The one-eyed toad is back!!!
PS There is a god after all!!!
The one-eyed toad is back!!!
PS There is a god after all!!!
I got what Mark meant, and his comment does relate to certain observable events and dramatic "outbursts" on this board. :confused2:
But, I am sure that might be unpopular to say out loud.
I agree with those who think Marty has helped cripple the Church of Scientology. I think "Church of Scientology" is where Ortega is coming from.
However, I never expected to see Tom Cruise below Marty on that list. I think Cruise is known throughout the entire galaxy as a Scientology crippler. Others I thought could have made the Top Five include Xenophon and Davis.
I think there are only two names left -- Miscavige and Hubbard. Anybody else possible in those two slots? Have we forgotten someone who's obvious?
I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's Hubbard at #2 and Miscavige at #1.
Some have argued against Hubbard making the list, since he's long gone. However, Xenu made #25 and Lisa McPherson made #10, so "living human being" is not a Village Voice requirement for the Top 25.
BTW, I am betting The People's Choice Award (chosen by readers' votes) will be Anonymous, who surely have stuffed the ballot boxes.
http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/Science of Certainty vs. Pedagogy of Vacillation
Tony Ortega did a write up on me at the Village Voice yesterday.
I appreciate the work Tony has done in investigating and working to understand me and what the independent movement is about. I think he provides a fairly accurate picture. One thing that Tony and I apparently don’t see eye to eye on is what our impact is on the future of Scientology. While he takes pains to distinguish between Corporate Scientology and Independent Scientology in the article at issue, he continues to consider – by the relegation of his story to the top twenty five people “crippling Scientology” – that we are somehow hurting the public image of Scientology. I couldn’t disagree more emphatically. I post about signs of our objectives being attained – differentiating in the public mind between the practice of Scientology philosophy and the daily criminal activity of the “church” of Scientology – fairly often (ironically including Tony’s own coverage of Janet Reitman’s book, our recent trip to Germany, and religious scholar Hugh Urban’s book on Scientology).
Perhaps not coincidentally, the only other thing I take exception to in Tony’s article on me is his painting a picture that I am focused on getting people out of the church and even out of Scientology. He misduplicated what happened with the three psychoanalyst referrals I received. One of them returned to the Bridge is moving up it actively, one considers himself an Independent Scientologist but is not actively pursuing the Bridge, and one – who for twelve years considered herself not a Scientologist – continued not to consider herself a Scientologist but lost all of her considerable antagonism and victimhood feelings for the subject, and instead went off considering her experiences part of her continuing growth.
I just let him know that I don’t solicit, advertise or pressure anyone to pursue Scientology. What he omitted to report is that I considered that approach remarkably effective. We just do our work and let the results speak for themselves. We are consistently booked solid four months in advance, and every week we have to refer people out because we just cannot handle the demand. <snip>
Yep, I would have Marty at #3 in my Top 25, too.
It's not that I think he's wonderful, great, saintly or any of that other BS that idiots like to throw around, it's just that he's actually doing something to cripple scientology.
The best he does is provide a distraction to the CoS while it sinks.
Dear Marty is on a noble quest to save Mankind by rescuing scintology from the evil clutches of little davie boy.
He sees himself on a mission to become a billionaire so his means are justified.
He continues to prove there are plenty of gullible people left to swallow the bait the second time around by hook,line, and sinker.
Can you imagine what would happen if Marty issued a statement that listed out all the LRH policies that Indies no longer needed to follow because they were criminal or harmful??
Great post Hoaxie.
If some group identifying themselves as some of sort of Scientology or Scientologists presented these views, I might have some respect for them:
1. Scientology has yet to produce any person who meets the many LRH definitions of "Clear" and "OT", and while it might someday, so far, it has NOT happened. We understand that there are many contradictions in Hubbard's writings and talks about such "advanced states".
2. Scientology can possibly help to assist some people in feeling better about life and themselves. This has nothing to do with "abilities gained" or "special powers".
3. We understand that there are MANY ways for any person to come to "feel better", and we do NOT hold the absolutist Hubbard view that "Scientology is the ONLY correct path", or that "ONLY an exact application of Scientology provides a way to free the spirit".
4. We hereby abandon and refuse to use any LRH directive that encourages Fair Game, lying, ARC manipulation, SP declares, disconnection, hard sell, deceitful ruin-finding drill, TR-L, extensive PR versus REAL products, fanatical KSW and related ideas, attempting to gain "agreement" DESPITE "truth" and "facts" to the contrary, attacking differing or critical views, intolerance of REAL "freedom of speech", and all statements where "positive ideals" are CLAIMED to be attainable with Scientology ("clearing a planet", "making a world free of crime, insanity and war", "we are the last free Men and Women in the Universe", etc.).
That is the SHORT list.
I know, it is much to hope for. Maybe someday . . . . . :confused2:
And, Marty's published view is FAR from that.