Marty Rathbun raises his head, and starts squawking

[arcxcauseblows]

This is sad, I was honestly a Marty fan I was very impressed with his interview on vice I think it's his best content but this...

He's got Miscaviges hand up his arse

Miscavige had Hubbard's hand up his arse

Hubbard had his head up his arse

It all reeks so bad of the Scientology stench

Gotta give him credit, he can judge and pontificate and overthink and blather on about every insignificant subject to it's death almost as far as Miscavige and Hubbard

It's like he's just trying to wear it out

Chalk up this boring video series with the rest of the freedom mag videos...

I was looking forward to this series!

This is just more fake news and that genre is saturated

GTFO

Doubt I'll bother with the rest and his book sounds just as boring as these videos

 

[Free Being Me]

I'm sure it hasn't gone unnoticed over the years when a huge media expose' goes viral exposing the $cio-cult inevitably some $cio(s) or cult sympathizer(s) try the usual smear and calumny cult tactics on Ex's. IMO, the cult is desperate. The hits keep coming with more and more people becoming informed about the truth regarding $cientology, hurting $cientology in the bulls-eye ... general public perception.

How many people has ESMB helped escape from $cientology? How many people are now inoculated from ever joining the cult because people have spoken up here? How many people have recovered from the cult because ESMB is filled with caring people? How many people are now informed due to Ex's spilling the beans when a cult front group is weaseling its way into someone's community?

Keep on keeping on posting, good people.

 

[Karen#1]

Claire Headley, wife of Mark Headley, the first INT base couple to sue the Cult, posted this in Facebook Group "The Outer Banks"
I asked her permission to cross post this to ESMB and she was delighted to have me cross post.

Claire Headley QUOTE:​

I always knew Marty was a deeply troubled individual. I considered him a friend, even when his actions said otherwise, while at Int and since leaving. I'm afraid I'm done. Watched the first video and refuse to watch anything further. I simply do NOT care. Won't be the first family or friend I've lost to scientology, nor will it be the last.

The only thing I have to add is this:
Marty's use of the word "Troika" struck me as eerily familiar. Why is that you might ask?

In December 1998 David Miscavige started using the term "Troika" as a reference to three Int base executives he had deemed to be suppressive persons, after they "messed up" at the New Year's event that year.



The Troika, as referred to constantly at the time by Miscavige, was comprised of Guillaume Lesevre, Ronnie Miscavige and Jason Bennick. This went on for close to two years, he expanded it later to "Fifka".

Marty knows this very well. He was Inspector General at the time. I see it as absolutely no coincidence at all that he chose to use that particular term.

Sharing here in case this of interest to anyone here.​

 

[exsomessenger]

Re: Marty Rathbun

I really hope more families are not destroyed

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

.


"GOING CLEAR PART 2" (Commentary):


Rathbun attempts to psychoanalyze Lawrence Wright because he had the opinion that Hubbard wanted to be a player in the film industry:
COMMENTS: Rathbun's amateurish claims that Wright was "PROJECTING" onto Hubbard his own desires were downright embarrassing because: 1) Rathbun doesn't have a clue what is inside Lawrence Wright's head; 2) This has nothing whatsoever to do with the book "GOING CLEAR"; 3) This is what stage magicians call "misdirection". This is also one of the "REPORTER TR DRILLS" that Hubbard devised in order to throw fact seekers off the stinking trail that leads to Scientology's rotten core.


Rathbun, through his own convoluted logic claims to know what Wright was thinking by reason of some of the questions he asked Rathbun. The entire basis for Rathbun's conclusion was (in his own words): "...an idea that I was getting from him through his questioning that L. Ron Hubbard, at bottom, really wanted to make it in Hollywood." Then Rathbun laughs and inexplicably concludes: "There was not a scintilla of evidence to support that."
COMMENTS: Despite Rathbun's "total certainty", he is dead wrong about Hubbard's aspirations to become a successful film writer. He wrote "REVOLT IN THE STARS" and had armies of staff trying to market that screenplay--all of which miserably failed. Then he wrote ten "MISSION EARTH" books (totaling 3,992 pages) in order to create a body of work that could generate many movies--all of which miserably failed. Then he wrote "BATTLEFIELD EARTH" and (again) had armies of people running around trying to get that made into a "blockbuster movie" that would make him a major screenwriter and movie industry player. We all know that that film disastrously and famously bombed--even being nominated for 10 Razzie Awards (worst film); and winning in 8 categories! Hubbard also tried writing and/or directing a vast number of Scientology info-films, tech films and dissemination films--all of which bombed and were abandoned. The truth is that Hubbard desperately wanted to become the "opinion leader" of film industry professionals by creating a blockbuster. Instead, he humiliated himself and became the laughing stock of real writers/directors. Where Rathbun is sadly misguided is that he perverted Wrights's line of inquiry about Hubbard wanting to become a successful player in the film industry by a leap of logic--assuming that this was the ONLY industry in which Hubbard had that burning desire. In fact, Hubbard's megalomaniacal ambitions were not exclusively for movies. He wanted to become the ultimate "authority" on HORTICULTURE (think "tomatoes on an e-meter), on PHOTOGRAPHY, on BUSINESS MANAGEMENT, on SHIPS/NAUTICAL TECH, on EDUCATION, on DRUG REHABILITATION, on HUMAN RIGHTS, on GOVERNANCE OF NATIONS, on WAR, on CRIME, on MENTAL HEALTH, on FINANCE, on HAPPINESS, on JUSTICE, on PHILOSOPHY, on MUSIC, on ART, on FILMMAKING TECHNIQUES, on WRITING, on THE CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE---and on a vast list of other scholarly subject and professions that he envisioned himself to be the unequaled master of. And, Hubbard desired "admiration" as the preeminent expert in ALL of those human endeavors! Rathbun (whether cleverly, stupidly or deceptively) tried to sell a logical fallacy that was dead-on-arrival. To wit, Rathbun's "logic" asserts that if Hubbard didn't want to EXCLUSIVELY be a moviemaker, then he didn't want to be a movie maker at all. Ludicrous shit, who would be fooled by that? LOL


Rathbun falsely states "When the book came out, I mean the whole book was sort of predicated on that idea."
COMMENTS: Anyone who has read "GOING CLEAR" knows that Wright's book was predicated on "Scientology the prison of belief" which had nothing to do with any of Hubbard's filmmaking efforts or desires. Rathbun reveals himself as quite the smirking jerk--for condescendingly trying to play others as fools--when the clear unequivocal evidence of what the book is about is available to anyone who can read.


Rathbun then rambles on at great length about a claim that Wright is guilty of enormous "OMISSIONS". Marty reassures us that he personally instructed and briefed Wright on the epic scale body of work that Hubbard did in developing Scientology over decades. Rathbun is quite perturbed that Wright did not pen his bestselling book according to Marty's "briefing" and "technical advice". Marty doesn't speculate about why a Pulitzer Prize winning author should follow the instructions of a novice writer who resoundingly failed to gain any commercial or critical success on his own self-published Scientology books.
COMMENTS: You have to actually watch it to believe it, but Rathbun rhapsodically praises Hubbard for his research, workshops, clinical trials and developmental refinements of his technology. Marty is quite unhappy that Wright did not chronicle Hubbard's decades-long dedication to his tech--as if the tech actually worked. Rathbun severely criticizes Wright for a "VAST OMISSION"--simply because Wright chose to focus on the EFFECTS OF SCIENTOLOGY ON REAL PEOPLE--as opposed to the statistical abstractions of how many audio lectures Hubbard delivered---or how many millions of minutes Hubbard expended polishing up his hoax.


CONCLUSION: The video is quite illuminating, if you don't mind wading through 6 minutes of sheer pathos, as Rathbun fumbles & struggles mightily to 'dead agent' Wright's brilliant exposé of Hubbard's hoax. Perhaps there is paradoxical entertainment value here as well, for we get to see one of the hoax's main victims coming back online (unsolicited) to showcase how confused and majorly "mental" an individual can become if they stay in the COS (Crimewave of Scientology) too long.

 

[ILove2Lurk]

. . .
Wow, I watched video #2 and see where this is going.

Marty is gonna take us to school on the whole Going Clear
book detail by detail, piece by piece with his personal think
and suppositions.

After everything that's been presented on this thread so far,
there's really not much more mystery as to who's behind this
and who's funding this. And that there's a financial settlement
in place.

Buckle up, it's gonna be a long, long haul folks and probably
a pretty bumpy one. I've made a special logo just for the lulz.

:wink2:
​

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

I am going to post my analysis on why Marty is now critiquing Going Clear. Because it is a mystery. 4 years after the movie has come and gone ?!

Marty posted on his very own blog all the favorable reviews of the movie. (2013)
So why 4 years later would he call "Going Clear" the BIBLE of the Anti-Scientology cult ? What ?
Who even talks about it ? What is this ?
In my grueling days, I did my Data Series Evaluators' Course (DSEC) ~~ the perpetual student doing every course under the sun ~~and I know the usage of it internally within the Cult.
When there is an enormous stat crash internationally, an Eval is done to find
THE WHY
THE WHO
Going Clear the movie CRASHED stats internationally.
HUGE HUGE demand for refunds, so much so that the cult had to set up a Task Force at the Hollywood Guarantee Building. (HGB)
The Flag Land Base has hundreds of millions in advance payments not yet delivered (APs) money collected and ferociously regged since the 1970s.....huge vast prepayments for Clear packages, Ls, and so on and consequently a complete FREEZE was put on ALL refunds. The refund demand was overwhelming to the cult. Alex Gibney and Larry Wright has impinged. The bell had rung.
You almost CANNOT un-ring the bell sound in your mind after you heard the bell ring.
There was a block put on all refunds. All of them.
Orgs emptied. Orgs were seen as deserted.
Because I receive Email globally due to my YOUTUBE channel, I was connecting the dots. It was a freefall.
Going Clear, the movie was a disaster internationally for the Cult.
When an Eval is done per DSEC, the handling of the situation is to revert the stats.
By trashing the movie *suddenly* out of the blue sky, pinning the book to "Anti-Scientology Cult" 's bible is simply a program target after careful analysis of what started emptying the orgs. It has always been policy to go back to what happened just before the stat crash and repair/revert that.
I see the bashing of Going Clear an attempt to revert the stats.

Marty's friendship with Larry Wright and Alex Gibney when he was a *promoter* of the movie before the flip to bash the movie.....​

OUTSTANDING !

Although I too trained in the Data Series tech, I never would have even conceived of what you hypothecated as the reason. I am laughing at how smart your CSI work is! LOL

It is both HILARIOUS and TRAGIC that you may very well be exactly right!

I often forget how profoundly illogical, complex and pathetically misguided Scientologists thinking/efforts are when trying to solve a simple problem.

It is unimaginably stupid, but from a Scientological point of view, you would be absolutely justified in your reading of this truly bizarre multi-part Rathbun rant.

As the celebrated philosopher Don Hubbard advises: "It doesn't have to make sense. It's Scientology!"



edit: I just received a private e-mail from Don who let me know that whenever he is quoted, he wants me to cue up a musical swell to accentuate the truth of his words. Specifically, he requires music from Scientology promo films where there are triumphant trumpets crescendoing in a flourish of awesome win. The cringier the better, Don advises. He suggests if we cannot get issue authority from the COS to use their super-uptone Star Wars-like scoring, we can probably find a suitable replacement in Roller-Rink organ music from the 1950s.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

.

TRIUMPHANTLY UPTONE
MUSICAL INTERLUDE

(For those of us who need a much needed break, because
a human can only take so much of Rathbun's calculated idiocy! LOL)




[video=youtube;KqaSCU5B3Tk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqaSCU5B3Tk&ab_channel=kiwiplant[/video]​

 

[I told you I was trouble]

That last video is without doubt one of the saddest things I have seen in a long time.

Retired political and business "attack dogs" get to swan off with a huge retirement fund and the many and various other perks that are provided either via the public purse or due to their own financial planning.

Ex police and military "attack dogs" (the four legged variety) usually get adopted into a loving family to see out their days in peace.

Ex scientology "attack dogs" (whether still in or out of the cofs) will almost certainly end their association on their knees with precisely nothing ... except perhaps a lot of anger, remorse, stress and anguish and one hell of a battle on their hands just to survive.

It's heartbreaking to watch an old attack dog just trying to form sentences that make sense, and failing.

 

[TheOriginalBigBlue]

Thanks for this, it must have been horrible sitting through all that. I don't know how you did it. I didn't make it past three minutes before I was so bored, I preferred getting munched by mosquitoes while pulling weeds in choking humidity so left the vid to do exactly that.

Thanks for sparing me from that brain numbing, word-weaving maze of Martyspeak.

His suit was nice though.

Good call!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRiZpOi9dVU

 

[CommunicatorIC]

Scientology, Marty Rathbun and the logical fallacy of Bulverism

.


"GOING CLEAR PART 2" (Commentary):


Rathbun attempts to psychoanalyze Lawrence Wright because he had the opinion that Hubbard wanted to be a player in the film industry:
COMMENTS: Rathbun's amateurish claims that Wright was "PROJECTING" onto Hubbard his own desires were downright embarrassing because: 1) Rathbun doesn't have a clue what is inside Lawrence Right's head; 2) This has nothing whatsoever to do with the book "GOING CLEAR"; 3) This is what stage magicians call "misdirection". This is also one of the "REPORTER TR DRILLS" that Hubbard devised in order to throw fact seekers off the stinking trail that leads to Scientology's rotten core.


Rathbun, through his own convoluted logic claims to know what Wright was thinking by reason of some of the questions he asked Rathbun. The entire basis for Rathbun's conclusion was (in his own words): "...an idea that I was getting from him through his questioning that L. Ron Hubbard, at bottom, really wanted to make it in Hollywood." Then Rathbun laughs and inexplicably concludes: "There was not a scintilla of evidence to support that."
COMMENTS: Despite Rathbun's "total certainty", he is dead wrong about Hubbard's aspirations to become a successful film writer. He wrote "REVOLT IN THE STARS" and had armies of staff trying to market that screenplay--all of which miserably failed. Then he wrote ten "MISSION EARTH" books (totaling 3,992 pages) in order to create a body of work that could generate many movies--all of which miserably failed. Then he wrote "BATTLEFIELD EARTH" and (again) had armies of people running around trying to get that made into a "blockbuster movie" that would make him a major screenwriter and movie industry player. We all know that that film disastrously and famously bombed--even being nominated for 10 Razzie Awards (worst film); and winning in 8 categories! Hubbard also tried writing and/or directing a vast number of Scientology info-films, tech films and dissemination films--all of which bombed and were abandoned. The truth is that Hubbard desperately wanted to become the "opinion leader" of film industry professionals by creating a blockbuster. Instead, he humiliated himself and became the laughing stock of real writers/directors. Where Rathbun is sadly misguided is that he perverted Wrights's line of inquiry about Hubbard wanting to become a successful player in the film industry by a leap of logic--assuming that this was the ONLY industry Hubbard had that burning desire. In fact, Hubbard's megalomaniacal ambitions were not exclusively for movies. He wanted to become the ultimate "authority" on HORTICULTURE (think "tomatoes on an e-meter), on PHOTOGRAPHY, on BUSINESS MANAGEMENT, on SHIPS/NAUTICAL TECH, on EDUCATION, on DRUG REHABILITATION, on HUMAN RIGHTS, on GOVERNANCE OF NATIONS, on WAR, on CRIME, on MENTAL HEALTH, on FINANCE, on HAPPINESS, on JUSTICE, on PHILOSOPHY, on MUSIC, on ART, on FILMMAKING TECHNIQUES, on WRITING, on THE CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE---and on a vast list of other scholarly subject and professions that he envisioned himself to be the unequaled master of. And, Hubbard desired "admiration" as the preeminent expert in ALL of those human endeavors! Rathbun (whether cleverly, stupidly or deceptively) tried to sell a logical fallacy that was dead-on-arrival. To wit, Rathbun's "logic" asserts that if Hubbard didn't want to EXCLUSIVELY be a moviemaker, then he didn't want to be a movie maker at all. Ludicrous shit, who would be fooled by that? LOL


Rathbun falsely states "When the book came out, I mean the whole book was sort of predicated on that idea."
COMMENTS: Anyone who has read "GOING CLEAR" knows that Wright's book was predicated on "Scientology the prison of belief" which had nothing to do with any of Hubbard's filmmaking efforts or desires. Rathbun reveals himself as quite the smirking jerk--for condescendingly trying to play others as fools--when the clear unequivocal evidence of what the book is about is available to anyone who can read.


Rathbun then rambles on at great length about a claim that Wright is guilty of enormous "OMISSIONS". Marty reassures us that he personally instructed and briefed Wright on the epic scale body of work that Hubbard did in developing Scientology over decades. Rathbun is quite perturbed that Wright did not pen his bestselling book according to Marty's "briefing" and "technical advice". Marty doesn't speculate about why a Pulitzer Prize winning author should follow the instructions of a novice writer who resoundingly failed to gain any commercial or critical success on his own self-published Scientology books.
COMMENTS: You have to actually watch it to believe it, but Rathbun rhapsodically praises Hubbard for his research, workshops, clinical trials and developmental refinements of his technology. Marty is quite unhappy that Wright did not chronicle Hubbard's decades-long dedication to his tech--as if the tech actually worked. Rathbun severely criticizes Wright for a "VAST OMISSION"--simply because Wright choses to focus on the EFFECTS OF SCIENTOLOGY ON REAL PEOPLE as opposed to the statistical abstractions of how many audio lectures Hubbard delivered---or how many millions of minutes Hubbard spend polishing up his hoax.


CONCLUSION: The video is quite illuminating, if you don't mind wading through 6 minutes of sheer pathos, as Rathbun fumbles & struggles mightily to 'dead agent' Wright's brilliant exposé of Hubbard's hoax. Perhaps there is paradoxical entertainment value here as well, for we get to see one of the hoax's main victims coming back online (unsolicited) to showcase how confused and majorly "mental" an individual can become if they stay in the COS (Crimewave of Scientology) too long.

Scientology, Marty Rathbun and the logical fallacy of Bulverism

As I have previously noted, a favorite logical fallacy of apologists for Scientology is Bulverism.

Bulverism is a logical fallacy. Wikipedia explains:

* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

Bulverism is a name for a logical fallacy that combines a genetic fallacy with circular reasoning. The method of Bulverism is to "assume that your opponent is wrong, and explain his error". The Bulverist assumes a speaker's argument is invalid or false and then explains why the speaker is so mistaken, attacking the speaker or the speaker's motive. The term "Bulverism" was coined by C. S. Lewis[SUP][1][/SUP] to poke fun at a very serious error in thinking that, he alleges, recurs often in a variety of religious, political, and philosophical debates.

Similar to Antony Flew's "Subject/Motive Shift", Bulverism is a fallacy of irrelevance. One accuses an argument of being wrong on the basis of the arguer's identity or motive, but these are strictly speaking irrelevant to the argument's validity or truth. But it is also a fallacy of circular reasoning, since it assumes, rather than argues, that one's opponent is wrong.

* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *

The Rational Wiki further explains:

* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

Bulverism the logical fallacy of assuming without discussion that a person is wrong and then distracting his or her attention from this (the only real issue) by explaining how that person became so silly, usually associating it to a psychological condition. The fallacy deals with secondary questions about ideas rather than the primary one, thus avoiding the basic question or evading the issues raised by trains of reasoning. It is essentially dodging your opponent's argument by treating them like a psychological patient who needs your evaluation to explain why they came up with such a ridiculous argument in the first place.The fallacy was coined by C.S. Lewis in his essay, "First and Second things".

Contents [hide] ​ 1 Strict usage 2 Examples 3 See also 4 Footnotes

[edit]Strict usage

The form of the Bulverism fallacy can be expressed as follows: You claim that A is true. Because of B, you personally desire that A should be true.Therefore, A is false. or You claim that A is false. Because of B, you personally desire that A should be false. Therefore, A is true.

Examples

• Used by pseudo-skeptics: "Religion is just a silly idea made up by people to cope with the discomfort of living in a purposeless, Godless universe."
• Used by those of a religious bent: "Atheists only deny the existence of God because they're angry at him[SUP][1][/SUP]."
• Used by those on the fringes of the political spectrum: "Liberals only support a Nanny State because they're crazy and neurotic," or "Conservatives only support capitalism because they're psychopaths and hate the poor."

[edit]See also

• Appeal to motive
• Argumentum ad hominem
• Genetic fallacy
• Shill gambit

* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *

Logical Gal explains the derivation of the name as follows:

* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

Have you ever heard of Ezekiel Bulver? He’s an imaginary 5-year old, immortalized by CS Lewis in brief hypothetical transformative moment of this young man’s life.” ….. Ezekiel Bulver, whose destiny was determined at the age of five when he heard his mother say to his father – who had been maintaining that two sides of a triangle were together greater than the third – “Oh, you say that because you are a man.” “At that moment,” E. Bulver assures us, “there flashed across my opening mind the great truth that refutation is no necessary part of argument. Assume your opponent is wrong, and then explain his error, and the world will be at your feet.” (essay read to the Socratic Club at Oxford in 1941) What CS Lewis describes in story form is none other than the Genetic Fallacy. Remember that fallacies are often used IN PLACE OF reason, either to make a case OR to attack an opponent’s claim.This kind of low blow attempts to discredit the speaker by talking about his or her origins. To wit:

• What do you expect from someone over 40?
• You’re only saying that because you’re a conservative!
• Of course they would argue that way, look at what they have to gain!

Do you see how these retorts are likely to distract the recipient from the merits of the argument in question? Tactical parries of this sort often lead someone on a fruitless bunny trail away from the meat of the discussion itself.

* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *

In short, Rathbun's attempt to psychoanalyze Lawrence Wright and claim that Wright was "projecting" onto Hubbard his own desires would, even if not completely unfounded and ludicrously stupid, be a textbook example of the logical fallacy of Bulverism. Rathbun does nothing more than, consistent with the Wikipedia definition of Bulverisam, "assume that [his] opponent is wrong, and [purport to] explain his error."

In other words, Rathbun, consistent with the Rational Wiki definition of Bulverism, "assum[es] without discussion that a person [i.e., Wright] is wrong and then distract his or her attention from this (the only real issue) by explaining how that person became so silly, usually associating it to a psychological condition," in this case Wright's supposed desire for a different Hollywood career and projection onto Hubbard.

 

[CommunicatorIC]

Deleted. Duplicate.

 

[guanoloco]

.


"GOING CLEAR PART 2" (Commentary):


Rathbun attempts to psychoanalyze Lawrence Wright because he had the opinion that Hubbard wanted to be a player in the film industry:
COMMENTS: Rathbun's amateurish claims that Wright was "PROJECTING" onto Hubbard his own desires were downright embarrassing because: 1) Rathbun doesn't have a clue what is inside Lawrence Wright's head; 2) This has nothing whatsoever to do with the book "GOING CLEAR"; 3) This is what stage magicians call "misdirection". This is also one of the "REPORTER TR DRILLS" that Hubbard devised in order to throw fact seekers off the stinking trail that leads to Scientology's rotten core.


Rathbun, through his own convoluted logic claims to know what Wright was thinking by reason of some of the questions he asked Rathbun. The entire basis for Rathbun's conclusion was (in his own words): "...an idea that I was getting from him through his questioning that L. Ron Hubbard, at bottom, really wanted to make it in Hollywood." Then Rathbun laughs and inexplicably concludes: "There was not a scintilla of evidence to support that."
COMMENTS: Despite Rathbun's "total certainty", he is dead wrong about Hubbard's aspirations to become a successful film writer. He wrote "REVOLT IN THE STARS" and had armies of staff trying to market that screenplay--all of which miserably failed. Then he wrote ten "MISSION EARTH" books (totaling 3,992 pages) in order to create a body of work that could generate many movies--all of which miserably failed. Then he wrote "BATTLEFIELD EARTH" and (again) had armies of people running around trying to get that made into a "blockbuster movie" that would make him a major screenwriter and movie industry player. We all know that that film disastrously and famously bombed--even being nominated for 10 Razzie Awards (worst film); and winning in 8 categories! Hubbard also tried writing and/or directing a vast number of Scientology info-films, tech films and dissemination films--all of which bombed and were abandoned. The truth is that Hubbard desperately wanted to become the "opinion leader" of film industry professionals by creating a blockbuster. Instead, he humiliated himself and became the laughing stock of real writers/directors. Where Rathbun is sadly misguided is that he perverted Wrights's line of inquiry about Hubbard wanting to become a successful player in the film industry by a leap of logic--assuming that this was the ONLY industry in which Hubbard had that burning desire. In fact, Hubbard's megalomaniacal ambitions were not exclusively for movies. He wanted to become the ultimate "authority" on HORTICULTURE (think "tomatoes on an e-meter), on PHOTOGRAPHY, on BUSINESS MANAGEMENT, on SHIPS/NAUTICAL TECH, on EDUCATION, on DRUG REHABILITATION, on HUMAN RIGHTS, on GOVERNANCE OF NATIONS, on WAR, on CRIME, on MENTAL HEALTH, on FINANCE, on HAPPINESS, on JUSTICE, on PHILOSOPHY, on MUSIC, on ART, on FILMMAKING TECHNIQUES, on WRITING, on THE CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE---and on a vast list of other scholarly subject and professions that he envisioned himself to be the unequaled master of. And, Hubbard desired "admiration" as the preeminent expert in ALL of those human endeavors! Rathbun (whether cleverly, stupidly or deceptively) tried to sell a logical fallacy that was dead-on-arrival. To wit, Rathbun's "logic" asserts that if Hubbard didn't want to EXCLUSIVELY be a moviemaker, then he didn't want to be a movie maker at all. Ludicrous shit, who would be fooled by that? LOL


Rathbun falsely states "When the book came out, I mean the whole book was sort of predicated on that idea."
COMMENTS: Anyone who has read "GOING CLEAR" knows that Wright's book was predicated on "Scientology the prison of belief" which had nothing to do with any of Hubbard's filmmaking efforts or desires. Rathbun reveals himself as quite the smirking jerk--for condescendingly trying to play others as fools--when the clear unequivocal evidence of what the book is about is available to anyone who can read.


Rathbun then rambles on at great length about a claim that Wright is guilty of enormous "OMISSIONS". Marty reassures us that he personally instructed and briefed Wright on the epic scale body of work that Hubbard did in developing Scientology over decades. Rathbun is quite perturbed that Wright did not pen his bestselling book according to Marty's "briefing" and "technical advice". Marty doesn't speculate about why a Pulitzer Prize winning author should follow the instructions of a novice writer who resoundingly failed to gain any commercial or critical success on his own self-published Scientology books.
COMMENTS: You have to actually watch it to believe it, but Rathbun rhapsodically praises Hubbard for his research, workshops, clinical trials and developmental refinements of his technology. Marty is quite unhappy that Wright did not chronicle Hubbard's decades-long dedication to his tech--as if the tech actually worked. Rathbun severely criticizes Wright for a "VAST OMISSION"--simply because Wright chose to focus on the EFFECTS OF SCIENTOLOGY ON REAL PEOPLE--as opposed to the statistical abstractions of how many audio lectures Hubbard delivered---or how many millions of minutes Hubbard expended polishing up his hoax.


CONCLUSION: The video is quite illuminating, if you don't mind wading through 6 minutes of sheer pathos, as Rathbun fumbles & struggles mightily to 'dead agent' Wright's brilliant exposé of Hubbard's hoax. Perhaps there is paradoxical entertainment value here as well, for we get to see one of the hoax's main victims coming back online (unsolicited) to showcase how confused and majorly "mental" an individual can become if they stay in the COS (Crimewave of Scientology) too long.

Are you sure about this assessment? That Ron wanted to be a player in Hollywood?

...I mean...

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

Re: Scientology, Marty Rathbun and the logical fallacy of Bulverism

..

(snipped for brevity)

Scientology, Marty Rathbun and the logical fallacy of Bulverism

As I have previously noted, a favorite logical fallacy of apologists for Scientology is Bulverism.

......

That is a truly EXCELLENT reference!

I had never run across this fallacy before and, as you say, it is quite the perfect fit and explanation for what Rathbun is attempting to do in these dead agent videos.

Thanks!!

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

.

Are you sure about this assessment? That Ron wanted to be a player in Hollywood?

...I mean...

LOL

Swear to God...I was going to include that exact photo in my post.

But, it was already rambling like hell and I didn't know if anyone had the appetite to stick with it--if the post became even longer.

But that photo is the PERFECT evidence to blow Rathbun's entire premise out of the water! LOL

By the way, here was the #2 runner-up photo in the competition.

Yeah, this photo was taken during a time
when Ron kind of got bogged on the clay demo
demonstrating the difference between a motion
picture director and a drunk pretending to be a cowboy.​

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

Claire Headley, wife of Mark Headley, the first INT base couple to sue the Cult, posted this in Facebook Group "The Outer Banks"
I asked her permission to cross post this to ESMB and she was delighted to have me cross post.

Claire Headley QUOTE:​

I always knew Marty was a deeply troubled individual. I considered him a friend, even when his actions said otherwise, while at Int and since leaving. I'm afraid I'm done. Watched the first video and refuse to watch anything further. I simply do NOT care. Won't be the first family or friend I've lost to scientology, nor will it be the last.

The only thing I have to add is this:
Marty's use of the word "Troika" struck me as eerily familiar. Why is that you might ask?

In December 1998 David Miscavige started using the term "Troika" as a reference to three Int base executives he had deemed to be suppressive persons, after they "messed up" at the New Year's event that year.



The Troika, as referred to constantly at the time by Miscavige, was comprised of Guillaume Lesevre, Ronnie Miscavige and Jason Bennick. This went on for close to two years, he expanded it later to "Fifka".

Marty knows this very well. He was Inspector General at the time. I see it as absolutely no coincidence at all that he chose to use that particular term.

Sharing here in case this of interest to anyone here.​

Thanks for reposting it--a great addition to this thread!

And that "troika" backstory is...............freaky!

Are we watching (or perhaps inside of) a Twilight Zone episode? LOL

 

[ThetanExterior]

Somebody should tell Marty we've moved on from Going Clear.

The hot topic now is Leah Remini's series on A&E.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

.

Somebody should tell Marty we've moved on from Going Clear.

The hot topic now is Leah Remini's series on A&E.

Wow, I didn't even know that Rathbun reads ESMB! Check out his response. . .

Originally Posted by Mark "Marty" Rathbun

For the record, I am very well aware of Leah's series on A&E.

I have sent her (via twitter) multiple R-Factors on how to have a successful TV show. The tech I have provided to her is invaluable and took LRH decades to research and develop.

Unfortunately, she is under the diabolical influence of the TROIKA and therefore she is unable to duplicate how much better she could be doing if she only fucking listened to my r-factors.

For example, I counseled her to not have any negative stories from ex-Scientologists. I provided marketing data and surveys which demonstrated that tv viewers are overrun on entheta about Ron and Scientology. They are ready for a change!

As a matter of fact, the number one surveyed response button (from WOGs) proved that they put the greatest value on not wanting to hear black PR on beings that came to the earth to save mankind. Obviously they are talking about Ron.

Leah chose to ignore all the priceless consulting--which she will pay for dearly because her millions of viewers are about to stop watching her show completely unless she knocks it off!

 

[shanic89]

Ah... ha... you are slipping HelluvaHoax, that reply made to much sense. It did not have enough use of waffle, pseudo intellectual supremacy and meaning so well hidden that even Marty doesn't know what he meant. Try sending it through google translate 50 times and you will be channeling your inner Marty in no time.

.

Wow, I didn't even know that Rathbun reads ESMB! Check out his response. . .

Originally Posted by Mark "Marty" Rathbun

For the record, I am very well aware of Leah's series on A&E.

I have sent her (via twitter) multiple R-Factors on how to have a successful TV show. The tech I have provided to her is invaluable and took LRH decades to research and develop.

Unfortunately, she is under the diabolical influence of the TROIKA and therefore she is unable to duplicate how much better she could be doing if she only fucking listened to my r-factors.

For example, I counseled her to not have any negative stories from ex-Scientologists. I provided marketing data and surveys which demonstrated that tv viewers are overrun on entheta about Ron and Scientology. They are ready for a change!

As a matter of fact, the number one surveyed response button (from WOGs) proved that they put the greatest value on not wanting to hear black PR on beings that came to the earth to save mankind. Obviously they are talking about Ron.

Leah chose to ignore all the priceless consulting--which she will pay for dearly because her millions of viewers are about to stop watching her show completely unless she knocks it off!

 

[F.Bullbait]

..

You guys love wasting time trying to get to the heart of Marty: