Marty's Blog: The Gush of the Sycophants

[KnightVision]

I don't really see the need for starting a thread about Rinder and Rathbun anytime a thought pops into someone's mind, but I'm not going to play along with their game of 'Hubbard Good / Miscavige Bad', either.

Same here. But there's something to be said for letting some battles die to win the war. No combat has ever been won otherwise. Most all attempts to take down an opponent 'on all fronts at the same time' fail because of lack of resources. Prosecutors entertain 'witness protection' all the time for damn good reason.

 

[ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn]

Same here. But there's something to be said for letting some battles die to win the war. No combat has ever been won otherwise. Most all attempts to take down an opponent 'on all fronts at the same time' fail because of lack of resources. Prosecutors entertain 'witness protection' all the time for damn good reason.

Personally I don't see the point of banging on Rinder, like I said eariler , sure I wish he was doing more, but he could be doing a lot less. I can't say the same for Rathbun, he is going out of his way to start battles, if it was up to him he would have stopped Nick Xenophon from investigating the cult's criminal activities in Australia. If anyone needs to take your advice it is Marty, but we both know Marty cares about no one but himself. He will only do what is good for Marty, sure people may get helped along the way, but that is all part of Marty's marketing strategy. As far as Rinder goes, I'll have to wait and see, it's still too early to tell what his intentions are, but Marty's are crystal clear.

 

[KnightVision]

Personally I don't see the point of banging on Rinder, like I said eariler , sure I wish he was doing more, but he could be doing a lot less. I can't say the same for Rathbun, he is going out of his way to start battles, if it was up to him he would have stopped Nick Xenophon from investigating the cult's criminal activities in Australia. If anyone needs to take your advice it is Marty, but we both know Marty cares about no one but himself. He will only do what is good for Marty, sure people may get helped along the way, but that is all part of Marty's marketing strategy. As far as Rinder goes, I'll have to wait and see, it's still too early to tell what his intentions are, but Marty's are crystal clear.

 

[Vinaire]

And those who want to pretend that Miscavige is the sole problem, have no intention of correcting the problem, their motives are strictly self-servicing. This is not a Black and White matter. Rathbun and Rinder want to take Miscavige down which we all can agree is a good thing and has never been in doubt, but they have no intention of being honest about what Scientology really is. They just want to use Miscavige as a scapegoat for the bigger problem which is Hubbard's con game itself. I can support Rathbun and Rinder as far as taking down Miscavige, but that is as far as it goes.

One step at a time may work better in this case.

.

 

[bts2free]

Wow, bts2free........what you wrote is such a blowdown that I'd like to acknowledge your postulate to flow power to my dynamics in a pro-survival safe environment where theta beings can duplicate source in alignment with going up the bridge which totally indicates to me the in-ethics intention that was mocked up because we all perceive the reality of being interior to the mest trap for eons where psychs implanted thetans and made them pts which made them BI's after it alter-ised their havingness so they cannot reach for their eternity! This post is Okay. ARC & ML, HelluvaHoax!

(I reserve the right to edit this paragraph above when I figure out where to insert the obligatory word "mudball".

PASS!

So theta. My ARC for you has increased 5.4X! Very well done. Carry on. ML, John

 

[SweetnessandLight]

Oooh, me...me!

I can see some people's attention being stuck on the charming armadillo.

.

I'll join that team! I LOVE cornfields!

 

[Infinite]

Wow, bts2free........what you wrote is such a blowdown that I'd like to acknowledge your postulate to flow power to my dynamics in a pro-survival safe environment where theta beings can duplicate source in alignment with going up the bridge which totally indicates to me the in-ethics intention that was mocked up because we all perceive the reality of being interior to this mudball's mest trap for eons where psychs implanted thetans and made them pts which made them BI's after it alter-ised their havingness so they cannot reach for their eternity! This post is Okay. ARC & ML, HelluvaHoax!

(I reserve the right to edit this paragraph above when I figure out where to insert the obligatory word "mudball".

Maybe?

 

[Magoo]

Carmel,

You said:

"I don't care if Marty is a nice guy or an asshole".

(Ditto)

Marty the man is not my concern. What he is doing though, very much *is* my concern.

Me too.

Given that I care about individuals who have been harmed by the scam aspect of Scientology,

Me too....

and that I have been active in helping people see it and be free of it (as *so* many here have been),

Me too....

then why would I *not* be loud about someone who I believed was the third and current messiah here to save and protect the scam?

Ok, I guess that's where we differ. I understand that Marty has his way of running his blog, and it's my understanding his goal is to help new people get OUT.
(I don't see him as "the third messiah there to protect the scam").

Many of those people are not ready to just 86 the tech,
and frankly, many wouldn't leave if they had to give up
the tech, no mater what you or I think of it.

I've told people the same re the "Freezone" for years.
I'm not a part of the FZ---but I sure support it. Why?
A) the "church" is what supports the serious abuses.
So once they're out of there---they stop supporting those
abuses. And remember, many people "in" would NOT leave unless they had some access to 'the tech", once out.
Marty's blog is one key place that helps people such as that, and they have friends they can connect up with, talk to, etc. As you know, it's a *huge* leap to leave C of $.
Loss of friends and loved ones can be seriously painful.
Ok, we can say, "Well, We did it, why not others?" And I say, everyone is different. It's a bit like losing weight:

For me, Weight Watchers worked. For many, it didn't.
For me Atkins never worked, but I know people who swear by it. So I finally, over years of learning about weight, food, nutrition, realized something very simple, yet very startling for me: DIFFERENT PEOPLE FIND DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WORK FOR THEM. *IF* it works for them, enough said, as long as it isn't harming others.
I feel the same about "the tech".

B) Once out----THEN and only then, those that used to be "in" are out,and by the nature of being OUT--can read, lOOK, listen, and make up their *own* minds.

Does that help at all to understand and answer your question? I hope so.

If not, fill me in on which part I missed.

Best and Happy Tuesday to you, lass

Tory/Magoo

 

[Carmel]

Carmel,

You said:
(Ditto)


Me too.


Me too....

Me too....


Ok, I guess that's where we differ. I understand that Marty has his way of running his blog, and it's my understanding his goal is to help new people get OUT.
(I don't see him as "the third messiah there to protect the scam").

Many of those people are not ready to just 86 the tech,
and frankly, many wouldn't leave if they had to give up
the tech, no mater what you or I think of it.

I've told people the same re the "Freezone" for years.
I'm not a part of the FZ---but I sure support it. Why?
A) the "church" is what supports the serious abuses.
So once they're out of there---they stop supporting those
abuses. And remember, many people "in" would NOT leave unless they had some access to 'the tech", once out.
Marty's blog is one key place that helps people such as that, and they have friends they can connect up with, talk to, etc. As you know, it's a *huge* leap to leave C of $.
Loss of friends and loved ones can be seriously painful.
Ok, we can say, "Well, We did it, why not others?" And I say, everyone is different. It's a bit like losing weight:

For me, Weight Watchers worked. For many, it didn't.
For me Atkins never worked, but I know people who swear by it. So I finally, over years of learning about weight, food, nutrition, realized something very simple, yet very startling for me: DIFFERENT PEOPLE FIND DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WORK FOR THEM. *IF* it works for them, enough said, as long as it isn't harming others.
I feel the same about "the tech".

B) Once out----THEN and only then, those that used to be "in" are out,and by the nature of being OUT--can read, lOOK, listen, and make up their *own* minds.

Does that help at all to understand and answer your question? I hope so.

If not, fill me in on which part I missed.

Best and Happy Tuesday to you, lass

Tory/Magoo

Re what I've bolded, I will.

- I have no issue with people not wanting to discard the tech.

- I have no issue with the Freezone.

- I too believe that most *wouldn't* leave if they thought that they had to discard the tech.

- People were getting out and many were using Scn in the Freezone for decades before Marty started his blog.

- I personally have helped numerous people get out, and in doing so I made a distinction between their beliefs in the tech and the scam of Scn/CofS, because I believe that there is one.

- I didn't and don't tell Scios all that I believe or know, just as I don't or wouldn't tell a child everything I believe and know. However, I never bullshitted my kids to protect them.........If they asked, they got the truth (or at least some of it), and the same applied/applies to the Scios who I helped get to look and see.

- I don't see Freezoners BS'ing anyone, and I personally didn't BS one single Scio who I helped get out, not one! I didn't need to, but nor would I have wanted to.

- Scios who are still in *will* or *do* look and find, and change their minds, if ya don't blow them off by negating their perspective and all that they believe in.

IMO, critics who would say to CofS Scios "LRH was an evil con man, and you need to wake up to that fact or you'll be fucked", are either ignorant, or insecure in their conviction and feel some need to assert their stance. They'd maybe be better off saying "Sorry, but I don't have the same regard for LRH that you do but we don't need to labour the point.......there are other issues which probably neither of us could deny". Still, I'd rather see a critic blow it by putting all on the cards on the table with a Scio, than feeding BS like Marty does.

Marty denies facts about LRH, denies facts about Scn, denies that the wrongs perpetrated by DM were created by LRH, denies that Scn was a 'bait 'n switch' when he knows it was, denies the crimes and abuses of the CofS prior to DM, and is presenting a false picture to those who would only do well by being directed to looking at the *true* picture.

If Marty was pro tech, I wouldn't give two hoots, and that's not my gripe. My gripe is that he is pro the scam and is perpetuating that scam, and whilst he continues to do so, he's certainly *not* on the same side of the fence, despite what he and his mates/allies may profess about his so called good intentions and good works.

Tory, does that clarify it for ya?

Hey, my Tuesday was a good'n, but all but done now.......Yours is coming up.........Hope it's a fair dinkum 'you beaut'!

 

[Zinjifar]

The solution to Scientology is the truth about Scientology. What's *needed* is the complete exposure of Scientology; its history, its dirty ops, its crimes and corruption. It's abuses and the truth about the 'source' of those abuses; not some eyewash about 'rogue elements'. Not again.

Marty will do *anything* he can to prevent that. He will do anything to continue the secrecy. Because that will allow the 'Church' to squeak through *again*.

Zinj

 

[Vinaire]

...


IMO, critics who would say to CofS Scios "LRH was an evil con man, and you need to wake up to that fact or you'll be fucked", are either ignorant, or insecure in their conviction and feel some need to assert their stance. They'd maybe be better off saying "Sorry, but I don't have the same regard for LRH that you do but we don't need to labour the point.......there are other issues which probably neither of us could deny". Still, I'd rather see a critic blow it by putting all on the cards on the table with a Scio, than feeding BS like Marty does.

Marty denies facts about LRH, denies facts about Scn, denies that the wrongs perpetrated by DM were created by LRH, denies that Scn was a 'bait 'n switch' when he knows it was, denies the crimes and abuses of the CofS prior to DM, and is presenting a false picture to those who would only do well by being directed to looking at the *true* picture.

...

It does become problematic when one promotes LRH like Marty does, because LRH is "source" of all good and bad in Scientology. It is not true that all the "bad" is coming from DM.

LRH is "source" and, therefore, he does bear responsibility for what is bad in Scientology. One cannot have the caek and eat it too.

The dichotomy "LRH is good and DM is evil" being pushed by Marty is a falsehood. That turns me off towards Marty as well. It makes me wonder about Marty's motives.

Marty should not promote LRH if he does not want to admit the failings of LRH. He should simply promote what is good in Scientology, and how that goodness is being corrrupted by DM in the present.

DO NOT DEFEND LRH BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF SKELETONS IN LRH'S CLOSET. JUST LEAVE LRH ALONE IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO OPEN HIS CLOSET. DON'T USE LRH FOR ANY PROMOTION.

.

 

[TEoS]

The solution to Scientology is the truth about Scientology. What's *needed* is the complete exposure of Scientology; its history, its dirty ops, its crimes and corruption. It's abuses and the truth about the 'source' of those abuses; not some eyewash about 'rogue elements'. Not again.

Marty will do *anything* he can to prevent that. He will do anything to continue the secrecy. Because that will allow the 'Church' to squeak through *again*.

Zinj

Amen to that!

 

[byte301]

Vinny said caek!

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

It does become problematic when one promotes LRH like Marty does, because LRH is "source" of all good and bad in Scientology. It is not true that all the "bad" is coming from DM.

LRH is "source" and, therefore, he does bear responsibility for what is bad in Scientology. One cannot have the caek and eat it too.

The dichotomy "LRH is good and DM is evil" being pushed by Marty is a falsehood. That turns me off towards Marty as well. It makes me wonder about Marty's motives.

Marty should not promote LRH if he does not to admit the failings of LRH. He should simply promote what is good in Scientology, and how that goodness is being corrrupted by DM in the present.

DO NOT DEFEND LRH BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF SKELETONS IN LRH'S CLOSET. JUST LEAVE LRH ALONE IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO OPEN HIS CLOSET. DON'T USE LRH FOR ANY PROMOTION.

.

You, or anyone else no matter how clever, cannot separate El Ron from Scientology. Together, they make a superglue laced turd.

Face

 

[Div6]

It does become problematic when one promotes LRH like Marty does, because LRH is "source" of all good and bad in Scientology. It is not true that all the "bad" is coming from DM.

LRH is "source" and, therefore, he does bear responsibility for what is bad in Scientology. One cannot have the caek and eat it too.

The dichotomy "LRH is good and DM is evil" being pushed by Marty is a falsehood. That turns me off towards Marty as well. It makes me wonder about Marty's motives.

Marty should not promote LRH if he does not want to admit the failings of LRH. He should simply promote what is good in Scientology, and how that goodness is being corrrupted by DM in the present.

DO NOT DEFEND LRH BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF SKELETONS IN LRH'S CLOSET. JUST LEAVE LRH ALONE IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO OPEN HIS CLOSET. DON'T USE LRH FOR ANY PROMOTION.

.

Not to put too fine of a point on it, but the driving wedge of differentiation is "LRH Tech" vs. "Golden Age of Miscavige Tech".....this should be kept in mind. The defintion of "floating needle" being one such key difference. The perversion of "confessional tech" into "inquisition tech" is another.

So I DO seem him (and others) defending "LRH Tech" as the primary key to differentiate between "brands" of tech....leading to Miscavige being the biggest squirrel EVER.

But my question to you is, what do you promote, and what do you use to deliver?

 

[SchwimmelPuckel]

Vinny said caek!

Contagion of anonymus!

 

[byte301]

Contagion of anonymus!

Yes. When even our Vinny starts using memes we KNOW we've been assimilated!

 

[Veda]

Not to put too fine of a point on it, but the driving wedge of differentiation is "LRH Tech" vs. "Golden Age of Miscavige Tech".....this should be kept in mind. The defintion of "floating needle" being one such key difference. The perversion of "confessional tech" into "inquisition tech" is another.

So I DO seem him (and others) defending "LRH Tech" as the primary key to differentiate between "brands" of tech....leading to Miscavige being the biggest squirrel EVER.

But my question to you is, what do you promote, and what do you use to deliver?

Standard tech? Squirreling? http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?p=392885&highlight=abodes

Welcome to the wonderful wacky world of LRH Tech...

Definition of a Floating needle thread: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=16164&highlight=rhythmic+sweep

Wikipedia article on Security Checks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Scientology_Security_Checks

Four complete Security Checks: http://www.clambake.org/archive/books/isd/isd-5i.htm

 

[anonomog]

Sardonicus

A human statue made of living stone
A paradox etched in human bone
If you could look behind his thin disguise
There's a hidden glint of madness in his eyes.
Many men are fooled by his smile
His superficial grace his charm and style
Sardonicus is everybody's friend
Sardonicus keeps smiling to the end

UB40

 

[Vinaire]

Not to put too fine of a point on it, but the driving wedge of differentiation is "LRH Tech" vs. "Golden Age of Miscavige Tech".....this should be kept in mind. The defintion of "floating needle" being one such key difference. The perversion of "confessional tech" into "inquisition tech" is another.

So I DO seem him (and others) defending "LRH Tech" as the primary key to differentiate between "brands" of tech....leading to Miscavige being the biggest squirrel EVER.

But my question to you is, what do you promote, and what do you use to deliver?

You promote the truth.

You promote that this, this, and this is right about Scientology Tech and Policy; and this, this, and this, is wrong with Scientology Tech and Policy.

That's it.

Keep LRH out of it if that is going to create controversy.

But slam DM hard because we all agree on getting rid of him as step 1.

.