Scientology A Master Race Cult

David J. Schindler is an attorney for Latham & Watkins LLP, the L.A. based international powerhouse law firm:

David J. Schindler's is a devout Jew and yet he is, ironically, defending the Scientology Master Race Cult, a group whose scriptures call for a Genocide against Scientology's enemies.

Schindler, David J. Partner Los Angeles
Health Care and Life Sciences
Intellectual Property, Media and Technology
Securities Litigation and Professional Liability
White Collar and Government Investigations

In this thread, I will use Scientology's own scriptures to show Mr. Schindler and Latham & Watkins LLP partners, associates, and the media why Scientology is a Master Race group that embodies a call for Genocide in its scriptures.

At the outset, I will refresh Mr. Schindler's memory by reminding him that eleven top Scientology's leaders signed a Stipulation of Evidence in which they plead to being White Collar Criminals in the Cult's infamous "Operation Snow White."

The Stipulation of Evidence listed numerous felonies in what was the largest ever case of Domestic Espionage. Over 500 FBI Agents raided Scientology offices in D.C. and L.A. in 1978 and seized 100,000's of files, many of which Scientology operatives had stolen from the US Gov't in a program of systematic burglaries and wiretapping against the IRS and other agencies. Mary Sue Hubbard, the wife of L. Ron Hubbard, signed the Stipulation and went to prison while L. Ron Hubbard remained in hiding as an unindicted co-conspirator in Operation Snow White.

There is anecdotal evidence that suggests CoS has, on a few occasions, crossed over into being a Red Collar Criminal group -- as in the Cult's internal and external enemies suddenly turning up inexplicably dead. Scientology's top critic in Clearwater, Florida was named Shawn Lonsdale. Shawn was found dead of "suicide" in his home under strange circumstances recently. L. Ron Hubbard's Fair Game policy allows Scientologists to attack Scientology critics:

ENEMY SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.

Copyright c 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard

HHUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE HCO Policy Letters can be found in WikiLeaks.

Mr. Schindler, don't turn away from this. You are an Attorney of Record for Scientology. You are also a member of The House of Justice. I will show you why you have a major ethical and religious conflict in your life and law practice at present. Please hear me out on this and then decide for yourself.

1. In June of 1965, L. Ron Hubbard took the bizarre step of declaring Scientologists to be a new and distinct race that was separate from, and superior to Homo Sapien, the race into which he himself was born and belonged. This spurious and hateful distinction allowed Hubbard to inject the diabolical element of racial superiority into the minds of Scientologists:

"HOMO NOVIS, 1. Homo man, novis, new. (BCR, p. 12) 2. a theta-animated mest body possessed of new and desirable attributes; a mest clear, a good, sane rational mest being about a skyscraper higher than Homo sapiens. (HOM, p. 40) 3. the Second Stage Release is definitely Homo novis. The person ceases to respond like Homo sapiens and has fantastic capability to learn and act. (HCOB 28 Jun 65)"
-- L. Ron Hubbard, Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary

[Re: "Homo Scientologicus"] : "Man had to cease to be Homo Sapiens and had to become Homo Scientologicus in order to accomplish any action that was anywhere near efficient in South Africa."
-- L. Ron Hubbard, PAB 119 1 September 1957 The Big Auditing Problem

[7] Any non-Scientologist is a "wog," someone who "isn't even trying."
-- L. Ron Hubbard, Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary

ref for above cites:

Having declared non-Scientologists to be racially inferior to Scientologists allowed Hubbard to dehumanize them in the minds of his followers. Having dehumanized non-Scientologists as a racially inferior, it was an easy next step for Hubbard to declare that Scientologists could harm any members of this inferior race should they dare attack Scientology and the superior race of Homo Scientologicus. Hubbard stated in writing that the members of the inferior race were to be treated like game animals during hunting season, for Hubbard declared them to be Fair Game.

The governments of England, America, Greece, and other countries saw the dangers of Scientology in the 1960's and conducted investigations. The media covered these investigations and this all brought negative attention to Scientology. That members of an inferior race would dare attack the master race of Homo Scientologicus and its Supreme Leader infuriated L. Ron Hubbard. Accordingly, on 16 Feb 1969, L. Ron Hubbard, realizing that he could not defeat the world in one decisive battle and bring it under a Scientology dictatorship, declared a war of attrition against the world.

Let us consider Hubbard's "BATTLE PLAN" against the world thirty-six years after he issued this declaration of war. First, the BATTLE PLAN itself. I will present it in sections with commentary. The bolded sections are my emphases:

Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

(Reissued with updated distribution.)




(This is a defense paper on material developed after 18
years of ceaseless attack by a foreign enemy. Nothing in
this paper advocates physical violence or invites the physical
destruction of persons.)...

We see that Hubbard opened his Battle Plan by stating that, "nothing in this paper advocates physical violence or invites the physical destruction of persons." However, the Fair Game doctrine was an LRH policy and has continued to a Scientology doctrine. While not advocating violence or murder, Hubbard does not explicitly condemn or forbid physical violence or murder. It is out of character for Hubbard to be vague. In his other policy letters he was always very explicit about details as when he defined what constituted crimes against Scientology and their punishments. In another example, Hubbard wrote a detailed policy on how to prepare his barley formula for babies that he claimed was based on an ancient Roman formula.

In his Battle Plan, Hubbard left the door open to physical violence and murder for that which he does not advocate he also does not forbid. In point of fact, Hubbard's 1967 Policy of Fair Game was still in effect when he issued this Battle Plan and Fair Game allowed the enemy, i.e. the inferior race of Homo Sapien, to be injured. Hubbard never revoked the policy of Fair Game but he did order that the policy never be publicly discussed due to the negative PR it drew. Hubbard's successor, David Miscavige has never gone on record as publicly canceling and repudiating the Policy of Fair Game or Hubbard's 1969 Battle Plan.

Hubbard continues with his Battle Plan:

In these days of "cold war" when actual warfare is
impossible due to atomic weapons, the warfare is waged in the
press and public in the form of ideas.

If you uniformly apply the tactics and strategy of battle
to the rows we get into, press or legal or public confrontation,
you will win.

The enemy uses " groups" and meetings of groups like one
would use squads.

If we and they are considered as two hostile and opposing
nations at war, then a huge array of tactics and strategy
become visible...

In the above bolded section we see that Hubbard considers Scientology to be a sovereign nation, a law unto itself, that is at war against a nation of inferior peoples, i.e. Homo Sapien. It is clear that Hubbard understood Scientology to be in a state of war against the world.

Hubbard continues:

One parallels in the field of thought what is used and
done in the field of battle in other ages.

You don't have to know too much about the tactics and
strategy of warfare to apply this but it helps.

The end product of war, according to Clausewitz, the
authority on it, is (condensed) "to bring about a more amenable
frame of mind on the part of the enemy."

But there are also wars of attrition. We are engaged
in one where total destruction of us has been the enemy's aim
for, at this writing, 19 years. This is barbarian warfare,
thus the enemy must have had very positive fears and terrors
about us. Since he fought for total attrition. In this case
it is not safe to hope for any half-way win. We must ourselves
fight on the basis of total attrition of the enemy. So
never get reasonable about him. Just go all the way in and
obliterate him.

It is bad warfare to fight battles on your own terrain,
in your own subject area. It is not good to fight in the
territory of allies. Fight battles wherever possible only on
enemy terrain, in and about his subject and his people, not
ours. You can gauge your relative success by this. When
all your battles are fought on his terrain, you are winning.

A good general expends the maximum of enemy troops and
the minimum of his own. He makes the war costly to the
enemy, not to himself.

In the section above, Hubbard calls for a war of attrition in which Scientology will, over time, wear down the forces of the inferior race of Homo Sapien. Hubbard also calls a minimum expenditure of Scientology's resources to do so. If we consider Scientology's conduct of war since 1967 when Hubbard announced Fair Game, we can see that Scientology has relied upon the Economy of Terrorism. In the tactics of terrorism, only one individual need be singled out for a psychologically devastating public attack in order to silence the masses. This is economical and does not require an army.

Hubbard's policy, and one followed by his successor David Miscavige, is to Fair Game individual critics by using intimidation, harassment, and financially ruinous lawsuits. In the calculus of its terrorism, Scientology wants the victim to scream loudly in agony while others look on and shudder and decide not to attack Scientology. Given that Scientology had hundreds of millions of dollars, it could afford to quietly pay off the people it had ruined. The victims would get enough money from Scientology in a legal settlement to start a new life and would, in return, agree to never speak of the settlement or of Scientology in public or private. Once the critic silently disappeared from the public scene, the perception that remained was that Scientology could destroy people with impunity.

Scientology Fair Games former members who seek to tell the truth about Scientology as well as journalists who seek to report on the abuses and excesses of Scientology. The cult does this because it wants to publicize itself as an organization that can take vengeance upon any member of the inferior race who dares to criticize it publicly.

However, all of this has changed due to the enormous cultural repudiation and ridicule of Scientology that erupted in 2005. There is strength in numbers and the global citizenry decided in 2005 to act in unity and attack Scientology for its race war, its polices of Fair Game, and its excessive litigation. Scientology cannot sue the entire world and it cannot destroy the internet where we can tell the truth about Scientology.


In all cases of Fair Game, Scientology's vengeance against valid and documented criticisms was immediate, brutal, and completely out of proportion to the criticisms made. It was meant to be this way for Scientology wanted to get the message across to the inferior race -- and especially its journalists -- that even the slightest criticism would result in a massive and overwhelming retaliation that was focused on character assassination and financial ruination. Hubbard took no half measures in his scorched earth policy against the inferior race. The enormous cultural repudiation and ridicule of Scientology that erupted in 2005 is, in part, payback for the decades of intimidation.

We next see page two of Hubbard's Battle Plan against the inferior race of non-Scientologists:

Copyright (c) 1969 by L. Ron Hubbard.
All Rights Reserved.

HCO PL 16.2.69 II
Reiss. 24.9.87 -2-

One cuts off enemy communications, funds, connections.
He deprives the enemy of political advantages, connections
and power. He takes over enemy territory. He raids and
harasses. All on a thought plane - press, public opinion,
governments, etc.

Seeing it as a battle, one can apply battle tactics to
thought actions.

Intelligence identifies targets and finds out enemy
plans and purposes, enemy connections, dispositions, etc.
It is fatal to attack a wrong enemy. But it is good tactics
to make the enemy attack wrong targets or persons himself.

Good intelligence pinpoints who when where what.

Good PRO plans an action and operations fights the battle.

Legal is a slow if often final battle arena. It eventually
comes down to legal in the end. If intelligence and PRO have
done well, then legal gets an easy win.

You can win a battle even without legal and by PRO alone.
You intend to win it without legal wherever possible.

The prize is "public opinion" where press is concerned.
The only safe public opinion to head for is they love us and
are in a frenzy of hate against the enemy. This means standard
wartime propaganda is what one is doing, complete with atrocity,
war crimes trials, the lot. Know the mores of your public
opinion, what they hate. That's the enemy. What they love.
That's you.

You preserve the image or increase it of your own troops
and degrade the image of the enemy to beast level.

Always be ready to parley but watch for tricks. Don't
give the enemy breathing space.

Capture and use his comm lines. A press magnate on your
side is a big win.

You have in one of these publicity wars all the factors
of modern wars complete with artillery, cavalry, infantry.

For example at this writing, all fighting has been on our
terrain; they knew our generals we didn't know theirs; they
had all the press, funds, government control. We are reversing
this. We are fighting now on their ground. But we have a
long way to go.

We will make it all the way providing we look on this in
terms of active battle and not as a "if we are saintly good we
will win." The people who win wars have a saintly image but
they win the war by clever and forceful use of the rules of
tactics, strategy and battle.

Wars are composed of many battles.

Never treat a war like a skirmish. Treat all skirmishes
like wars.

In page two, we see Hubbard's utterly psychotic state of mind emerge when he says, "The only safe public opinion to head for is they love us and are in a frenzy of hate against the enemy. This means standard wartime propaganda is what one is doing, complete with atrocity, war crimes trials, the lot. Know the mores of your public opinion, what they hate. That's the enemy. What they love. That's you."

Hubbard wanted to act sadistically towards the inferior race and yet he wanted this inferior race to love Scientology, and who was the embodiment of Scientology except L. Ron Hubbard? Hubbard was a paranoid schizophrenic: He wanted to be Ron the Terrible who savagely destroyed his enemies, and, he also wanted to be loved and admired as Ron the Savior of Humanity.

Factually, L. Ron Hubbard was mentally ill and violent. That he had a personal fortune estimated to be as high as $400 million dollars in 1969, allowed him to surround himself with lawyers and to use surrogates to do his dirty work. As we saw in Operation Snow White, eleven of the top leaders of Scientology went to prison. Everyone that is except for the mastermind, L. Ron Hubbard. All of the other leaders of Scientology paid for having taken part in the largest act of domestic espionage in US history. However, Hubbard, while he would write the Battle Plan, lead the war, amass the great fortune, and take revenge on his enemies, would not take responsibility for his crimes in Snow White. Instead, he threw his expendable subordinates into the fire and had them pay for his crimes and sins. This included his wife Mary Sue Hubbard who took the fall for her husband. I'm sorry, but I have to get personal here: What kind of man allows his wife to go to prison for his own crimes? I'll tell you what kind of man does this: A complete coward. A real man takes his punishment and doesn't throw his wife to the Feds. As an aside, Anthony Pellicano, despite everything he did that was wrong, sucked it all up and did the right thing: He went to prison and refused to cooperate. Pellicano is a man and Hubbard wasn't.

Hubbard finished his Battle Plan on Page Three with a massively incorrect view of the Cold War:

HCO PL 16.2.69 II
Reiss. 24.9.87

The cold war is a war. The West is losing it because it
is fighting by other rules than the rules of war. We mustn't
lose it.


Adopted as official
Church policy by


The Battle Plan can be found at: ref:

We can see Hubbard's initial conceptualization of Scientology as a Master Race group:

1. Homo Novis - the superior race composed of Scientologists.

2. Homo Sapien - the inferior race.

3. Fair Game - The punishment that Homo Novis, as the superior race, was entitled, and even obligated as we shall see, to inflict on the inferior and unenlightened race of Homo Sapien, which race Scientologists also refer to as "Homo Saps" and "Wogs."

In these three definitions, we see LRH acting to build the Empire of Scientology based asserting racial superiority by use of violence. Yet, there was an even more sinister step needed to achieve Pax Scientology: A Genocide against all those who oppose Scientology. LRH's call for a Scientology Genocide was based on LRH's Tone Scale. It was also based on LRH declaring that Scientology would rule the world:

“Somebody some day will say ‘this is illegal.’ By then be sure the orgs say what is legal or not.”

- L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, 4 January 1966, “LRH Relationship to Orgs"

Using his own scale as a metric to judge the value of a person, LRH declared that all persons who were 2.0 or lower on his scale had only two options in a Scientology World:

he reasonable man quite ordinarily overlooks the fact that people from 2.0 down have no traffic with reason and cannot be reasoned with as one would reason with a 3.0. There are only two answers for the handling of people from 2.0 down on the tone scale [glossary], neither one of which has anything to do with reasoning with them or listening to their justification of their acts.

The first is to raise them on the tone scale by un-enturbulating some of their theta by any one of the three valid processes.

The other is to dispose of them quietly and without sorrow. Adders are safe bedmates compared to people on the lower bands of the tone scale. Not all the beauty nor the handsomeness nor artificial social value nor property can atone for the vicious damage such people do to sane men and women. The sudden and abrupt deletion of all individuals occupying the lower bands of the tone scale from the social order would result in an almost instant rise in the cultural tone and would interrupt the dwindling spiral into which any society may have entered.

It is not necessary to produce a world of clears in order to have a reasonable and worthwhile social order; it is only necessary to delete those individuals who range from 2.0 down, either by processing them enough to get their tone level above the 2.0 line — a task which, indeed, is not very great, since the amount of processing in many cases might be under fifty hours, although it might also in others be in excess of two hundred — or simply quarantining them from the society. A Venezuelan dictator once decided to stop leprosy. He saw that most lepers in his country were also beggars. By the simple expedient of collecting and destroying all the beggars in Venezuela an end was put to leprosy in that country.


In Hubbard's world, it is Scientology processing or death for persons adjudged to be at 2.0 or lower by Scientology. If a person cannot be processed above 2.0, then that person, and all others like him, are to be disposed of, "quietly and without sorrow...." In other words, Hubbard and Scientology call for either a forced conversion to Scientology or genocide as a way to eliminate all of those people whom they consider to be at 2.0 and below.

What is 2.0 on Hubbard's Tone Scale? It is Antagonism. Simply stated, Hubbard said that anyone who was antagonistic, and he meant antagonistic towards Scientology, was to be forced to convert or be murdered "quietly and without sorrow" by the superior race of Homo Scientologicus , who alone is capable of determining a person's Tone Level by use of Hubbard's so-called technology.

To expand upon Homo Scientologicus' genocide of anyone who is at 2.0 or below on Hubbard's Tone Scale, let's look closer at the Tone Scale below 2.0 to see else who would be executed in a Scientology dictatorship. Homo Sapiens who experienced the following states would either be raised above 2.0 or executed by the Master Race:

1.9 Hostility
1.8 Pain
1.5 Anger
1.4 Hate
1.3 Resentment
1.2 No Sympathy
1.15 Unexpressed Resentment
1.1 Covert Hostility
1.0 Fear
0.98 Despair
0.96 Terror
0.94 Numb

You can see the entire Tone Scale at Scientogy's website:

Hubbard has the whole thing rigged, for if one is not a Scientologist then, in Scientology's logic, they have some covert hostility (1.1) or resentment (1.3) against Scientology. In Hubbard's perverted logic, Scientology is so good that the only people who do not like it are criminals. This is why it is so easy for him to call for a genocide against people of an inferior race.


Now we see the steps:

1. Homo Novis - the superior race composed of Scientologists.

2. Homo Sapien - the inferior race.

3. Fair Game - The punishment that Homo Novis, as the superior race, was utterly entitled to inflict on the inferior race.

4. Genocide - The social engineering of Scientology to rid the world of any member of the inferior race who is 2.0 or below on Hubbard's Tone Scale.

That Scientology at present lacks the means to conduct a Genocide does not change its intent. I say this because Mr. Miscavige, in his capacity as the Chief Ecclesiastical Officer and Managing Agent of Scientology, has never publicly repudiated, denounced, or withdrawn Mr. Hubbard's call for a genocide. Insofar as the body of Mr. Hubbard's writings constitute the scriptures of the Scientology religion, the call for Genocide against Scientology's enemies is an undeniable part of the Scientology religion.

How many people would Scientology execute in a genocide if it ruled the world? We can make on determination based upon Hubbard's own writings. Hubbard described the anti-social personality:

From HCOPL 27 Sept 1966: "In the fields of government, police activities and mental health, to name a few, we see that it is important to be able to detect and isolate this personality type so as to protect society and individuals from the destructive consequences upon letting such have free rein to injure others. As they only comprise 20% of the population and as only 2.5% of this 20% are truly dangerous, we see that with a very small amount of effort we could considerably better the state of society.


In a world of 6.4 billion people, Hubbard's numbers would mean that 1.28 billion people (20%) have anti-social personalities. This means that Scientology would first conduct a genocide against the 2.5% of the most dangerous anti-social personalities, which would be 25.6 million people.

After executing these most dangerous 25.6 million anti-social personalities, there are still 1.24 billion anti-social personalities that need to be processed or executed. This does not count the members of the inferior race who have social personalities but are at 2.0 or below.

At a minimum, the Master Race of Scientology would execute 25.6 million anti-social personalities and anyone at 2.0 or below that could not be processed to a higher level. However, if one did not become a Scientologist then they could not ever go above 2.0 because the refusal to become a Scientologist is viewed as a hateful and antagonistic act by L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology's leaders.

Given the massively violent plans for genocide that reside in the sacred scriptures of Scientology, the free and sane peoples of the world must resist this most dangerous cult.

While Scientologists would protest that they do not want to commit genocide, they cannot escape the charge for it is embodied in their sacred scriptures. When a person becomes a Scientologist they, by default, become associated with Hubbard's ideas of a Master Race, an inferior race, and genocide of persons below 2.0. Scientologists can protest to high heaven that this is not true of them or of Scientology, but until the world sees Scientology publicly repudiate the violent writings of Hubbard we cannot and will not trust Scientology or Scientologists.

When Scientology asks wogs, "Can we be friends?" the answer has to be no, for we in the Wog world cannot be friends with a group that considers itself to be a Master Race, considers us to be inferior, and embraces a Source that called for either genocide or forced conversions.

Don't turn away from this if you are a Scientologist! You are supposed to be able to confront anything and you have to confront what LRH said and you have to confront its implications. To not confront this data is to run away from truth, the very thing you claim to seek in Scientology.

How can Mr. Schindler claim to be a devout Jew when he abets the cause of a Master Race group? Representing Scientology is to his shame. Bet Tzedek did a newsletter on a foreign woman working in America in a private home who had her passport seized by her employer and was not allowed to talk to anyone:

This same treatment goes on in Scientology's Sea Org at Flag and Int Base, Mr. Schindler. What you fight against at Bet Tzedek is what you are defending when you represent Scientology. I don't think you know this because your client will likely not tell you about how it treats its own Sea Org and Staff at Int Base in Hemet, California. Should you wish to meet with former high-ranking Sea Org members who served at Int Base, that can be arranged. Talk to them Mr. Schindler. Hear what they have to say.

Mr. Schindler, I do not think you are evil. Indeed, your pro bono work with Bet Tzedek shows you to be a man with a deep sense of social justice who serves the poor according to God's call to help the poor. However, I do think you are ignorant of what Scientology is and what it does. I will be glad to meet with you privately if you wish to discuss this matter with me under an NDA. If it is a conflict of interest for you to meet with me, I will meet with a colleague, a friend, or a rabbi that you designate. If you are interested, please contact me at:

J. Swift