Commendation, Marty Rathbun and Mike Rinder.

[Voltaire's Child]

Baby steps. I'm just glad they're doing something!

A very silly exchange with a party line churchie is so fresh in my mind right now, so when I see someone actually go ahead and publicly disclose some of the unsavory events in CofS, it's downright refreshing.

Could they do more? Possibly. But it's a start. I see where Mick's coming from.

 

[nozeno]

Anyone who falls for a ponzi scheme too can get a profit from it if they get out in time. That doesn't mean ponzi schemes are not a black and white issue.

The Anabaptist Jacques

Not always, as with life in general it's a little more complicated than that.

For example you could have been involved with the infamous Bernie Madoff or Art Nadel, hedge fund manager from Sarasota, Fl.

I was indirectly involved in my business with one of them and I can tell you that the investors that got out early are subject to so-called clawback type lawsuits by the investors who weren't lucky enough to get out while the gettin' was good.

Whether or not the "unlucky" ones will recover anything from these types of investment/ponzi schemes is a long drawn out procedure in which mostly the lawyers win.

So you are right, it is not black and white and sometimes the ones that ran to the exit first have to return the clams to the ones at the back of the line. However in my experience I've seen that shells are broken and the clams are squooshed all over the place.

 

[nozeno]

Fair Game, disconnection, the chain locker, keelhauling, sec-checks, intel, vicious attacks of perceived enemies, beans and rice, deplorable conditions for families, ridiculous pay, etc. were all part of the LRH era. The Midget COB has only magnified and intensified these reprehensible activities. And Marty's splitting hairs on confessionals versus sec-checks -- puhleez... the culling of overts, evil intentions, withholds, discreditable acts, thoughts, compulsions, sexual indiscretions, etc. FROM PC FOLDERS, NOT SEC CHECK OR ETHICS RECORDS by the GO and now OSA for use in attacking/suppressing the disaffected -- yes, Marty, it was Saint LRH.

The rest of his interview was wonderful.

Gotta luv that Marty!

How'd ya like to be audited by him?

"PICK UP THE CANS MUTHERFUGGER OR I"LL SMASH YOUR FACE!"

Nice to have you back. Did you go to the bathroom and fall in?

 

[Terril park]

They're not talking about Fred Astaire, they are referring to grace as mercy or indulgence.

You know, Scientology word clearing loses the fluidness of language and intertextual conceptions and tends to make one literal. But that's a story for another thread.

The Anabaptist Jacques

MICK
"Both of them lied to Miscavige in order to keep their positions - why on earth would you assume they are speaking the whole truth now? I applaud them being interviewed and answering the questions but that does not buy them any grace."

BB
3] " Goodwill, favour."

4] Mercy; clemency; pardon; forgiveness.

Well spotted AJ. Missed this earlier post by Mick.

Others may consider it buys them some grace.

 

[Tiger Lily]

It's not about 'condemning' them; there's nothing we can do to them. What is important though is to realize that 'they' (actually Marty in this case, since Mike hasn't said much yet) have an agenda. That agenda is to, as far as possible, distance themselves from any crimes they and their 'Church' have committed, deny any responsibility and as far as possible distract from the systemic nature of criminality in Scientology and divert attention to a single 'target'; David Miscavige.

I would hope that any Ex or even current Scientologist reading or hearing the level of self-serving revisionism we're being served would have all the alarms and bells and whistles going off by now. What's sad is that for some, the standard cultic hero worship and adulation of 'saviors' continues.

Is Marty's statement 'useful'? Yes, certainly. But, it's *intended* to be first and foremost useful for *him*.

Zinj

Zinj, you may be right. They may have seen something coming and decided to save their own skins. Or not. I don't know, I have no way of knowing that. (Does it really matter?). They ARE exposing crimes of the church. And that is good.

Don't worry, no more "cultic hero worship and adulation" of anyone for me, and probably not for most here. I don't have these guys on any kind of a pedestal, I wouldn't be surprised if they are self-serving scum (if they hadn't been scum already, Scientology is surely capable of creating monsters) but I think it's worth entertaining the possibility that they are waking up and have finally decided to do what they can to change it.

In any case, I'm going to enjoy the show.

-TL

 

[MostlyLurker]

That's the point. They havent asked anything. Rathbun has stepped into a role he has never stepped out of, lord and master of his domain. Instead of taking the step of being understood as would happen eventually on ESMB he continues to play God, at a distance. The question was not who they are better or worse than, it is who they are now.

They are still scientologists. An ex-scientologist forum, even if filled with nice good people like us, may not suit their interest.

In a way they are taking responsibility for their church, and that is good. Would Scientology drop all the abusive behavior should Miscavige be overthrown? I can't but hope so.

 

[ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn]

They are still scientologists. An ex-scientologist forum, even if filled with nice good people like us, may not suit their interest.

In a way they are taking responsibility for their church, and that is good.

I might have missed something here, could you please help me understand how they are taking responsibility for their church?

 

[MostlyLurker]

I might have missed something here, could you please help me understand how they are taking responsibility for their church?

Instead of blindly follow the dwarf or keep quiet, like most churchies do, they step forward and attacked him. That is doing something for a change. They consider themselves scientologists and care for the tech? I have nothing against that. I hope, if they succeed in having Miscavige removed, that they, (or the future leaders of the cult) will remove with Misvcavige all the abusive practices, the lies, disconnections, deceit and more that we all hate.

 

[Dulloldfart]

I hope, if they succeed in having Miscavige removed, that they, (or the future leaders of the cult) will remove with Misvcavige all the abusive practices, the lies, disconnections, deceit and more that we all hate.

If these future leaders do that, there will be nothing left.

I don't mean that in the snarky sense of the CofS being composed only of those things, but from the viewpoint that if they put things to rights, and make people whole (in the legal financial sense) there will be nothing left in the coffers.

Which would be fitting.

Paul

 

[ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn]

Instead of blindly follow the dwarf or keep quiet, like most churchies do, they step forward and attacked him. That is doing something for a change. They consider themselves scientologists and care for the tech? I have nothing against that. I hope, if they succeed in having Miscavige removed, that they, (or the future leaders of the cult) will remove with Misvcavige all the abusive practices, the lies, disconnections, deceit and more that we all hate.

But Miscavige is about as close to a model Scientologist leader that Hubbard intended, as you can get.

The only problem Hubbard would have with is Miscavige is that he takes too much credit for the cult. Scientologists are not supposed to give credit to anyone but Hubbard himself.

I personally think Miscavige belongs in prison, but that doesn't absolve Hubbard and his sadistic totalitarian policies that created him. There are plenty of Ronbots just waiting for a chance to take Miscavige's place running the wash, rinse, spin cycle of Hubbard's totalitarian cult

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Instead of blindly follow the dwarf or keep quiet, like most churchies do, they step forward and attacked him. That is doing something for a change. They consider themselves scientologists and care for the tech? I have nothing against that. I hope, if they succeed in having Miscavige removed, that they, (or the future leaders of the cult) will remove with Misvcavige all the abusive practices, the lies, disconnections, deceit and more that we all hate.

The Tech they love is totalitarian and abusive. Miscaviage, and Rathbun and Rinder when they were in, were following command intention.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[MostlyLurker]

But Miscavige is about as close to a model Scientologist leader that Hubbard intended as you can get.

The only problem Hubbard would have with is Miscavige is that he takes too much credit for the cult. Scientologists are not supposed to give credit to anyone but Hubbard himself.

I personally think Miscavige belongs in prison, but that doesn't absolve Hubbard and his sadistic totalitarian policies that created him. There are plenty of Ronbots just waiting for a chance to take Miscavige's place running the wash, rinse, spin cycle of Hubbard's totalitarian cult

Right. I just hope a lesson will be learned.

I have a long list of wishes for the church that includes no confidentiality on anything written by LRH, cancellation of policies, the reform points of The Pilot and much more, but it is pure speculation. (How do you call that - wishful thinking?)

 

[ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn]

Right. I just hope a lesson will be learned.

I have a long list of wishes for the church that includes no confidentiality on anything written by LRH, cancellation of policies, the reform points of The Pilot and much more, but it is pure speculation. (How do you call that - wishful thinking?)

I call that creating a new religion that has little resemblance to what Hubbard intended

 

[MostlyLurker]

If these future leaders do that, there will be nothing left.

I don't mean that in the snarky sense of the CofS being composed only of those things, but from the viewpoint that if they put things to rights, and make people whole (in the legal financial sense) there will be nothing left in the coffers.

Which would be fitting.

Paul

That is possible.

Supposing Miscavige will go home (or to prison), and an actual change will occur (which is not granted either), there will be a reform or revolution?

It comes to mind Mikhail Gorbaciov. How to reform the Soviet Union avoiding its dissolution?

 

[Feral]

There is little doubt in my mind that Marty Rathbun or Mike rinder, individually or together could *stop* the ongoing criminality of the 'Church' of Scientology within weeks. Admittedly, not without jeopardy to themselves.

They have so far chosen not to. I'm not a prosecutor or jailer, but, I'm also not inclined to award them little tin 'hero' badges.

Zinj

Right, but I'm willing to sit back and see how it all turns out.

Napoleon (the real one) said; "Never interrupt an opponent while he is making an error"

He could have also said, "Never interrupt anyone while they besiege an enemies fortress, even if you don't trust them"

 

[Zinjifar]

It comes to mind Mikhail Gorbaciov. How to reform the Soviet Union avoiding its dissolution?

The analogy is probably apt. Mikhail Gorbachev never intended to free the Soviet Union or end the domination by the Communist Party. But, faced with the impossibility of continuing on the same or a more repressive course, he attempted to make *minor* changes that were as close to cosmetic as possible. That was enough to completely slip the reins.

Zinj

 

[uniquemand]

That is possible.

Supposing Miscavige will go home (or to prison), and an actual change will occur (which is not granted either), there will be a reform or revolution?

It comes to mind Mikhail Gorbaciov. How to reform the Soviet Union avoiding its dissolution?

Any effort to reform the Church of Scientology has to hinge around transparency and accountability, which would by definition require termination of confidentiality of Tech and Admin issues, such that all Scientologists knew which policies and bulletins the Church was operating on. With that done, they could make intelligent decisions about which ones to keep, and which ones to toss out (anything advocating confidentiality would be a good place to start, and I'm not talking about PC folders, I'm talking about issues which are "confidential": sekrit).

I am not sure such a reform is possible, nor am I sure that there is a figure in the FZ or in the Church around whom people would rally if corporate dissolution occurred and a Reformed Church was attempted. Had Ken Ogger been around, a lot of people might have gone for that, twelve years ago. I can think of no FZ Scientology name that has the same power, right now, and am unaware if there is a leader in the Church that people might trust, "technically".

 

[MostlyLurker]

I call that creating a new religion that has little resemblance to what Hubbard intended

That is an old question. The good part of scientology is there to entrap people into the dark part, or on the contrary the dark secretive scientology is there to protect the good part?

I believe in taking just the good part and expose and throw away the rest. That would certainly be a different church.

By the way, in the Marty interview I saw an effort to protect LRH and move LRH responsibility to Miscavige, and I didn't like that. He said that LRH was fed with false reports and for that reason he allowed "disconnection" to be reinstated in 1983.

I wonder if he could explain away all the flaw and shortcomings of Scientology and LRH in a similar way. There would be a better church anyway, but keeping LRH on a pedestal will have the danger of somebody coming up with the "recovery of lost tech" and re-implementing the abusive practices in the future. That's no good.

Scientology should make known that LRH was fallible, that the tech was developed by the combined effort of many people, and some LRH polices are just plain wrong.

Scientology must evolve, must cleanup his past and openly move forward.

Just food for thought.

 

[Tiger Lily]

Hi TL,

There is a moral difference in lying to your family about something you are embarrassed about and lying to the authorities about how somebody in your care died.

There is a huge moral difference between lying about your wins and beating someone up.

Just because you had the same sort of feeling of motivation does not excuse what they did.

It also casts a pall over what they are doing NOW.

Mike Rinder was a friend of mine in my SO days, we did a mission together, we bumped into each at various times during our careers. I like Mike, I enjoyed his company and I would probably enjoy it again.

But that's beside the point of the uncomfortable moral aspect of things.

For the last 20 or so years - both Mike and Marty have, by their own statements helped Miscavige run a reign of terror on Scientologists and Sea Org members.

Families have been split up by their actions, people have lost jobs, people have gone bankrupt.

What would it take for you to condemn people who have done that sort of thing?

I was in international management, I helped set up and run the IAS/IMU, I was the CO of AOSH EU, I was the D/CO EU. I did missions - so many of them I have lost count.

In all my time, and in all my stressful situations NOT ONCE did I ever lay a hand on anyone - in fact I never raised a hand even at a distance, I never "got in someone's face" and yet, unlike Miscavige Rinder and Rathbun - I actually have a history of being in fights prior to my time in the SO. I actually fought people who fought back. I was a biker.

In all my stressful situations I never once regged someone just because I was ordered to - in fact I refused on several occasions, once because I thought that the prospect did not understand what he was doing - even though he had the money.

So the truth of the matter is that no-one needs to sell his or her conscience to be in the SO - you only need to sell it if your position, your power means more to you than your own personal integrity (and I don't mean that bogus "integrity" Hubbard waffled on about).

Neither Rathbun nor Rinder stood up to MIscavige, neither told him to fuck off when he ordered them to do things that they obviously did not feel right doing. They preferred to do unto others rather than be done unto.


Both of them lied to Miscavige in order to keep their positions - why on earth would you assume they are speaking the whole truth now? I applaud them being interviewed and answering the questions but that does not buy them any grace.

Hey Mick,

Thankfully I was never tested like you were. I am glad that there are people like you out there who are willing to stand up and not cave in to that kind of pressure; and the fact that you were willing to use your real name and be open about your views is evidence of that (I saw your post on Ethercat's "through the door" back in 2002; I admired it even back then, and I wasn't out yet).

And though lying to my family etc. isn't on the same order of magnitude, it still was compromising my integrity. I'm not happy that I did it, but I did it many times in the name of Scientology.

But when I realized what I had been doing, and apologized to my family they welcomed me "back" with open arms and have never brought up those things to me again . . . even the $30,000 debt that changed our family's' lifestyle forever -- completely forgiven. I can't tell you how much that meant to me and has helped me to get on with my life.

I guess time will tell if these guys are sincere, and what their motivations are. Does anyone know if they have apologized to the people they hurt (ie are they taking any responsibility for it or just blaming it all on DM)? That's probably an important component.

-TL

 

[ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn]

That is an old question. The good part of scientology is there to entrap people into the dark part, or on the contrary the dark secretive scientology is there to protect the good part?

I believe in taking just the good part and expose and throw away the rest. That would certainly be a different church.

By the way, in the Marty interview I saw an effort to protect LRH and move LRH responsibility to Miscavige, and I didn't like that. He said that LRH was fed with false reports and for that reason he allowed "disconnection" to be reinstated in 1983.

I wonder if he could explain away all the flaw and shortcomings of Scientology and LRH in a similar way. There would be a better church anyway, but keeping LRH on a pedestal will have the danger of somebody coming up with the "recovery of lost tech" and re-implementing the abusive practices in the future. That's no good.

Scientology should make known that LRH was fallible, that the tech was developed by the combined effort of many people, and some LRH polices are just plain wrong.

Scientology must evolve, must cleanup his past and openly move forward.

Just food for thought.

The whole transparency and honesty thingy poses one small problem which may be a little too difficult for Scientology to overcome, the problem being that Scientology has never even remotely come close to producing the imaginary state of Clear or OT which it's entire intent is based on.