Marty: An Open Letter to Tony Ortega

lotus

stubborn rebel sheep!
I didn't have a huge problem with Marty's response. It was actually more measured than I'd expected.

I did find it galling that M&M and the commenters went on and on about how you can't use Hubbard's personality to criticize Scientology, because a person's behavior has nothing to do with the truth of their message -- and then proceed to attack people's ideas by citing their personalities and even appearances.


And can we for once and for all bury the "old news" defense? CoS and M&M are equally guilty of using it. "Who cares? It's old and boring, let's move on." Well, so is the fact that Hubbard founded Scientology, that he had a wife named Mary Sue, etc., etc. That doesn't make it any less true, or any less essential for an understanding of the subject. What they really mean when they say this, of course, is, "What you're saying is true but embarrassing, and we would prefer that people stop talking about it."


This is it :thumbsup:
 

Zhongjianren

Patron with Honors
http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2011/09/28/an-open-letter-to-tony-ortega/#comment-151318
Heather G | September 29, 2011 at 6:50 am | Reply

I’ve been thinking about this a bit today. I think the problem is that we’re approaching this from different paradigms.

When I choose what scientific laws to apply, I don’t care about the character, spirituality or morality of the guy who first discovered them. Likewise when I select a car or a computer or a kitchen appliance. I sure do not want to become like any of numerous clever engineers, designers, scientists etc whose characters (in my opinion) are not worthy of emulating, though I might admire their achievements and knowledge in some respects. Workability, design and value for money are what count. I’m going to call this my technology paradigm.

When I choose to devote myself to my religion, however, it’s all about the character of God. The character and spirituality of Jesus and how he treated people are essential to my faith. The christian life is the spiritual journey of becoming LIKE Jesus. It’s not about what works. WWJD – the cliche is “What Would Jesus Do?” – is a question christians ask themselves, not because what Jesus would do will WORK, but because a Christian wants to BE like Jesus, in character.

This is the religious paradigm, at least as far as the Abrahamic faiths are concerned. In each of those faiths, the nature and character of God -whether known as Allah, YHWH or Jesus Christ – is key. Because God is the Source of life and of the faith. The character of the Source is essential, and the life of the believer is about being close to God and becoming like God in His character.

The character of a scientist is largely irrelevant, because one does not undertake a spiritual journey to become close to and like a scientist if one buys a machine that uses his scientific law. It’s just a machine. It either works or it doesn’t.

I think people like Tony who place high value on the character of the founder of a religion are approaching Hubbard and scientology using a religious paradigm. The way you guys talk about the tech and Hubbard, arguing for the adoption instead of the technology paradigm, reinforces for me that the category of “religion” doesn’t sit comfortably about scientology.

I suggest that, whether or not they are right, most people in western culture are attuned to thinking about character when they consider religion and workability when they consider science and technology. Maybe we’re all wrong and you’re right. But the reality is that, unless and until people adopt your paradigm, the character of Hubbard will continue to matter to them. And for many people, that will keep them away from scientology. Sorry, but that’s just reality.
 

Veda

Sponsor
The Marty people are working hard to re-bamboozle Tony Ortega... "different paradigms," etc. :eyeroll:

"That's not the Scientology I know, and have been involved in for 50 years." Mike Rinder.

Wow, 50 years, all the way back to 1961 and the dawning of Security Checking (the good old days).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wY76WHmRlYA&feature=player_embedded

http://www.lisamcpherson.org/burden.htm

Schwimmel Puckel, in a 9 February 2011 post, had these observations:

"I quite sure that Hubbard directed this personally... But I can't prove it. But it was/is well known that even as Mary Sue and Jane Kember held those posts they did, nothing was done without Ron overlooking, approving and/or ordering it.

"I never met the man in person. I was in the Guardian's Office Europe 1979 to mid '81. Well, we had telexes clattering in from 'Ron' all the time. He was very much into anything the GO did, was my impression.. And we carefully cut the corner that said 'Ron' off of the slips before archiving. No document were to expose Ron as a leader or executive authority of anything anywhere."

About events of the early 1970s:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uF99yYCE8wI
 

Captain Koolaid

Patron Meritorious
There is numerous video available on internet wich shows Mike lying.

a little bit body language study of mike is interesting

we then know (very easily and predict) when he he going to lie within the next sec

His eyes disconnect - he escape the interviewer eyes (twitching)

And then, when ''performing'' lies

he shakes his head like a spring..each time he knows he hides things but wishes we could not find (twitching)

Tommy Davis do pretty much the same with his eyes

It is a lot more interesting to spot when he's NOT lying. I assume it does happen once in a blue moon.
 

Peter Soderqvist

Patron with Honors
Hmm. Apart from the obvious fact that neither of the two dweebs have gotten over Hubbard it wad interesting to see that Marty was more concerned with trying to "handle" the idea that Hubbardian pronouncements were stifling the CofS. It was a worthless attempt of course - I don't think I have seen a more feeble attempt to excuse KSW 1 "if it ain't broke don't fix it?" No Marty - what Hubbard said in KSW is "It ain't broke, can never be broke, is unbreakable and you should never allow anyone to say anything different". Was kind of disappointing to see such obvious attempts at 'handling". And Mike's use of the "long dead tree in the forest" motif was pretty cheesy too. The thing is, Mike, while Hubbard may be a long dead tree in a pretty ugly forest - he still smells up the place.

I have often wondered what Mike has to say about Chris Owen's brilliant expose of Hubbard's war service? Or Marty for that matter - the last thing I ever heard about it from marty was how he was going to reveal... but that seems to have disappeared in amongst the deluge of things he is going to reveal...

Poke these two the right way and they still respond the same way.

And oh yeah Mike - being conned for 50 years doesn't make you an expert - it makes you an idiot.

Margaret | September 29, 2011 at 5:15 pm | Reply
Ann wrote: “And the fact that LRH did not have war injuries and therefore could not have discovered Dianetics through his efforts to cure himself, begs the question–How did he develop Dianetics”

Ann, it’s untrue that LRH didn’t have war-related injuries and maladies. When asked by a reporter for the 4-Dec-1950 issue of LOOK magazine (the 2nd largest magazine in the US at the time, by subscription) what those war-related maladies/injuries were, he described them with specifics. When his war records were released after his death in 1986, those descriptions matched the war records exactly.

None of the authors of the anti-LRH “biographies” (Russell Miller, Jon Atack nor Bent Corydon) mentioned this fact — though evidence suggests that they were familiar with the LOOK article — nor did Chris Owen who authored the LRH website attacking Ron’s war record mention this (though to Chris Owen’s credit, he has back-pedaled over the years on other anti-LRH claims).

So I wouldn’t so easily buy into the anti-LRH rhetoric — even if The New Yorker repeats it.
http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2011/09/28/an-open-letter-to-tony-ortega/#comment-151485

martyrathbun09 | September 29, 2011 at 5:23 pm | Reply
Thanks Margaret, one reason I called Miller’s book “third rate.”

Soderqvist1: but where is the documentation for this?
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
. . . Soderqvist1: but where is the documentation for this?

Martyland? DOX? Yeah, right.

mr022.jpg

^^^ Physical exam for release from active duty - "health has not been adversely affected". Didn't stop L Ron Hubbard from claiming a disability pension for decades afterwards.

http://www.cosvm.org/lrhnavy.htm


. . . In an interview given shortly after the creation of Dianetics, Hubbard was more candid about his war wounds. The December 5, 1950, issue of Look magazine quoted him as saying he had been suffering from "ulcers, conjunctivitis, deteriorating eyesight, bursitis and something wrong with my feet." This description fits very well with Hubbard's Navy and Veterans Administration records.

There are further contradictions in Hubbard's published Scientological works. At least twice Hubbard referred to an incident shortly before the end of the war, when, according to his other statements, he was supposedly incapacitated by his wounds. The first reference was made in a tape recorded lecture, given on July 23, 1951; the second in a bulletin published on November 15, 1957. 4 In both Hubbard claimed that he was on leave in Hollywood on July 25, 1945, when he was attacked by three petty officers, one with a broken bottle. Because of his knowledge of Judo, Hubbard was able to fight them off. An impossible feat for a blind cripple.

At the very time that he was supposed to have "recovered fully," in October 1947, Hubbard wrote to the Veterans Administration. In the letter, he claimed that after two years he was still unbalanced because of his wartime service. He was suffering from prolonged bouts of depression and frequently thought of taking his own life. He asked for psychiatric treatment.

Hubbard was examined again in December 1947, and a few dollars were added to his pension for the arthritic condition of his right hip, spine and ankles. Hubbard said he had sprained his left knee in the service, but the doctor did not allow this. His award was raised to a forty percent disability, which in 1947 amounted to $55.20 per month. In 1948, he applied for a Navy disability retirement, which at the time would have amounted to $181 per month, tax-free. His disabilities were not sufficient for such a retirement. Far from being "permanently disabled physically," Hubbard was twice refused a physical disability retirement from the Navy Reserve . . .

http://www.american-buddha.com/cult.pieceofbluesky.2.5.htm
 

Jachs

Gold Meritorious Patron
Dan Sherman is probably placing his final touches on the "real" truth after 20 years

Dans place where Makeover and Moreover merge as one..

http://www.lermanet.com/L_Ron_Hubbard/mr093.htm
Military Record of L Ron Hubbard

page 2, recommended for promotion when due "temperamental, often has his feelings hurt"

Maybe an off day for Ron
 
Last edited:

Jachs

Gold Meritorious Patron
Hubbard was examined again in December 1947, and a few dollars were added to his pension for the arthritic condition of his right hip, spine and ankles.


dont overlook the Affirmations

Your eyes are getting progressively better. They became bad when you
used them as an excuse to escape the naval academy.

Your stomach trouble you used as an excuse to keep the Navy from
punishing you. You are free of the Navy.

Your hip is a pose.

Your foot was an alibi.

In the Veterans examination you will tell them how sick you are. You will look sick when you take it. You will return to health one hour after the examination and laugh at them.
 

Veda

Sponsor
Margaret | September 29, 2011 at 5:15 pm | Reply

-snip-

So I wouldn’t so easily buy into the anti-LRH rhetoric — even if The New Yorker repeats it.

http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2011/09/28/an-open-letter-to-tony-ortega/#comment-151485

martyrathbun09 | September 29, 2011 at 5:23 pm | Reply
Thanks Margaret, one reason I called Miller’s book “third rate.”

-snip-

Hubbard was examined again in December 1947, and a few dollars were added to his pension for the arthritic condition of his right hip, spine and ankles.


dont overlook the Affirmations

Your eyes are getting progressively better. They became bad when you
used them as an excuse to escape the naval academy.

Your stomach trouble you used as an excuse to keep the Navy from
punishing you. You are free of the Navy.

Your hip is a pose.

Your foot was an alibi.

In the Veterans examination you will tell them how sick you are. You will look sick when you take it. You will return to health one hour after the examination and laugh at them.

From 'Keeping Scientology Working', 7 February, 1965:

"We're not playing some minor game in Scientology. It isn't something cute to do for lack of something better.

"The whole agonized future of this planet, every Man, Woman, and Child on it, and your own destiny for the next endless trillions of years depend on what you do here and now with and in Scientology :unsure::ohmy::yes:

"This is a deadly serious activity. And if we miss getting out of the trap now, we may never again have another chance :spacecraft:. [See 'Implantology'] Remember, this is our first chance in all the endless trillions of years of the past . Don't muff it now because it seems unpleasant or unsocial to do Seven [Hammering out of existence incorrect technology], Eight..."


Just prior to the appearance of 'KSW', was published the piece 'My Philosophy', in which L. Ron Hubbard told Scientologists:

"Blinded with injured optic nerves, and lame with physical injuries to the hip and back, at the end of World War II, I faced an almost nonexistent future. My service record stated: 'This officer has no neurotic or psychotic tendencies whatsoever', but also stated, 'permanently disabled physically'.

"And so there came a further blow. I was abandoned by family and friends :violin: as a supposedly hopeless cripple and probable burden on them for the rest of my days."


And, on 7 March 1965, exactly one month after the appearance of 'KSW' was published 'Suppressive Acts, Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists, the Fair Game Law':

"A Suppressive person or group becomes 'fair game'.

"By Fair Game is meant, without rights for self, possessions or position, and no Scientologist may be brought before a Committee of Evidence or punished for any action taken against a Suppressive Person or group...

"Suppressive acts are defined as actions or omissions undertaken to knowingly suppress, reduce, or impede Scientology or Scientologists.

"Such suppressive acts include public disavowal of Scientology... public statements against Scientology.

"[Suppressive acts also include] 1st degree murder, arson, disintegration of persons or belongings not [emphasis added] guilty of suppressive acts.

"[Suppressive Persons] place themselves beyond any consideration for their feelings :nazi:or well being...

"The homes, property, places, and abodes of persons who have been active in attempting to suppress Scientology... are all beyond any protection."
 

Freeminds

Bitter defrocked apostate
Hubbard was examined again in December 1947, and a few dollars were added to his pension for the arthritic condition of his right hip, spine and ankles.
. . .

Ah, yes... Hubbard and the Veterans' Administration, 1947...
LRH said:
Gentlemen;

This is a request for treatment . . .
After trying and failing for two years to regain my equilibrium in civil life, I am utterly unable to approach anything like my own competence. My last physician informed me that it might be very helpful if I were to be examined and perhaps treated psychiatrically or even by a psychoanalyst. Toward the end of my service I avoided out of pride any mental examinations, hoping that time would balance a mind which I had every reason to suppose was seriously affected. I cannot account for nor rise above long periods of moroseness and suicidal inclinations, and have newly come to realize that I must first triumph above this before I can hope to rehabilitate myself at all.
I cannot leave school or what little work I am doing for hospitalization due to many obligations, but I feel I might be treated outside, possibly with success. I cannot, myself, afford such treatment. Would you please help me?

Sincerely, L. Ron Hubbard
If the Great Blubbard had already developed Dianetics by the end of WWII, in order to treat his alleged war injuries... how come he was still trying to bring himself into the care of the 'evil psychs' in 1947?

Cognition: because he was nothing but a liar and a fraud.
 

anonomog

Gold Meritorious Patron
"It doesn't matter what Hubbard said, you don't know, the tech works!"

Show me a m*****f***ing clear.

Or doesn't it matter that Hubbard lied about that too...
 

Gadfly

Crusader
Ah, yes... Hubbard and the Veterans' Administration, 1947...

If the Great Blubbard had already developed Dianetics by the end of WWII, in order to treat his alleged war injuries... how come he was still trying to bring himself into the care of the 'evil psychs' in 1947?

Cognition: because he was nothing but a liar and a fraud.

I don't think that "nothing but a liar and a fraud" describes him quite accurately, but that he WAS a tremendous liar and a fraud is definitely a true statement (in addition to whatever else he may have been). Being a liar and a fraud did seem to be a very basic aspect of Hubbard's personality. He very much exhibited his own statement that "the lowest form of creativity is lying". Yes, a VERY LOW form. Hubbard was a "master" in lying (creating fiction).
 
Last edited:

elwood

Patron with Honors
I posted this over on OCMB as well:

Marty claims to have the inside skinny on what the FBI is thinking and what actions they are pursuing (or not). Many critics, on the other hand, don't believe a word of his story. Given Marty's propensity to put lots of spin and embellishment on the basic facts, the truth as always probably lies somewhere in the middle. Further speculation on what may or may not have transpired between the Feds and the indies is useless.

As far as blaming Scientology's evils on Hubbard; I thought Tony Ortega did an excellent job of summarizing a basic position of the critics; as in: "Hubbard and Scientology are inseparable, therefore Scientology is bad and can never be good". Marty did a good job of summarizing the indie position; as in: "We don't care if the tech fell off the back of a garbage truck. It works".

Both sides having stated their positions, and the differences seeming to be irreconcilable, I see no purpose in continuing the debate over whether Scientology deserves to survive.

Personal opinion alert:I consider Marty to be an arrogant asshole and drama queen who plays fast and loose with the facts, is absolutely intolerant of any criticism and was apparently taught to write by Scientologists. What he does with the English language is criminal. He is, however, very entertaining and is accomplishing something Anonymous can't; he's getting people out of the church. I also wish he would go back to California.
 

elwood

Patron with Honors
Just read Maty's latest blog and the comments.

Marty's characterization of Hubbard is absolutely hilarious. He's really throwing the raw meat to his syncophants and those folks are drinkin' some real high-octane kool-aid over there.
 

Auditor's Toad

Clear as Mud
<snip>
Personal opinion alert:I consider Marty to be an arrogant asshole and drama queen who plays fast and loose with the facts, is absolutely intolerant of any criticism and was apparently taught to write by Scientologists. What he does with the English language is criminal. He is, however, very entertaining and is accomplishing something Anonymous can't; he's getting people out of the church. I also wish he would go back to California.

There are people who have gotten out of scientology that attribute it to Anonymous - just a fact.

And it seems Anonymous had gotten some sea org members to blow.

Ratbun, hopefully, will stay in Texas where they are most famous for deep BS.
 

Smilla

Ordinary Human
I posted this over on OCMB as well:

Marty claims to have the inside skinny on what the FBI is thinking and what actions they are pursuing (or not). Many critics, on the other hand, don't believe a word of his story. Given Marty's propensity to put lots of spin and embellishment on the basic facts, the truth as always probably lies somewhere in the middle. Further speculation on what may or may not have transpired between the Feds and the indies is useless.

As far as blaming Scientology's evils on Hubbard; I thought Tony Ortega did an excellent job of summarizing a basic position of the critics; as in: "Hubbard and Scientology are inseparable, therefore Scientology is bad and can never be good". Marty did a good job of summarizing the indie position; as in: "We don't care if the tech fell off the back of a garbage truck. It works".

Both sides having stated their positions, and the differences seeming to be irreconcilable, I see no purpose in continuing the debate over whether Scientology deserves to survive.

Personal opinion alert:I consider Marty to be an arrogant asshole and drama queen who plays fast and loose with the facts, is absolutely intolerant of any criticism and was apparently taught to write by Scientologists. What he does with the English language is criminal. He is, however, very entertaining and is accomplishing something Anonymous can't; he's getting people out of the church. I also wish he would go back to California.

So far, there has been no evidence produced to show that Marty has been directly responsible for getting anybody out of the Mother Cult. I'd like to see some.
 

anonomog

Gold Meritorious Patron
Just read Maty's latest blog and the comments.

Marty's characterization of Hubbard is absolutely hilarious. He's really throwing the raw meat to his syncophants and those folks are drinkin' some real high-octane kool-aid over there.

:duh:Dammit...why did I go over to see what you were talking about....:duh:

snip...Today, I address a propaganda line that developed some legs during the take-down-Hubbard Cold War. That is, “Hubbard’s writings rarely mention the word ‘love.’”

For those who have studied and applied much Scientology, certainly for me personally, that one cut to the quick. It was not readily put to rest by counting up the use of the word “love” in Hubbard’s works. Because, fact of the matter is, you won’t find the word “love” aplenty in Hubbard’s books and lectures. Does that fact mean the subject of Scientology has nothing to do with the concept of “love”?
Of course not Marty all the best spiritual leaders hide the concepts of peace, love and goodwill to all men, deep within gems like "dispose without sorrow". It is a brilliant way to teach lateral thinking skills. Bless you Ron!

Again to those who understand the subject through study and work with it, the answer is “of course it does, in fact it is the heart and soul of the subject.”
Nice to know the subject has heart and soul, pity those who study it lose theirs.

The purpose of the subject is to free the spirit through achievement of ever-increasing Understanding. Understanding is composed of Affinity, Reality and Communication (ARC). ARC are the component parts of Theta (the spirit, the soul; a term coined by Hubbard so as not to confuse it with 3000 years of misconceptions accumulated in the subject of spirituality). Theta is the highest concept of love. Theta is life force, elan vital, the all-healing good that the opposite of love (hate, lies, evil) disappears in the presence of.
I think Hubbard just enjoyed making up fancy sounding words and then composing long unintelligible texts "explaining" them. An not unwelcome side effect would be that people would pay good money for the explanations so the longer the better.


Nearly every book written (there were dozens) and every lecture spoken (there were thousands) by Hubbard were done in furtherance of forwarding the laws of Affinity, Reality and Communication (increasing them) so as to free Theta.
Pity the free Theta was anything but free.

http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/20...-affinity-reality-and-communication/#comments
 
Top