Happy Birthday, L. Ron Hubbard!

Yes, today is Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard’s 101st birthday! Celebrations have started already last Saturday and will continue all around the world till the end of this month.

As a reader of this blog you might know a thing or two about LRH but I am sure there is more. Check this out:

http://www.lronhubbard.org/home.html

Truly recommended to spend some time on.

– L

35 Comments

  1. I would suggest that the burden of proof lies with Scientology, as they are the ones making specific claims as to the war record of Hubbard. And many of these claims remain without validation.

    As was pointed out by visitor 25, there is simply no evidence to support the claim that Hubbard was injured in combat, a claim which forms the very basis of Scientology. Quite the contrary, his medical records are quite specific as to his actual maladies.

    It has been claimed that Hubbard received a purple heart for his wartime injuries. This is not reflected in his official file, and not supported by his medical records.

    There is no record of Hubbard playing any role in combat actions, much less any acts of heroism.

    Louanne has claimed that hubbards association with the satanist jack parsons was part of a secret naval intelligence mission- this, too, is unsupported by fact, as you’ve seen in your records. That occurred well past the 25-year declassification date.

    That’s a small list of the specific claims as to hubbards war record. I’m left wondering why Scientology makes so many claims that are refuted by verifiable records?

    • Hi Call4,
      You wrote “I’m left wondering why Scientology makes so many claims that are refuted by verifiable records?”

      The verifiable records also imply that Hubbard went home from Australia by ship, on either the SS CHAUMONT or the M/S PENNANT. Yet a review of the passenger lists of these ships, and their arrival and departure dates (available in the National Archives), prove that not only was Hubbard not on those ships, but that there was no physical way he could have taken anything but an airplane back on his return to the US.

      The fact is, some “verifiable records” are wrong. I don’t think one has to resort to consipiracy theories to explain them. But one does need to look deeper than the surface to really get to the truth behind them.

      Per the records in the National Archives, Hubbard was in Australia at least as late as March 8, 1942 (disseminating counter-intelligence details) and was back in San Francisco on March 23, 1942. Even the fast ships in those days couldn’t make the Australia – San Francisco voyage in under three weeks — letalone just over two. This is especially true given that Hubbard’s Naval record also states that he returned via Honolulu.

      To confirm that conclusion, I literally scoured through all the ship passenger lists arriving into the U.S. in Feb, Mar and Apr 1942, looking for Hubbard. I didn’t find Hubbard on any of them. I then turned my attention to the airplane records. And in those, I found a flight from Australia to San Francisco (via Honolulu) that arrived in SF on March 23, 1942. And as it turned out, it was on the same fleet of planes that the Secretary of the Navy’s office was using to send senior officers and dignitaries on trans-oceanic flights. Given the above, I believe chances are very high that Hubbard was on that flight.

      With regard to your other statements about Hubbard not having seen action … I’m afraid that a deeper more thorough look at the evidence suggests otherwise. While it took some digging, I believe a decent case — using only existing and public records — can be made for my statements below.

      I cannot speak for any other claims that Louanne or the church of Scientology makes.

      • While certainly engaging, Kat, many of your conclusions appear to be based on information that no one else has been able to find for 60+ years, including Scientology researchers! I’m not doubting you or your research abilities, but I am echoing the request for the original documents, as your findings seem to contradict other records, particularly the ones pointed out by visitor.

        Still other conclusions that you have reached seem based on conjecture, rather than verified fact. An example is the assumption that Hubbard must have been in a tropical region due to the presence of malaria (I don’t recall malaria in his medical record, but I’ll defer to your research). You claim on this site that “Men weren’t catching malaria in Australia”; malaria wasn’t eradicated in Australia until 1981, with the last major outbreak occurring in world war 2. 

        Certain assumptions are also made as to hubbards manner of travel from leaving Australia. I have not heard the particular claims made that he took a particular watercraft, but I think that you’ve eliminated those by the passenger lists. I’d imagine that you haven’t eliminated all ships for that time period, but I still believe that air travel is most plausible. Yet, we still don’t know for certain how or why he left the country. Has the dod not provided that flight manifest? 

        I would have to question the assumption that hubbards assumed presence on that flight assumes positive action. Do you feel that the cable sent to Washington by the Australian government, which reads in part, “This officer is not satisfactory for independent duty assignment. He is garrulous and tries to give impressions of his importance. He also seems to think he has unusual ability in most lines.”, is a forgery? If it is not, then it doesnt seem impossible that hubbard would be included on the next flight out of there! Of course that’s not taking into account the fact that boeing and other manufacturers were mass producing intercontinental airframes by the 40s, with hundreds in operation for commercial travel. Certainly, civilian air travel was a possibility. 

        But, regardless, I’m sure you’ve considered hubbards own claims about that flight: 

        “I hooked a ride on the Secretary of the Navy’s plane; produced the right set of orders (I hope nobody ever kept them on file) and got flown home.” in this version, he claims to have created his own orders, while injured personnel were shipped by slow boat. 

        In another version, he claimed that he called the secretary of state and told him that he had important dispatches that could “practically sink the Japanese fleet”. While this contradicts his earlier claims, it can not be confirmed by any official record.

        You also claim specifically that “And that he almost certainly saw action in Java.” this is also not supported by his personnel file. 

        You mention the purple heart, which supports your theory as to his injuries- why is the purple heart not listed in hubbards separation documents? Only four awards are actually listed- far less than is claimed on his behalf. 

        I suppose that I’m left to hope that you provide these source documents so that they may be verified, as many of your conclusions contradict the official record previously provided by the navy, VA and dod. Not doubting your conclusions, but merely asking that you share your resources. 

      • Sorry, kat=sky

        Also, you say that many verifiable resources point to a particular ship. What resources are you referring to? I have not seen a verifiable resource making that claim.

        However, that is a minor point. I think that the greatest interest will be why his claimed injuries are not reflected in his file, nor his awards, and why his officer evaluation reports were do negative regarding the character of his service.

      • Wow… a lot of conversation.

        If I may ask, did you find any evidence to support the claim that Hubbard was sent on a secret mission by the navy to infiltrate any grouping or individual instance related to the church of satan in the US?

        Is there even any indication that he completed his training for the ONI?

      • Call4, you wrote:
        “based on information that no one else has been able to find for 60+ years, including Scientology researchers!”

        This may be true, but remember too that the Internet has only been around for about 15 years in any meaningful way … and the National Archives, though available on microfilm for decades, has only started putting many of their documents online AND searchable in the last few years. This has been a key piece in doing research. On top of that, there is now books.google.com which is recent and has been invaluable, and many additional searchable resources, that hadn’t existed before.

        Also, there have been a couple versions of Hubbard’s Navy records floating around out there. One appears to have come from Gerry Armstrong as was entered into evidence in court in the 80s — Russell Miller appears to have used this set. Another set appears to have come from Arnie Lerma, which were apparently based on microfilm records which he says he got from the Navy. Chris Owen and Jon Atack appear to have based their research on these (as well as Armstrong’s).

        However, there is now a new set from the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC), which is where all of Hubbard’s (declassified) files are currently held. This set contains actual high-quality digital color scans of the original, raw records. Not surprisingly, it contains some medical records which I had not found online before (the “malaria” while a “combat intelligence officer in the asiatics” for example). But also appears to be MISSING some files that some of the earlier sets such as Armstrong’s DO contain. I think there is a good reason for this, and it is related to how I believe a subset of Hubbard’s files went missing. More on that later.

        Regarding malaria in Australia, you should dig into this a bit further. You will find that most of the cases of malaria were in northern Australia, and were largely from people who had just returned from the tropical regions in the islands to the north. While it is remotely possible that Hubbard could have caught malaria while in northern Australia (Darwin), most of the prevailing theories out there have described Hubbard as remaining in the lower half of Australia — Brisbane and Melbourne. And malaria would have been nearly impossible to catch in those climates.

        If Hubbard had gone to Darwin (which records indicate that he probably did), it almost certainly would have been as part of his trying to get to Java — which makes sense since his primary orders were to report to the Philippines. The Philippines by Feb. 1942, however, were not safely reachable and the new Allied base of operations had become Java by that time. What troops who had had orders to the Philippines (but were re-routed to Australia, like Hubbard) were doing, were making their way to Darwin — by ship or plane — and then taking ships or planes into Java or other islands in the Dutch East Indies, to help defend against the encroaching southbound Japanese forces. It was tough going because the Allied troops were thin at this point, and the Japanese were overwhelming the Allies in the last weeks of February. By March 1st, the Japanese had landed on Java. But by that time, nearly all of the Allied forces (other than the Dutch) had escaped Java by ship, submarine, plane — and even in some cases by liferaft in hopes of being met up with by ships further out at sea. All of these details are available in War Diaries and Action Reports available online these days (and of course historians have been writing about them for decades).

        In all likelihood, Hubbard was part of these movements.

        But what of the Naval Attache threat that tried to send Hubbard home on the CHAUMONT?

        Hubbard’s written response to that threat on Feb. 3, 1942 was the key that pieced it all together for me. It took parsing that letter down in detail, to understand what was happening.

        From the moment Hubbard stepped off the POLK, he was officially reporting to the Army, not the Naval Attache. And he remained reporting to the Army the entire time that he was in Australia, and presumably Java. (One sees evidence of this in Hubbard’s compliance report, the endorsements, and the surviving correspondence of this period.) And from all indications, the Army (especially his commanding officer Alexander LP Johnson) held him in very high regard.

        There appears to have been some kind internal feud going on between the Naval Attache (Causey) and the Army Colonel (Johnson). Since Hubbard was officially reporting to Johnson (and ultimately sided with Johnson, writing a scathing report about Causey’s lying and insulting Johnson), Causey was no doubt pissed and retaliated by trying to carry out an earlier threat of sending Hubbard home. But with Hubbard officially reporting to the Army (Johnson), the Naval Attache (Causey) order was safely ignored — Hubbard never returned on the CHAUMONT as Causey hoped. Ultimately, Hubbard remained attached to the US Army the entire time and also appears to have made his way to Darwin and then Java.

        Hubbard may have indeed amassed some very valuable intelligence-related documents (as he states in one of his lectures), and this may have been what earned him a ticket on a plane home. One of the most valuable things to Washington in this period, was understanding what the heck had happened in Java and what the full level of Japanese capabilities were. With Hubbard being an ONI officer — or a “combat intelligence officer” as his Navy medical file describes — it is possible he was able to gather up valuable files and reports that Washington would have been keen to get ahold of rapidly.

        And by the way, Call4, while I was at the National Archives, I had a chance to look up the now-declassified correspondence files of the Secretary of the Navy and the CNO’s office. Guess who had a record of personal correspondene with the Secretary of the Navy in the early 1940s? Yup, our Mr. Hubbard. It was nothing extravagent — was related to the Explorers Club — but it does indeed exist. And Hubbard also had several entries in the CNO’s and SECNAV’s office index files, regarding intelligence training and other matters in 1941 and 1942.

        But where is all the proof of injuries? Where are the documents that show his purported Java escapades and earning of medals? Was it “sheep dipping” or some kind of “intelligence cover up”. I don’t think we have to resort to that. As mentioned, some clues do exist for the Army connection, some minor injuries, a probable trip to Java, the malaria, and the flight home. All of these things exist in the public record and Hubbard’s Navy files.

        But ultimately, with Hubbard reporting to the Army — and not the Navy — during his entire time he was in Australia/Java, I think the answer for “missing files” far more prosaic. In 1973, the National Personnel Records Center suffered from a fire which destroyed millions of Army personnel records (Army, not Navy). In all likelihood, Hubbard had a short-lived Army file which documented more of his time in Australia/Java — and if so, it was likely destroyed in this fire. This theory also helps to explain why some files exist in Armstrong’s collection of Hubbard’s personal war records, but are not now in the official Navy record. For example, that letter Hubbard wrote to the Army in Australia — it does not appear in his official Navy file — but was part of Armstrong’s collection and is cited by Chris Owen and others.

        Then there’s the question of the “purple heart”. I checked one of the official Purple Heart websites, and it states that oftentimes, the Purple Heart was given on the spot, usually in a ceremony shortly after the veteran was injuried or distinguished himself. And oddly enough, Hubbard was buying new uniforms in Australia at the end of Feb. 1942 and early March 1942. Why would he need new uniforms? Is it possible that he tore or ruined them during his escapades in Java, and he needed new ones for a ceremony?

        Some have scoffed at the idea that Hubbard got a purple heart “with palm”, since the Navy didn’t give “palms” to their multiple Purple Heart recipients. They gave “stars”. But guess who did give “palms”? The Army. And with Hubbard reporting to the Army the entire time he was there, if he did earn purple hearts, it almost certainly would have been given to him “with palm”.

      • Regarding “infiltrate any grouping or individual instance related to the church of satan in the US?”

        If he was sent in to Jack Parson’s house as an intelligence activity, it would have almost certainly been to help figure out who the “commies” were and not because of the black magic, etc. There is definitely evidence that the US intelligence community, through the 40s and after the war — was sending in “undercover informants” to the circle of folks in and around Jack Parson’s life. For example, you can find FBI “informants” in (Jack’s close friend) Frank Malina’s life in the FBI files (online). The informants aren’t named, unfortunately, but they were no doubt there.

        One primary “person of interest” to the intelligence community was Robert A. Cornog, who worked on the Manhattan Project. He was believed to have had communist sympathies (ultimately lost his security clearance in 1947), and was living at Parsons at the same time as Hubbard. One theory that I have is that Hubbard was there to help determine Cornog’s degree of communist involvement. Personally, I think Hubbard also had an interest in researching the “mystical”, and so if Hubbard was there primarily for intelligence reasons, it worked out for him in more ways than one.

        “Is there even any indication that he completed his training for the ONI?”

        Yes, in Hubbard’s entry in the declassified SECNAV and CNO Office Correspondence Index files, it mentions that Hubbard was nominated to take an Intelligence Course from Oct. 21 – Nov. 11, 1941 — this was no doubt in preparation for his assignment to the Philippines. Oddly, there is no record of this in any of Hubbard’s Navy personnel files that I have found — either online or at the NPRC.

      • Sky,

        While this is all good information, and certainly very interesting, too many assumptions are made on critical issues. However, you seem to have drawn certain inferences which I can respect, but they remain un-validated. I do look forward to seeing the raw files, which I assume you’ll make available, but there are just too many assumptions being made with an apparent goal that I don’t fully understand.

         I’m curious- where did you find your statistics on malaria in Australia? That’s fairly critical, as you say that it’s “impossible” to catch malaria in the lower half of Australia, and use that to support your claim that Hubbard was in Java. This directly contradicts the University of Sydney’s information that the mosquito species Anopheles annulipes is a known vector for malaria, and has been blamed for many of the malaria outbreaks in southern Australia- far from impossible to catch. I’m not faulting your research, but you base some very serious claims on such facts, and I’m sure you wouldn’t want to ignore other possibilities.

         You’re correct that there were many  movements into and out of java- but other than mosquitoes and a new uniform purchase, is there anything that actually puts Hubbard there?
        I appreciate, also, your interpretation of the documents that hubbard may or may not have amassed- can I hope that you’ve found something more solid as to that?

         But I will happily concede minor injuries, even malaria, without specific proof; primarily I doubt the extent of the injuries that he claimed. The extensive injuries for the core of his metaphysical claims, and I think that we can both agree that they don’t match the level that was claimed. Correct?

         Lastly, regarding the purple heart- I’m not sure if you’re familiar with the military structure; a branch will not give awards to a member of another branch, regardless of affection or attachment. There is a process in which the Army (per AR 600-8-22, which has been consistent on this) will REQUEST that the other branch (Navy in this case) give a certain award. Regardless, the purple heart is not recommended- it is entitled to the individual who meets certain criteria. Furthermore, the purple heart is an award endowed by the President, and would certainly be on his naval record if awarded.

         So we have several items that we can make assumptions about, but which are not strictly validated by fact:

        1.       Whether or not he was flown to the US in the manner as described is unconfirmed

        2.       Whether or not he was awarded any more than the 4 awards in his personnel file is unconfirmed

        3.       Whether or not he saw any action in the war is unconfirmed (other than the deposit and the mexico shelling incident)

        4.       Whether or not he was every in Java is unconfirmed

        5.       Whether or not he had any valuable intelligence (claimed or actual) is unconfirmed

         You state that “the Army” held Hubbard in very high regard. I see a degree of permissibility, but I haven’t yet seen any positive fitness reports. Will you be posting those that you’ve found? Does your comment indicate that you indeed found documents by Johnson?  

      • Regarding undercover work and black magic:

        Upon what do you base your theory, other than the dubious claim of the very individual that stood to benefit by the claim?

      • Call4,
        When documents are missing in a veteran’s file, and there are conflicts and anamolies in the file itself, then all one can do is draw inferences from other clues that do exist in the official file, or elsewhere. Hubbard’s time in Australia — indeed, in other parts of his file too — is replete with missing and incomplete documents and conflicting information.

        You bring up the Fitness Report. No, it does not exist for his time in Australia. Why is that? Nearly every other part of Hubbard’s Navy file has one. There are quite a few files that appear to be missing from the Australia period … yet clues exist that they were there at one time. Where are they now?

        Another example. The method of transport home. The official Navy file implies that Hubbard took the SS CHAUMONT or the MS PENNANT. We look in the National Archives and we find that it would not have been possible — time wise — for him to have taken anything other than a plane. Why is that?

        When I discussed malaria in the southern half of Australia, I said it was “nearly impossible”, not “impossible”. My sources are “Australia Frontline: Australian Army Research During WW II” and several medical articles about malaria during the war years. Also, the website malaria.com and the book “Malaria”. Chances are very slim that Hubbard caught malaria if he remained in Australia.

        Regarding Hubbard’s “extensive injuries as the core of his metaphysical claims” … sounds like you’re channeling Chris Owen. Chris Owen was/is prone to strawman arguments — I’ve covered this elsewhere here. Most notably, he reverses the intent of a picture from “What is Scientology?” regarding the depiction of Hubbard’s condition at the end of the war. Hubbard gave his specific conditions that he suffered from at the end of WW II in the Dec-1950 “LOOK” article. Hubbard and scientologists further gave a pictorial representation of Hubbard’s condition at the end of WW II (walking with cane and tinted glasses — not in bandages and comatose as Owen claimed) at the end of the war in “What is Scientology?”. These references give the specifics as to what Hubbard meant by “crippled and blinded” in My Philosophy. And these specifics match the VA records.

        With regard to the Purple Heart, in early 1942, the formalities of the Purple Heart had not been established as you state. In fact, it wasn’t until later in 1942 that the Navy even began giving out Purple Hearts — prior to that, only the Army and Army Air Corps gave purple hearts. Further, in early 1942, one could get a Purple Heart for simply performing “meritorious service” — one didn’t even have to get injured. Overall though, Hubbard’s getting the purple heart is very speculative. But I do think conditions existed at the time that made it possible.

        With regard to what I’ve collected, I have documentation for the statements I’ve made in these articles. Some of the documentation will be stronger than others. In some cases, it will be rock solid. In other cases, it will just be inferential. The collective picture, however, I think tells the tale. I will eventually get it all webbed. (If others are interested in starting their own research, I would recommend the National Archives partner sites fold3.com and ancestry.com.)

        Beyond all that, I am still looking. If anyone has that letter from Alexander LP Johnson, I am also still looking for that.

      • Regarding: “Black magic … Upon what do you base your theory, other than the dubious claim of the very individual that stood to benefit by the claim?”

        If you were the intelligence community in 1945, and you knew that Parsons was boarding a bunch of sci-fi folks and commies, and you were suspicious of the loyalties of a key atomic scientist (Cornog, who was boarding there) and you wanted to send in a “natural fitting” mole to figure out what Cornog’s real intentions were … who better than a formal ONI officer, well connected into the sci-fi community, who was being honorably discharged from the Navy?

        Sorry to kill your visions of Hubbard, but the theory works.

      • One small correction: the malaria reference is “Malaria Frontline: Australia Army Research During WW II”.

      • Well, sky- I wish you the best of luck. It’s quite clear that you’ve already made up your mind and are looking only for things to support your conclusions, else you wouldn’t make so many assumptions and draw so many inferences in the face of missing information. It’s quite disappointing, as the ethical thing to do would be to allow facts to speak for themselves and avoid drawing conclusions where none can be drawn. But, you have a goal in mind and you seem inclined to reach it, so more power to you. I do hope you’ll at least post the raw data along with your report, to assist others in their research as well. Will you be doing so?

        Your method is very well summed up in your comment, “the theory works”. No, it doesn’t; at best, it’s remotely plausible. But that seems good enough for your work, however.

        Oh, well, perhaps the raw data will be of some value.

      • Call4, I made up my mind based on the evidence, not a pre-conceived assumption or strawman argument, that you are apparently carrying around with you.

        You wrote:
        “Your method is very well summed up in your comment, ‘the theory works’. No, it doesn’t.”

        As you wish. But if you’re able, try putting any other former ONI Naval officer in place of Hubbard in that theory, and see who well it works for you. Might surprise you.

        All my best to you.

      • Well, I had great hopes for this. But it appears that great effort is being made to validate the claims of Scientology. It just -seems- to have bias. I wonder if you’ve explored your methodology for objectivity?

        I can only hope that you draw a distinction in your report between known facts and your own inferences, and provide adequate information to allow readers to reach their own conclusions. Most of us would not merely accept that something truly happened merely because it’s possible.

        Is this research being done for the religious tolerance website?

      • Visitor24 wrote: “But it appears that great effort is being made to validate the claims of Scientology.”

        LOL. Not at all. What I see are sour grapes — because someone’s pre-conceptions are being challenged. I don’t care what the scientologists believe or not about Hubbard. My research and relative conclusions are based on the facts, as they become available. I honestly don’t care if Hubbard gets exonerated or indicted.

        No, I’m not doing the research for religioustolerance.org. I’m doing the research to get to the truth.

      • Then you do, at least, acknowledge that several elements remain unconfirmed, no matter how plausible one may find them to be?

        My only point is that you claim to have information previously unavailable. I’m sure that you’d agree that one should not merely believe what one is told, which also applies to your claims.

        Would you be so kind as to direct me to the resources that you used to draw your conclusions?

      • By the way, dismissing healthy skepticism as “sour grapes” is inaccurate at best. Wouldn’t you encourage one to remain skeptical in the absence of evidence? You have not yet provided evidence beyond what you claim to have seen. I only wonder when you will share this explosive evidence.

      • Visitor24, you wrote: “Then you do, at least, acknowledge that several elements remain unconfirmed, no matter how plausible one may find them to be?”

        Of course I acknowledge this — I’m just suggesting that people use common sense. There’s nothing wrong with healthy skepticism. One just has to be careful not to let his preconceptions get in the way.

        Regarding “explosive evidence”, probably the ship and plane records that I’ve dug up are the most explosive, as they show fairly conclusively that Hubbard was flown home. Another important fact I’ve undercovered is a deeper understanding regarding who Alexander LP Johnson was, and his relationship to Hubbard in Australia. Some smaller discoveries are the differences between the official Navy file on Hubbard and the other ones online, as well as the mention of Hubbard having gotten malaria and a few other references in Hubbard’s Navy file suggestive of a trip to Java.

        As far as where to find the above, for passenger/plane records, I used the National Archives partner sites ancestry.com and fold3.com (as well as the microfilm records at various National Archives locations). For Alexander LP Johnson, I found more details about him in a couple books available in books.google.com — just search on his full name. For the mention of malaria and a few other details suggestive of a trip to Java, I found that in the NPRC Navy file on Hubbard.

        As mentioned, I will eventually get this all written up and web’ed, but at the moment I’m still doing research.

      • Guys,
        I want you to know that your input has been valuable. And I shouldn’t have been so dismissive.

        When I do eventually get this all written up and all the items fully referenced, then the full peer review can begin.

        In the meantime, I still have a few additional bits to dig up, including that letter that my OP mentions.

  2. Hello,

    I’m hoping someone here can help me. I’m currently doing some research into L. Ron Hubbard’s military years, and I was hoping to get any documentation that the Church has on this period. I’ve read the lronhubbard.org pages, but these unfortunately don’t have much documentation behind them. I’ve also read the non-Scientology pages (Chris Owen for example), but found them to be very biased.

    Is there someone here that can help me? I’m trying to be as balanced as possible in my research.

    Also, as a specific request, I’m trying to find a letter that was reportedly given by the Church of Scientology to researchers of Hubbard’s military years in the past. It was apparently written on Feb. 13, 1942 by a Col. Alexander L.P. Johnson, and describes Hubbard as “an intelligent, resourceful and dependable officer” and recommends that some kind of “earlier request” be granted. Various researchers have mentioned it, but no researcher has actually webbed a copy of this letter that I’ve been able to find.

    Also, there apparently is a “Prouty Affidavit”, but I haven’t been able to find this online either.

    Does anyone know where I might find the above two documents? Or perhaps give me a name and contact information of someone in the Church that might be able to help me?

    Thank you.

    Sky

    • Sky-
      I would recommend that you do what I did- ask the navy itself! Through the freedom of information act, they will send you hubbards entire record, including official correspondence, officer evaluations, etc.
      Good luck!

      • Done, Visitor25. And thoroughly studied. Unfortunately, there are some pretty significant gaps and conflicting facts. So I’m trying to get to the bottom of it.

      • You’re very prepared! One might suspect that hubbard had much to gain, if he exaggerated his accomplishments. Compare this to the official record, which has nothing yo gain by lying. It’s quite telling that some of the awards claimed by Hubbard didn’t apply to his actions, and done weren’t even in use at the time!

      • I didn’t say that the official record was lying. I said there were gaps and conflicting facts.

        And Hubbard himself claimed awards? Gosh, you have a source for that?

      • Sky- I didn’t say you made that claim, but there are only two possibilities and I addressed them both.
        A more accurate phrase would have been “claimed by the church on hubbards behalf”. I am not aware of Hubbard making specific claims about his awards, only about his service in general.

      • Sorry Visitor25, didn’t mean to get testy on you.

        In looking into Hubbard’s military career, I’ve discovered evidence that Hubbard was in fact flown back to the US from Australia, in one of the planes from the fleet that was being used by the Secretary of the Navy’s office. And that he almost certainly saw action in Java.

        The only way that officers were flown in trans-oceanic trips in these planes during this early part of the war were if: (a) they were of very senior rank (e.g. Admirals), (b) they were carrying information/documents of urgent importance to Washington, and/or (c) they had distinguished themselves in some manner (usually through heroism, medals, etc). Hubbard was a Lt. (jg), so we know that (a) is out of the question. That leaves (b) and/or (c).

        Chris Owen and Gerry Armstrong (and Russell Miller and Jon Atack) during the last 2-3 decades, have all painted Hubbard as having blatantly lied about (a) his having done anything important or heroic at the outset of the war in Australia and then (b) being flown home as a result. They have all painted a picture of Hubbard as simply being “garrulous”, making a nuisance of himself, returning to the US on a ship with his tail between in his legs, and feeling like he had to lie about it for the rest of his life.

        And this basically set the stage for their spinning of the rest of Hubbard’s military career and beyond.

        Chris Owen in particular, through his “Ron the War Hero” pages, was apparently so desperate to paint Hubbard as a liar that he completely reversed a depiction of Hubbard’s degree of being “crippled and blinded” at the end of the war in the book “What is Scientology?” (1975). Chris pretends that Hubbard was saying that, at the end of the war, he was in a hospital bed “comatose … with bandages over his eyes” and “hooked up to an intravenous drip” like some nearly dead soldier. In fact, the picture in that book actually shows a fairly healthy Hubbard, with only a cane and tinted glasses, looking clean-cut and wearing an officer’s uniform. Chris leaves out the original text from the “WIS?” book and only shows the picture — even adding in his own text — in order to fully reverse the meaning and intent of that picture.

        Sadly, Chris Owen’s “Ron the War Hero” pages have been largely accepted at face value — and have been used by journalists, wikipedians and blog authors for the last decade or so as the “go to statement” on Hubbard’s military years.

        Even The New Yorker magazine fell for it, though they claim to have done their own research. But even they apparently didn’t go much deeper than the surface — most likely because Chris’ strawman and snow job was so convincing.

        So in response to your post: you’ve forgotten the third possibility. You took your cue from earlier researchers, that digging any deeper than the surface was necessary to understand Hubbard’s military career. Hubbard didn’t lie. And the US Navy didn’t need to cover-up anything. It just took a little bit of digging to get to the truth.

      • quite all right, but please forgive me for saying, it sounds like you’ve already reached a conclusion and are looking for facts to support it. Perhaps I’m mistaken, of course, but it sounds like you’re convinced already that the information frequently presented is only “spin”. Have you already made up your mind about his history?

        “I’ve discovered evidence that Hubbard was in fact flown back to the US from Australia, in one of the planes from the fleet that was being used by the Secretary of the Navy’s office. And that he almost certainly saw action in Java.”
        May I please ask where you found this evidence?
        There is also another possibility, other than the three that you had claimed- isn’t it possible that such a flight was the most expedient and cost-effective way to return him to the states, allegedly (according to his naval record) at the request of the Australian Government?

        You also say “The only way that officers were flown in trans-oceanic trips in these planes during this early part of the war”
        On what do you base this statement?

        I’m curious as to what you’ve found regarding the other claims of hubbard’s military history. Do you have an opinion on the alleged submarine incident? Or the medals that are claimed by scientology? Or his war wounds? Recall that Hubbard himself made very specific claims as to the nature of his alleged injuries- claims that are not found in the official record. How would we account for that discrepancy? Another consideration would be the negative comments made in Hubbard’s official file- do you have a thought as to the validity of those?

      • Consider, please, this quote from former Scientology Spokesperson, Tommy Davis:

        “Of course, if it’s true that Mr. Hubbard was never injured during the war, then he never did heal himself using Dianetics principles, then Dianetics is based on a lie, and then Scientology is based on a lie.”

        It’s true that, essentially, all of scientology is dependent on the validity of the injuries claimed occurred to L. Ron Hubbard. If the injuries never happened, then the claims began to unravel. Of course, the official record disputes these claims, as the injuries are not recorded in his file (as you surely have seen). Is this one of the “gaps” you’re referring to? Wouldn’t such a thing indicate that either the military OR scienotology is lying?

      • Visitor25,
        I hadn’t made up my mind first at all. In fact, I had pretty much been in the same boat as everyone else relying on the statements and documents that Chris Owen and others provided (which he apparently got from Gerry Armstrong and/or Russell Miller). Chris doesn’t appear to have actually gotten copies of Hubbard’s records directly from the NPRC (National Personnel Records Center) — or if he has, then I’m afraid he’s either telling lies or he’s a lousy researcher.

        It took searching through public records at the National Archives (both online and in person), and also getting the complete record of Hubbard’s service from the NPRC in St. Louis for me to change my view as I have. It also took studying a number of Action Reports and War Diaries from WW II to fill in some of the missing pieces.

        I’m not here because I made up my mind first. I’m here looking for as much documentation as possible, to add to the documentation I’ve already gathered, and to see where it leads.

        Regarding your 4th possibility. No, air travel in 1942 was a luxury. The Australian Gov’t flew their dignitaries — not US Navy nuisance makers — on trans-oceanic flights. US Navy nuisance makers were sent home on ships — the heros and important folk were put on a plane. You’d have to study this period of history yourself to understand what I’m saying. But its an important point, I agree — when I write all this up, I’ll be sure to include some good references on it.

        Regarding negative comments in Hubbard’s files? Sure, but so what? And some people liked him too. Chester Nimitz was court-martialed in the first few years of his being in the Navy — he had run his ship into the ground. Big deal. Didn’t stop him from becoming a 5-star Admiral. Nimitz also made plenty of Navy foes in his day too.

        Regarding the submarine incident? Definitely a magnetic deposit. But according to Moulton, they were allowed to wear “two stars” on their American Theatre medal as a result. (Which may explain at least one discrepancy on the CoS-provided Naval Separation Document — which is a whole other subject.)

        Regarding Hubbard’s actual statements? I believe you’re still using the Chris Owen inspired strawman. Look up that picture that I mentioned (earlier) to see how Hubbard and his supporters depicted his physical condition at the end of the war in the book “What is Scientology?”, compared to how Chris describes it. Then look up the Dec-1950 “LOOK” magazine article where Hubbard was interviewed and gave specifics, to a national audience, on what maladies he suffered from at the end of the war — which btw match the VA and Navy record. Then you’ll have the full specifics behind “crippled and blinded” in Hubbard’s My Philosophy.

        You said: “If the injuries never happened, then the claims began to unravel.”

        Especially if you turn those “injuries” into a strawman — as Chris Owen has — by reversing an actual depiction of Hubbard’s physical condition at the end of the war (ala “What is Scientology?”).

        At the beginning of the war, the evidence suggests that Hubbard likely saw combat in and around Java in the second half of Feb. 1942, just prior to its fall in early March. His Navy medical file shows that he damaged his eyes, probably broke or sprained an ankle and caught malaria while being a “combat intelligence officer” in the Asiatics. (Men weren’t catching malaria in Australia, btw — they had to go into the tropics for that.) Again, this is all documented in his Navy medical record. If you haven’t seen it, then you haven’t gotten the complete record available at the NPRC these days.

        There’s also no question that there are missing documents in Hubbard’s file from this period, but I believe I’ve found a much simpler reason why than “sheep dipping”. It will require a well-sourced report, however, which I hope to eventually write.

        Whether Hubbard got hit by small pieces of shrapnel while in a combat-heavy Java, however, is speculative. If he did, it probably wasn’t too serious or life threatening. In fact, I don’t think any of Hubbard’s injuries were life threatening, but they may have been enough to get him a Purple Heart.

        This, and Hubbard’s status as an ONI officer, would certainly help to explain how he got himself flown home on a plane from the fleet used by the Secretary of the Navy’s office.

        By the end of the war, some of Hubbard’s maladies (esp. arthritis, bursitis) may have been carryovers from these earlier injuries. Hubbard also of course had gotten an ulcer in 1943 and 1945, which were the direct causes for his hospitalization in those years. However, according to the VA records, Hubbard was in pretty bad physical shape after the war (between 1945 to 1947), and not just from the ulcer. The ulcer gave him 10% disability, and Hubbard got an additional 30% for the eye damage and other physical conditions (and no, Hubbard didn’t fake it — that 40% was based on tests and physical measurements — not just on Hubbard’s statements).

        By 1950, Hubbard passed up an opportunity to appear before the Navy Retiring Board, after they finally granted it to him after several years of Hubbard’s trying.

        By 1951, the VA records show that most of his earlier, measurable maladies were no longer present.

        Did his dianetics research help him “work his way back to fitness and strength” (as Hubbard put it)? Who knows. He also could have just eaten his wheaties.

        Either way, the documentation in the public record backs up what I say above. There are a few more important details, but they’ll likely have to wait for my full report.

        In the meantime, I sure would like to get a copy of that Alexander LP Johnson letter. Anyone?

      • It sounds like you have some interesting information that has not been seen by most (any?) before.
        May I assume that you will be posting these explosive documents online, so that others may independently validate your conclusions? I’m particularly interested in the record of his injuries (not in the copy provided to me by the VA) and a record of his awards (specifically denied by the navy).

        more tomorrow on some of your specific claims and conclusions- bedtime for now :)

  3. Is this site dead?
    There doesn’t seem to be very many people saying positive things about Scientology online, including this site.

  4. Melbourne! Winner of birthday game!

  5. HB Ron!

  6. Happy Birthday, Ron! <3


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Comments RSS

  • What is this blog?

    I am running a website, ScientologyMyths.info which deals with critical questions about Scientology.
    So naturally I am into finding answers to the questions that are constantly being asked all over the internet about Scientology, Scientologists, the Church, L. Ron Hubbard and the Church's leader, David Miscavige. I want to find answers from independent sources, not only Church of Scientology owned sites or anti-Scientology hate sites. So what's left? Court documents, photos and other reliable sources. Help me find stuff and ask whatever you want. Thanks!

    The easiest way to shoot a question over to me is to click here.

    Or search below.
  • Archives

  • Religion Photo Feed

    S. Spirito in Sassia

    San Pietro

    Flight into Egypt

    More Photos