited to hell by OSA.
	They might be part of the court record, but as garbage that was rejected by the court as evidence.
	You lose.”

	“I went through the transcripts and pulled the ‘best’ parts I could find, doing my best to comply with DM's orders to make Gerry look like a paid informant. Privately I thought it was obvious, even after the editing, that Gerry was being set up, but I dutifully turned in my doctored transcript to DM, who then turned it over to Ted Horner, a Gold staff member in charge of film editing, to use my edited transcript to do the final edit on the videotapes.
	After seeing the videotape, the judge was enraged and told the Scientologists, ‘I have heard about these dirty tactics that you use against your perceived enemies, but now that I have seen it for myself I think you are much, much worse than I had ever imagined!’ And kicked them out of his chambers.
	Everyone joined in the delusion that we were simply tightening up the videotape. DM ordered me and the rest of the FREEDOM staff to turn the edited GA videotape transcripts into a special edition of FREEDOM. If the judge wouldn't listen, then we would take the issue to the people of Portland! That was what DM said.”

The recordings (raw tapes)

These raw tapes that have been available are of a rather reasonable quality, keeping in mind that these were recorded with a telephoto lens and a long range microphone at considerable distance.

 
Overview of the responses received from Gerry Armstrong (and others) concerning this write-up and further evaluation of his person

• The Swedish psychiatrist again  &  Responses from Gerry Armstrong prior to release
• Various responses received ‘after’ release of the write-up
• Responses from Gerry Armstrong and Monica Pignotti ‘after’ the release of my write-up
• A counter-action from Gerry Armstrong

 
The Swedish psychiatrist again  &  Responses from Gerry Armstrong prior to release

It was thus my intent to give Gerry Armstrong the opportunity to actually respond to this write-up. While compiling it I had an exchange with this earlier mentioned Swedish psychiatrist on a Swedish discussion forum from Swedish television. The occasion was a recent broadcast relating to Scientology. I happen to mention to him that an article on the matter of the Affirmations was in progress and would be published on the Internet in the very near future. This motivated him a bit later to forewarn Gerry Armstrong on this aforementioned Internet newsgroup about this. This newsgroup is regularly visited by Gerry Armstrong. This psychiatrist wrote amongst other in his message that “one can not rule out the possibility that [he] is compiling an attac[k] on Gerry Armstrong on behalf of the Cult of $cientology”. Ending his message with: “So Gerry, if you are reading this, there might be something ugly coming your way! Take care buddy, and be assured that many of us is thinking of you, admiring your bravery, endurance and integrity!” (posted 23 November 2008). These words make the position (or rather admiration) of this psychiatrist rather clear, and it may actually speak for itself. Nonetheless I responded to these quoted phrases with: “Sorry, I do not operate for some organization or on behalf of someone else.” & “Factual information and properly performed studies in itself are never ugly, but it may look ugly for friend Gerry.”.

 
Various responses received ‘after’ release of the write-up

	“Ah, you are an authority worshipper, and you believe newspapers, and that journalists always do their groundwork properly.
	Now, obviously then an attempt to overthrow with conviction, YOUR conviction and guru admiration (i.e. St. Gerry)!
	Unfortunately I have to disappoint you, as there is not a shred of proper evidence that L. Ron Hubbard would have written these papers. Now will an intelligent individual please come along!”

 
Responses from Gerry Armstrong and Monica Pignotti ‘after’ the release of my write-up

“Unfortunately, Robert Vaughn Young died several years ago. Stacy has been incommunicado since the fiasco several years ago, so it is highly unlikely she would confirm anything. Gerry claimed in a recent ARS posting that people saw the affirmations who could vouch for them. Bob and Stacy wouldn't fit that description any longer and we'll never know if they ever did. It is also unclear what Gerry meant that they could have confirmed what was in ‘within reasonable parameters, authentic’. It sounds like he was citing their expert opinion more than claiming they were actual witnesses to the LRH handwritten documents. There's a big difference between their opining they were written by LRH and actually having seen the documents in his own handwriting. What I am asking is whether anyone else actually saw the physical LRH-handwritten documents that are claimed to exist and if so, who.”

 
A counter-action from Gerry Armstrong

The life and goings of L. Ron Hubbard Jr. (‘Nibs’) aka Ron DeWolf

	Introduction
	A chronology of events
		- The 50's
		- ‘Casualties’ (1959-60)
		- Nibs Hubbard:  Statements made ... and withdrawn again, not once but twice (1967-69 & 1972-73)
		- The Clearwater Hearings (May 1982)
		- Ron DeWolf applies for his ‘inheritance’ (Nov 82)
		- The Penthouse occurrence (1983-84)
		- Ron DeWolf again applies for ‘inheritance’ after official news of the passing of his father (Jan 86)
		- Ron DeWolf renouncing all of his claims (May-Jul 1987)
	Is Ron DeWolf a reliable witness?
	Nibs is being edited ... (an anecdote)

 
Introduction

This may also be a bit sensitive. Various chronologies and overviews that I have seen posted at various places on the Internet and elsewhere are often gloriously missing out on various expects and happenings involving the person Ron DeWolf. As a rule this is for propaganda reasons. The anti-Scientology movement followers are very avid and quick to brief you about the things he had said that were not in favour of Scientology or its founder, but conveniently they also choose to not tell you that he withdrew the things he had said about equally often. If confronted with this argument they are then equally quick stating that this is only because the Scientology organization exerted their control (or sorts) over him, and thus should be disregarded from. This too is a rather convenient rebuttal. The Church of Scientology on the other hand has only made some official statements, or published counter articles if the situation required such an action. Otherwise they have been very quiet about him, and in fact have edited out any and all reference to Nibs Hubbard out of the present version of the materials. Pretty much to the point that as if he never would have existed. Not even video recordings have been spared (see last section entitled: “Nibs is being edited ... (an anecdote)”).
It is because of these reasons that what you find are just bits and pieces, information taken out of context, left out sequences, or simply missing information. It suffices to say that you may have to do some serious digging if you wish to find a more complete tale of his life and goings. I have attempted to present the happenings as they occurred chronologically. These are assembled from the available sources.

 
A chronology of events

• The 50's
• ‘Casualties’ (1959-60)
• Nibs Hubbard: Statements made ... and withdrawn again, not once but twice (1967-69 & 1972-73)
• The Clearwater Hearings (May 1982)
• Ron DeWolf applies for his ‘inheritance’ (Nov 82)
• The Penthouse occurrence (1983-84)
• Ron DeWolf again applies for ‘inheritance’ after official news of the passing of his father (Jan 86)
• Ron DeWolf renouncing all of his claims (May-Jul 1987)

 
The 50's

‘Nibs’ Hubbard , July '57

He was the firstborn child of L. Ron Hubbard (born 5 May 1934). From the beginning in 1949/50 till 1959 he had been an active participator in the subject of Dianetics and Scientology and its organization. His name and his wife's (Henriette) are noted as witnesses in the founding of the first 3 organizations in December 1953. The Scientology periodical Ability makes frequently mention of him during 1956-59, a couple of times even with a photograph. Frequently he functioned as a sideman or the soundman at Dianetics and Scientology conferences, but also as organization secretary. It would appear that he also made himself particular repute as an auditor. In ‘Ability 33’, [Jul 56] we see him referred to as “one of the world's more famous auditors”. Page 5 of this issue of Ability was dedicated to ‘his nibs’ and laid out various of his achievements and goals. Accomplishments that, as per the article, “made Ron Senior sit up and take notice”. He has also been active as instructor/supervisor at courses (amongst other 18th A.C.C.* in Jul-Aug 1957, 19th A.C.C. in Jan-Feb 1958 & 21st A.C.C. in Jan-Feb 1959). In this capacity of being an instructor he, together with John W. Galusha, compiled the course booklet: ‘Scientology Training Course Manual - Field Validation & Hubbard Apprentice Scientologists’ (1957), which publication effectively put in the line of becoming well trained on the socalled TR's*. Things however were in for a change as rather abruptly, in late 1959, he dissociated himself from the Scientology organization and his father, and left. He simply took his belongings, told no one about it, and went elsewhere never to return to the organization.

 
‘Casualties’ (1959-60)

	“There are a few casualties along the line of getting off overts*, and by my telling you about them, you may be able to prevent others and to better understand what is going on.
	Only about eight people have ‘run for the brush’ to date because of an unwillingness to reveal their overts against Scientology. There may be a few more but the data is not to hand. The overwhelming majority of Scientologists have embraced these new techniques and measures with enthusiasm.
	Factually, those that blew were not in possession of much data on overts. I feel that if they had been they would have stood up to it.
	In early November I ordered all organizations to give an E-Meter check on all staffs preliminary to auditing these on the new overt/withhold—responsibility combination. I also forbade Central Orgs to employ persons with hidden social crimes that might be used to hurt Scientology (blackmail) until expiation could be accomplished and auditing completed.”          LRH

	“This began by suspending one Doug Moon in HASI Melbourne until he had been cleared since he was such a social liability. ...
	The day I returned to Saint Hill Norma Webb, a Peter Stumbke and another non-Scientologist named Dinah Day resigned and ran away.
	On November 23rd at the urgings of Nina West, close friend of Webb, Nibs Hubbard* deserted his post in Washington and left no forwarding address. It transpires that he had been caught up in the Moon—Webb—West connections. He tried to find nerve to face an E-Meter the Saturday he left but did not report for his scheduled session with his Washington auditor on that day. He has since been heard of here and there borrowing money and staying out of sight.”          LRH

“As Nibs Hubbard was probably being blackmailed it is creditable that he removed himself from post before he could be made to harm the Washington Organization.*”          LRH

“Nina West's certificates and awards in Scientology and Dianetics are hereby cancelled, due in part to evidence of use of PDH* on Central Org Personnel.”          LRH

*  PDH: ‘Pain Drugs Hypnosis’. A person is put into a trance through use of pain, drugs and hypnosis and is told things. Roughly it means you have become stimulus response without really having control of yourself anymore.

Does this PDH may explain why he behaved erratically (changing his mind time after time) in later years? It has been suggested by some.

 
Nibs Hubbard:  Statements made ... and withdrawn again, not once but twice (1967-69 & 1972-73)

1967-69:  It is reported that in 1967 he had made “statements to the Internal Revenue Service” and made a “sworn testimony against the church”. Then “on September 22, 1969” he “then changed his mind” and “recanted” these.

♦ The above listed data from 1967-73 has been summarized and is extracted from an article that appeared in magazine ‘Penthouse’, Jan 84, consult here (link will open as a pop-up window). If you have alternate sources for this information from that time period (1967-73), the actual video recording or other, please contact me.

In 1972 L. Ron Hubbard Jr. (‘Nibs’ Hubbard) changed his last name in ‘DeWolf’. The variation ‘De Wolf’ was the maiden name of his great grandmother from his fathers side. In a newspaper article Nibs revealed that he had done so due to having been subjected to harassment by the Church of Scientology (see ‘County, Press-Enterprise’, 13 Nov 82).

 
The Clearwater Hearings (May 1982)

The initial establishing of the Scientologists in downtown Clearwater (Fl) in late 1975 had already been met with some mistrust by its citizens. During the late 70's and early 80's Scientology was getting various further unfavourable attention (raid on the Scientology's headquarters in Washington, DC and Los Angeles, July 1977; Guardian Office incidents, 1979-81). The city commissionaires of Clearwater and their mayor that felt alarmed by the growth of the organization in their town then approached the attorney Michael Flynn to help them to perform an investigation of this Scientology. This resulted in the Clearwater Hearings that convened 5 to 10 May 1982. They were held in public and were even locally broadcasted life on television and could be viewed in its local library. Ron DeWolf testified on 5 & 6 May of these hearings. Basically his testimony appears to be an attempt to utterly demolish the reputation of his father, he called him a liar (99% of all his father had said about himself was a lie), violent (hit his wife), a drug user/abuser/pusher, that the creation of Scientology only and always had been about the money, and so on. It may be found noteworthy that Ron DeWolf attacked with full force by discrediting about any and all relating to his father. His testimony was thus no mild criticism.

 
Ron DeWolf applies for his ‘inheritance’ (Nov 82)

“Son of Scientology believes Hubbard dead or ill   Petition filed requesting estate trustee The oldest son of L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of the Church of Scientology, believes his father is either dead or mentally incompetent, according to a petition filed in Riverside Superior Court. The son, Ronald E. DeWolf, also claims in the court papers filed Wednesday that officials in the church have stolen millions of dollars, gems and securities either from his 71-year-old father or from Hubbard's estate in the last 12 months. DeWolf, 48, of Carson city, Nev., is asking the court to appoint him as trustee of his father's affairs to protect the assets. DeWolf, a former Scientologist who now manages an apartment complex in Carson City, claims the worldwide organization is now run by David Miscavige, described in the petition as a ‘22-year-old with a ninth-grade education.’ He alleges Miscavige and another church official, James Isaacson, forged Hubbard's signature to loot the accounts. ‘I am not attacking LRH (L. Ron Hubbard) in a legal sense,’ DeWolf said yesterday in a telephone interview, ‘because no one has ever been able to do that successfully . . . The only way he can contest all of this is to show up physically in court. But I expect he may have trouble doing that because I don't think he is alive.’ The son said he has not seen his father since 1959, but DeWolf said he has kept track of the inner workings of the secretive church ‘through conversations with attorneys, friends and a loose-knit network of former cult members.’ ... Hubbard laid out secret plans for his death, according to DeWolf. Hubbard instructed Douglas to ‘bury him in the date fields’ in the area and not to disclose his death. ‘shortly thereafter,’ DeWolf states in his petition, ‘my father disappeared.’”      (from ‘County, Press-Enterprise’, 13 Nov 82)

“Hubbard wife to oppose try to rule church founder dead  The wife of L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of scientology, filed notice yesterday that she will oppose an attempt to have her husband declared legally dead or mentally incompetent. ... The notice was filed in Riverside County Superior Court in an effort to prevent Hubbard's son, Ronald E. DeWolf, 48, of Carson City, Nev., from being appointed trustee of Hubbard's estate.      (from ‘County, Press-Enterprise’, 20 Nov 82) Although she has not seen Hubbard since 1979, her attorney Litt said: ‘She hears from him regularly by correspondence and she is comfortably supported by her husband on a monthly basis.’ Litt said Mrs. Hubbard's action is not meant to substitute herself for DeWolf as a trustee. ‘But, under California statutes,’ he said, ‘if a trustee were to be appointed, she would be the presumptive person to be trustee since state statutes give preference to a spouse.’”

This all actually introduced and started the time period in which serious questions are being raised about if in fact L. Ron Hubbard still would be alive. Attention was given to it on television shows and newspapers.

In the same article it is responded to with:
	“Not so, retorted the publishers of several of Hubbard's manuscripts ... The publishers insist that Hubbard is still writing, not just books but correspondence. But no one, including top church officials, has produced Hubbard. And the mysterious founder of Scientology and its allied philosophy, Dianetics, is not talking.”

 
The Penthouse occurrence (1983-84)

 
Ron DeWolf again applies for ‘inheritance’ after official news of the passing of his father (Jan 86)

“Hubbard's Son Planning to Seek Inquest, Contest Will  A Boston attorney representing the estranged son of Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard said Wednesday that he will request a coroner's inquest into the death of the reclusive multimillionaire and plans to contest the will Hubbard signed the day before he died. ... In the letter, made public by his office, Flynn said he wants to know whether the science fiction writer's vast wealth ‘would provide a motive for individuals close to Hubbard to engage in potential wrongdoing.’ Flynn insisted that he was not accusing anyone of wrongdoing but said Hubbard's closest associates should be ‘made to answer questions surrounding’ the death on a remote ranch in Central California. ... Hubbard's will was dated one day before his death, according to Whiting. Flynn said he will attempt to have the will invalidated on grounds that Hubbard may have been coerced or mentally incompetent. ... Church officials said that although he had suffered a stroke the week before his death, Hubbard was lucid when he amended the will, providing additional money to some family members. Hubbard also left the church he founded three decades ago ‘tens of millions of dollars.’ DeWolf apparently received nothing. ... Getting Ready to Die Church spokesman Hoden said Hubbard's will was dated shortly before his death because he had made a decision to leave his body and was getting his affairs in order. Four days before his death, Hubbard also signed a certificate saying it was against his religious beliefs to have an autopsy performed. No autopsy was conducted, and his remains were cremated.      (from ‘Los Angeles Times’, 30 Jan 86)

It be noted here that the above article does state some things that could be considered somewhat odd or suspect. For example “he had made a decision to leave his body” (thus to actually die). I've listed and investigated various additional arguments that could be forwarded in regards to these circumstances in an article that I wrote about this: “The official version (Jan 86)”, consult here (link will open in a separate window).

Either way Ron DeWolf's bid for an inquest had been rejected for reason of :
	“‘It is our belief that the physician of record has sufficient knowledge to reasonably state the cause of death,’ Whiting said. ‘There is no information obtained during the inquiry to suggest death resulted from other than the cause stated by the physician.’” (from ‘Los Angeles Times’, 5 Feb 86)

 
Ron DeWolf renouncing all of his claims (May-Jul 1987)

It is reported that Ron DeWolf died on September 16, 1991. Some persistent rumours tell that he died because of the injuries he developed while being run over by a car when crossing a street. Another source says that he would have died from cancer.

 
Is Ron DeWolf a reliable witness?

	“And not all professionals in the ‘anti-cult’ field trust DeWolf, either, Scientology officials, while reluctant to admit DeWolf's very existence, when faced with his accusations distribute a transcript of a videotape which DeWolf made in 1972. On tape, DeWolf says he had no personal knowledge of any wrong-doing or illegal acts or brutality against people by members of Scientology, and that he lied in earlier testimony.
	DeWolf now says the tape was made ‘under duress...I did a lot of talking to a lot of people, and nobody believed me. They thought what I had to say was as far out as Scientology itself. But I can't expose L. Ron Hubbard without exposing myself. So I had to reach a point where I was ready, willing, and able to in actual fact let everything – everything – hang out. The whole ball of wax – the good, the bad, the beautiful, the ugly...It wasn't really until 1978, in fact, that I got out from under it. I didn't have all kinds of counselors or ‘deprogrammers.’’”

 
Nibs is being edited ... (an anecdote)

In July 1958 when L. Ron Hubbard gave the Clearing Course lectures, it was his son Nibs that assisted him on the podium. In the 1987 video release he can still be seen. However in the 2006 DVD release he is gone.

For me this is pretty much up to the point of getting ridiculous. First it was the hand of Nibs that brought the books onto the podium and then took them away again. Suddenly now it has become an invisible hand doing these things and rather mysteriously pushed the books on the podium and subsequently removed them again. The edited version looks rather humorous when viewed. And then, who would actually recognize this as being Nibs Hubbard? Would anyone? Pictures of him are indeed very scarce. Thus in regards to that it does not bear any particular significance to have had him edited out from this video. It has now drawn the attention because it was edited like this. Instead the focus has now gone to why the present Church of Scientology does this. It also raises the question that if this can be edited like that, then what else has been edited that we have not discovered yet?

Either way as from the perspective of the intent and purpose of the subject of Scientology and Dianetics there is in fact some oddness or rather inconsistency involved with this. One could simply define the expression ‘as-is’: “To view anything exactly as it is without any distortions or lies, at which moment it will vanish and cease to exist.” (from ‘Scientology Abridged Dictionary’, 1965). This indeed is very basic for these subjects.

I may hope that I've given you something you'd like to contemplate about... I have done my best to put together relevant information. If you find that I am in error or figure that you have some information that should be included, then please contact me about that.

Vocabulary:

     68R, 68RA:
For example: ‘HCO PL 14 Oct 68R’ & ‘HCO PL 14 Oct 68RA’. The date denotes the first time it has been published in issue-form. The R stands for 'Revision' and would refer to that it has been revised since it was first issued. If it is revised a 2nd time it says RA, a 3rd time RB etc..
     ACC:
'Advanced Clinical Course'. 1. Basically a theory and research course which gives a much further insight into the phenomena of the mind and the rationale of research and investigation (PAB 71)  2. L. Ron Hubbard's special courses personally taught by him, and sponsored for him by an HCO office. (HCO PL 24 Feb 60). Abbr. ACC.
     AD 13:
'After Dianetics 13': The book Dianetics was written and published in 1950. 13 years after Dianetics would give 1963.
     audit, auditing, auditor:
The application of Scientology processes and procedures to someone by a trained auditor (listener). The goal of the auditor is to make the receiver of the auditing look at incidents and reduce the mental charge which may lay upon them. The auditor may not evaluate and has to adhere to the Auditor's code.
     Black Dianetics:   (as in Technical Dictionary)
1. Hypnotism. (from lecture given on sept 17, 1951 entitled ‘Black Dianetics’). 2. There are those who, to control, resort to narcotism, suggestion, gossip, slander—the thousands of overt and covert ways that can be classified as Black Dianetics. (from Scientology Journal Issue 3-G, Sept. 1952 entitled ‘Danger: Black Dianetics!’).
     CSI:
‘Church of Scientology International’. A senior level within the Church of Scientology.
     entheta:
Means enturbulated theta (thought or life); especially refers to communications, which, based on lies and confusions, are slanderous, choppy or destructive in an attempt to overwhelm or suppress a person or group.
     HCO (HCO Division):
‘Hubbard Communications Office’: It's in charge of the org boards, personnel, hatting and communication lines. HCO builds, holds, maintains, mans and controls the organization. It's in charge of inspection and it's in charge of ethics. Has the say on all copyrights and trademarks, rights of materials and the issuance of publications.
     HCO PL or PL:
‘Hubbard Communication Office Policy Letter’: issue-type reserved for L. Ron Hubbard only, these address administrative issues.  One should keep in mind however that at one time not all HCO PL's were written by L. Ron Hubbard.  In present time they are either cancelled or reissued in another issue-type. 
     LRH:
An usual abbreviation for ‘L. Ron Hubbard’.
     MEST:
A coined word, meaning matter, energy, space and time, the physical universe. All physical phenomena may be considered as energy operating in space and time. The movement of matter or energy in time is the measure of space. All things are mest except theta.
     original mimeo print-off:
Individually printed issues and distributed from the Mimeo Section of the Scientology organization as opposed to those collected in volumes. These are the issues that you may regard as the real first prints. As a rule these are typed out, mimeographed and distributed as soon as possible after having been compiled or written. They are always legal-sized, 8½ by 14 inches (approx. 21,6 x 35,6 cm). If the issue had 3 or more sides, the pages were collated and stapled together in the upper left corner. More detailed information about this is found here (link will open in a separate window).
     OT (Operating Thetan):
1. Willing and knowing cause over life, thought, matter, energy, space and time. And that would of course be mind and that would of course be universe. (SH Spec 80, 6609C08)  2. An individual who could operate totally independently of his body whether he had one or didn't have one. He's now himself, he's not dependent on the universe around him. (SH Spec 66, 6509C09)  3. A being at cause over matter, energy, space, time, form and life. Operating comes from “able to operate without dependency on things” and thetan is the Greek letter theta (θ), which the Greeks used to represent “thought” or perhaps “spirit” to which an “n” is added to make a new noun in the modern style used to create words in engineering. (Book of Case Remedies, p. 10)
     org:
Abbreviation for ‘organization’.
     OSA:
‘Office of Special Affairs’. A network within the Church of Scientology International which plans and supervises the legal affairs of the church, under the board of directors. (from ‘What Is Scientology?’ (1992 Edition), page 649).
     PAB:
'Professional Auditors Bulletin', Scientology periodical (monthly) send to all members to keep auditors informed about the latest discoveries concerning processing procedures and other.
     SHSBC:
‘Saint Hill Special Briefing Course’: This is a course delivered by L. Ron Hubbard at Saint Hill, England during 1961-66 and comprising of 447 lectures, its result is an adept auditor and thorough know-how of Scientology itself.
     theta:
Thought, life force, the spirit or the soul.
     Training Routine (TR):
Training regimen or routine. Often referred to as a training drill. TRs are a precise training action putting a student through laid out practical steps gradient by gradient, to teach a student to apply with certainty what he has learned. In particular these are for training of an auditor in regards to communication. The ones presently in use are OT TR 0, TR 0 confronting, TR 0 bullbait, TR 1, 2, 2½, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 100, 100-A, 101, 102, 103 & 104. (for more data see Technical Dictionary & HCOB 17 Jul 69RB)
     wog:
‘worthy Oriental gentleman’. 1. This means a common ordinary run-of-the-mill garden-variety humanoid. (SH Spec 82, 6611C29)  2. A wog is somebody who isn't even trying. (SH Spec 73, 6608C02)