1st Hand LRH Stories: Marty is Terrified of ESMB

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
I lurked a long time before I began to post.

One thing I learned for sure is that Alanzo makes some very very very intelligent posts.

And I, for one, ain't about to tell him to him what he ought or ought not be doing.

Alanzo is one of the posters that if he posts I want to read it.

Thanks man, please keep up the excellent work !

Oh, and yes, he IS one of those people that one day I hope I get to meet IRL.

Thank you very much, AT.

Every year we talked about having a Lost Weekend type gathering in Las Vegas or some other place for ESMBers. But because most ESMBers are from all over the world, they have collapsed on a global scale.

I have an ex-wife who lives in Las Vegas now.

Winter time is Las Vegas is always nice.
 

Atalantan

Patron with Honors
All right, so you are basically saying that if my goal is to sell newly-outs on the ideas of expanding their factual knowledge of LRH and Scientology, then I am going about it all wrong. And in that way I am not using good social judgment. I need to get some Zig Ziglar tapes and smooth out my sales skills.

You may be right.

If it is possible to "go into ARC" with politically correct Scientology and tell the factual truth about L Ron Hubbard and Scientology, then I may very well be a complete social retard for how I am going about it.

10 years of being a critic, however, while constantly bumping up against newly outs, and all their same thought-stopping mechanisms (the AMA/APA, Psychs, etc) have taught me that it is not possible to go into ARC with PC Scientology, and to still talk about the facts as I see them.

Further, what I have learned is that if you do that, you are just called "1.1", a "real covert SP", etc etc... More thought-stopping mechanisms to keep them from listening to anything you say.

So while I am unable to predict precisely who is going to shit their pants and have their heads explode - like Marty did - I can predict that the dominant response is going to be thought-stopping phrases and dead agent techniques that will be used to get people to shut out what I say.

As a result, I have learned to very OVERTLY STATE MY CASE and even WILLINGLY and DRAMATICALLY BE THE SP they are going to accuse me of being anyway. To take that to ridiculous extremes and to then become very LOUD and UNKILLABLE ABOUT IT.

Kind of like the porcupine strategy that Ron talked about in one of his taped lectures. He said that it is impossible to shoot a porcupine and kill it, and hunters who try and try just go down tone into apathy after a while and give up.

As an Armadillo, Porcupines are our distant, long lost cousins who we very much admire. That is why I have adopted the Porcupine Strategy of Scientology Internet criticism.

Maybe it's not the smoothest social strategy in the world, but I really do believe that I have a social responsibility to try to help others in the same way that I was helped, as long as the same problems face others that I faced. I feel a social responsibility to let others know what I found out so that they can avoid the pitfalls I fell into by having things hidden from me, and actively lied to about Scientology and L Ron Hubbard.

And so in that sense, I do feel that I am employing some little bit of social judgment. Even good social judgment.

Or, I could just like it rough.

Anyway, many, many people are always helping to make me into a better critic, and I always appreciate their suggestions and take them all under consideration.

We here at Alanzo's Critics Enterprises, LLC hold a meeting every Friday afternoon, empty the huge Suggestion Box out on to the conference table in a big pile, and sift through each suggestion about how I can be a better critic.

We talk them over and make notes on the big whiteboard, draw diagrams and arrows to connect them all together, and work out strategies for their implementation.

Your suggestions will be part of our meeting tomorrow and I'm sure my people will be all over it.

We know that you have a choice in your criticisms of Scientology, and we appreciate your choosing us.

Thank you for your contribution.

You said:

"All right, so you are basically saying that if my goal is to sell newly-outs on the ideas of expanding their factual knowledge of LRH and Scientology, then I am going about it all wrong."

NO!

You missed the one main point I was trying to make, and I think that's my fault because my post was so verbosely overlong. So I will try to focus with laser precision! My main point was supposed to be this:

IF your goal was to post an invite to ESMB on Marty's blog that would not be challenged by him, getting you bitch-slapped along the way, THEN you went about it the wrong way.



But, even in that I was being too critical of you. Explanation is below.

My general points were that depending on your goal, you need to approach your objective in a venue-specific way.

I believe you actually succeeded pretty well, because your post is still up, and the acronym "ESMB" is still posted there for all to read. Further, the little "tempest in a teapot" that ensued is likely to make some people curious as to "what is this site ESMB and why was there some uproar about it? I think I'll check it out"

As scientologists used to say, "all publicity is good publicity", meaning even bad publicity is better than no publicity.

But you didn't accomplish that by "STATING YOUR POSITION!" and letting the chips fall where they may. That would probably have got you a big boot up your ass. No. You accomplished it by trying to go with the flow and the actual topic, and slide it in. It was a good attempt, and I was perhaps too critical of it initially, as your post is still up so it worked well enough.

I should be saying "Good job! Fine-tune that and eventually you'll be able to post a link to ESMB on an org's bulletin board!"

Part of this is to muzzle yourself, if what you want to accomplish is getting invites or links posted on sites that may be essentially hostile to your position. Who cares what your personal position is? Take your ego out of it completely. You want make ESMB known? All right. Then your objective is to issue the invites or get the links posted, that's all. No-one needs to know "your position" if that's your objective. Are you trying to promote yourself, your position, or ESMB? You may have to choose, depending on the venue you are trying to establish yourself in.

You wrote:

"If it is possible to "go into ARC" with politically correct Scientology and tell the factual truth about L Ron Hubbard and Scientology,...."

That's just it. The kicker is the "and". Sometimes you will have to choose which one you want to accomplish. There will be situations where you can't do both in that same unit of time. You may have to choose going in to enough ARC with them to then be able to leave a sign post or link to a place where they will find the factual information you want them to find. You accomplished that on Marty's blog. I know darn well you can think of good things you can truthfully say about some aspect of scientology, so getting in some ARC isn't that hard. Especially these days, I would guess scientologists are hungry for it. But from then on you have to estimate if they are actually ready to hear, much less talk about, the contrary facts or data.

99% of the time, they're not. You need to remember you are light-years ahead of them, having been out as long as you have. And even if they are out 10 years, many of them won't ever be interested in digging as deep into it as you were/are. They'll just want get on with their lives. All you can do is point them to where they will eventually find the info you want them to find. That's it.
 

Atalantan

Patron with Honors
I lurked a long time before I began to post.

One thing I learned for sure is that Alanzo makes some very very very intelligent posts.

And I, for one, ain't about to tell him to him what he ought or ought not be doing.

Alanzo is one of the posters that if he posts I want to read it.

Thanks man, please keep up the excellent work !

Oh, and yes, he IS one of those people that one day I hope I get to meet IRL.

He does make a lot of very x3 intelligent posts.

However, my wife won't let me tell her what she ought to do, my daughter won't let me tell her what she ought not to do, and my son won't let me tell him either what he ought to do or what he ought not do, so I have to find others I can pick on. And Al has been very good-natured about it.
 

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
You said:

"All right, so you are basically saying that if my goal is to sell newly-outs on the ideas of expanding their factual knowledge of LRH and Scientology, then I am going about it all wrong."

NO!

You missed the one main point I was trying to make, and I think that's my fault because my post was so verbosely overlong. So I will try to focus with laser precision! My main point was supposed to be this:

IF your goal was to post an invite to ESMB on Marty's blog that would not be challenged by him, getting you bitch-slapped along the way, THEN you went about it the wrong way.

But, even in that I was being too critical of you. Explanation is below.

My general points were that depending on your goal, you need to approach your objective in a venue-specific way.

I believe you actually succeeded pretty well, because your post is still up, and the acronym "ESMB" is still posted there for all to read. Further, the little "tempest in a teapot" that ensued is likely to make some people curious as to "what is this site ESMB and why was there some uproar about it? I think I'll check it out"

As scientologists used to say, "all publicity is good publicity", meaning even bad publicity is better than no publicity.

But you didn't accomplish that by "STATING YOUR POSITION!" and letting the chips fall where they may. That would probably have got you a big boot up your ass. No. You accomplished it by trying to go with the flow and the actual topic, and slide it in. It was a good attempt, and I was perhaps too critical of it initially, as your post is still up so it worked well enough.

I should be saying "Good job! Fine-tune that and eventually you'll be able to post a link to ESMB on an org's bulletin board!"

Part of this is to muzzle yourself, if what you want to accomplish is getting invites or links posted on sites that may be essentially hostile to your position. Who cares what your personal position is? Take your ego out of it completely. You want make ESMB known? All right. Then your objective is to issue the invites or get the links posted, that's all. No-one needs to know "your position" if that's your objective. Are you trying to promote yourself, your position, or ESMB? You may have to choose, depending on the venue you are trying to establish yourself in.

You wrote:

"If it is possible to "go into ARC" with politically correct Scientology and tell the factual truth about L Ron Hubbard and Scientology,...."

That's just it. The kicker is the "and". Sometimes you will have to choose which one you want to accomplish. There will be situations where you can't do both in that same unit of time. You may have to choose going in to enough ARC with them to then be able to leave a sign post or link to a place where they will find the factual information you want them to find. You accomplished that on Marty's blog. I know darn well you can think of good things you can truthfully say about some aspect of scientology, so getting in some ARC isn't that hard. Especially these days, I would guess scientologists are hungry for it. But from then on you have to estimate if they are actually ready to hear, much less talk about, the contrary facts or data.

99% of the time, they're not. You need to remember you are light-years ahead of them, having been out as long as you have. And even if they are out 10 years, many of them won't ever be interested in digging as deep into it as you were/are. They'll just want get on with their lives. All you can do is point them to where they will eventually find the info you want them to find. That's it.

OK, I got it now.

But you know, here's a fact from a different angle: not one of my posts would have ever appeared on Marty's blog had he not been pursuing some kind of "free speech" purpose or ideal.

I believe it is in him, somewhere, deep down.

I know it is!
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Gary Morehead aka "Jackson" | October 25, 2010 at 2:44 pm | Reply

"My dear friend Sarge has taken the time to relate some of the most intimate aspects of HIS OWN life, that happens to include specifics about his relationship with LRH, a dear friend to many of us here. It is unadulterated and beautiful. In fact, it simply is information about the unaldulterated charachter and personality of both Sarge and LRH. After reading such stories you can do nothing but see how simple and gentle these two men actually are.

It's really a beautiful thing to watch super-stupid supporters of insane cult leaders (like Hubbard, COB, Bill Robertson, Marty Rathbun...) saluting and crying at the same time, experiencing overwhelming pride as their deity-du-jour rolls by in the parade, waving to adoring crowds.

The best part is when we CUT TO a few months/years later when their cult leader brutalizes them psychologically & physically. At that point they go into shock and just don't know what to think.

Marty "cult"ivates cult members in exactly the same manner as his predecessors.

Now this ludricrous claim that LRH was a "simple and gentle man" has got to be on the ALL TIME TOP TEN LIES ABOUT HUBBARD THAT MAKE YOU CRINGE EVEN BEFORE THE FULL SENTENCE IS COMPLETED.


hitlersdogbl.jpg

"Adolf was so kind and gentle with animals!"

hitler-with-dog.jpg

"He was just a regular gentle man, as gentle as could be!"
(this image actually circulated to German public in cigarettes pack to remake his image)


hitler_baby.jpg

"Why babies just adored Hitler just adored children--he was so gentle with them, ya know?"

313.jpg

"He was the life of the party and a ton of laughs--and gentle too!"



VIDEOS DON'T LIE!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3C5Sf8RC7s"He always validated the good things people did--and he was so gentle!"​
 
Last edited:
Information Control is my main target: Information control on all flows.

Break up the information control on all flows and any possibility of a cult, mind control, or any vestiges of brainwashing, are gone.

Gone, Baby, Gone.

Socrates said that.

Not me.

Alanzo,

Here was Marty's response to that on his blog:

"His plea for no “information control” is a plea for the reactive mind to reign."

Not all communication is real communication in the truest sense. Some of it can just be coming from circuits and the reactive mind and thus should be blocked. Marty is correct.

Here was also an interesting reply on the same thread from one of the other commentators on Marty's blog ( Valkov ) about you Alanzo:

"A word about Alanzo. Without prejudice, let me say this. I have interacted with Al a lot on Geir’s (now Claire’s) forum over the past year. I have a back ground in psychiatry/psychology, and more than 8 months ago, I began to believe that Al had received ECT at some point in his life, possibly after his break with the Co$.

ECT typically produces personality changes that exactly correspond with the 2 Atcause mentioned – fixidity and reactivity, or rote responses on some topics.

Unfortunately, it is also true that some people experience a relief from suffering when they receive ECT, and feel that ECT helped them in a way nothing else did. Thus they will defend it. There are “ECT survivors” organizations, like “The Committe for Truth in Psychiatry”. (Google for it, please). This is not allied with CCHR, and one must be an “ECT survivor” to be a member. These people have testified before Congress. Their beef with psychiatry is not that ECT is bad, but that psychiatry has failed to fully disclosed the “other effects” of ECT – like the memory loss and personality changes, and impairments of mental functioning that occur all too often. It is as a result of this group in particular, that psychiatry has been forced to do a lot more disclosure of the risks, require a waiver to be read and signed, and in most states, do away with involuntary administration of ECT.

My point here is, many of these “survivors” still say ECT “helped” them by providing a relief from their suffering, usually a serious overwhelming depression, when all other means available to them had failed. Thus they will defend ECT and insist that it be available to those who really want it.

As for Al, I of course don’t know, it is an inference on my part. The way he acts is consistent with what I have speculated, and it is no way intended to denigrate or diminish him, or make him look bad. If it is as Ithink, more power to him, that he has survived.
It is speculation based on what I have gathered about the after effects of ECT on a person. He is an intelligent and at times likeable person. Unfortunately, he also has a fixed agenda I suspect he is powerless to deal with.

If I am wrong, and he really is acting completely on his own determinism, then let’s lynch him and get it over with, or just take him to the Humane Society and….. :)

OK, for the literal-minded out there, please do not take my joke and spin it that I am promoting euthanasia. It is a joke that Al, knowing me, The Feral White Russian from Manchuria, I think would understand as a joke.

If you do take it literally and post such calumny about me, I will send the Russian Mafia after you…. :)"
 

Atalantan

Patron with Honors
OK, I got it now.

But you know, here's a fact from a different angle: not one of my posts would have ever appeared on Marty's blog had he not been pursuing some kind of "free speech" purpose or ideal.

I believe it is in him, somewhere, deep down.

I know it is!

Well, deep down it is in most people, I guess.

I am totally undecided about how and why posts are passed or rejected. I also wonder how many people are modding for that blog. I think there is more than one. It would be better if it was a forum with posted rules, than a personal blog. I do feel virtual real estate is the property of the person who creates it, so he can run it however he wants to run it. I always have the choice of not going there if it's not my cup of tea.

I think many posts are passed because they are just innocuous non-controversial comments. It seems anything that might have an "agenda" involved gets scrutinized much more carefully.

It is quite possible that he has as part of his agenda, to be less doctrinaire because he is starting to feel more confident about himself. He may be realizing more and more that the world is a big place, and there are many different opinions out here, and that he can live with the rest of the world, after all.

Jeff has a good new post reviewing Erich Fromm's (psychiatrist) old book (written in 1941) titled "Escape from Freedom". It is about why people fall into the kind of structure cults like Nazism provide.

Anyway,the freedom that a person experiences can be scary, when he loses some structure he is used to having around that helps order his life. It's a common problem, whether post divorce, or being away from home for the first time when going away to college, losing a job or changing jobs, losing a home, or whatever. Fromm reflects that in the modern world, a lot of the old structures have disappeared, and many people are at sea, feel unsettled.

Jeff in his own book, describes how it was for him when he first left scientology.

Anyway, like Marty or not, he is just as human as anyone else and has to be going through this as much as any other ex.

One has to build a new life and habits up, to replace the old ones. I think Marty is subject to some of this. I'm not sure how much he actually knows where he is going. I agree that he sends up trial balloons, tests things out. That's natural and shows resourcefulness. It means he is a survivor. I think he means it when he says he didn't start his war with Miscavige, and that if Miscavige left him alone, he'd be happier. I think maybe he wouldn't bother much with the blog, which at this point is a tool.

But as I've posted already, I don't really like to speculate. I just like to respond to whatever appears before me. You could be right, but I feel no certainty about it either way. There is no doubt Marty is controlling, but it's his personal blog... Does he have a plan or is he flying by the seat of his pants? Unanswered questuions.

As that other guy wrote, "Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof."
 

Ogsonofgroo

Crusader
Alanzo,

Here was Marty's response to that on his blog:

"His plea for no “information control” is a plea for the reactive mind to reign."

Not all communication is real communication in the truest sense. Some of it can just be coming from circuits and the reactive mind and thus should be blocked. Marty is correct.

Here was also an interesting reply on the same thread from one of the other commentators on Marty's blog ( Valkov ) about you Alanzo:

"A word about Alanzo. Without prejudice, let me say this. I have interacted with Al a lot on Geir’s (now Claire’s) forum over the past year. I have a back ground in psychiatry/psychology, and more than 8 months ago, I began to believe that Al had received ECT at some point in his life, possibly after his break with the Co$.

ECT typically produces personality changes that exactly correspond with the 2 Atcause mentioned – fixidity and reactivity, or rote responses on some topics.

Unfortunately, it is also true that some people experience a relief from suffering when they receive ECT, and feel that ECT helped them in a way nothing else did. Thus they will defend it. There are “ECT survivors” organizations, like “The Committe for Truth in Psychiatry”. (Google for it, please). This is not allied with CCHR, and one must be an “ECT survivor” to be a member. These people have testified before Congress. Their beef with psychiatry is not that ECT is bad, but that psychiatry has failed to fully disclosed the “other effects” of ECT – like the memory loss and personality changes, and impairments of mental functioning that occur all too often. It is as a result of this group in particular, that psychiatry has been forced to do a lot more disclosure of the risks, require a waiver to be read and signed, and in most states, do away with involuntary administration of ECT.

My point here is, many of these “survivors” still say ECT “helped” them by providing a relief from their suffering, usually a serious overwhelming depression, when all other means available to them had failed. Thus they will defend ECT and insist that it be available to those who really want it.

As for Al, I of course don’t know, it is an inference on my part. The way he acts is consistent with what I have speculated, and it is no way intended to denigrate or diminish him, or make him look bad. If it is as Ithink, more power to him, that he has survived.
It is speculation based on what I have gathered about the after effects of ECT on a person. He is an intelligent and at times likeable person. Unfortunately, he also has a fixed agenda I suspect he is powerless to deal with.

If I am wrong, and he really is acting completely on his own determinism, then let’s lynch him and get it over with, or just take him to the Humane Society and….. :)

OK, for the literal-minded out there, please do not take my joke and spin it that I am promoting euthanasia. It is a joke that Al, knowing me, The Feral White Russian from Manchuria, I think would understand as a joke.

If you do take it literally and post such calumny about me, I will send the Russian Mafia after you…. :)"
Smells like a stinky croc-o'-poop, can haz link please?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4MJqLmKfHo&nofeather=True
 

Mick Wenlock

Admin Emeritus (retired)
"thereckoning"?? wow - seeing a post from you is like walking into the bathroom and seeing a turd floating in the toilet bowl.
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
My post has disappeared over there, so that probably means that Marty has deleted it from his approval queue without posting it.

And then, Gary Morehead aka "Jackson" (former Int Base Security Chief under Miscavige for decades) posts the following to my asking why all the secrecy, fake names and "shore stories" with regard to LRH?




From Marc Headley's Trial, the transcripts mention Gary Morehead:





Looks like Miscavige's "Int Security Chief", and Miscavige's "RTC Inspector General for Ethics" are running "what's ethical" again over on Marty's blog.

Just when I thought he was doing so well, too.

Dang it.

How many times are you gonna disappoint me Marty before I write you off as a pinheaded, wannabe cult leader just lookin for a new group of people to suppress?

I'm guessing, about zero?
 
Top