Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

Discussion in 'News and Current Events' started by SuperChipcat, Jul 1, 2009.

  1. ntnmf Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    We ARE lazy, disingenuous, counterproductive, and illogical, troll.
  2. mrfyde Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    You sir are either a well spoken and intelligent man who does not know what he is talking about, or and complete idiot.

    Im not going to write an equally tl:dr post because you obviously wouldn't read it either.

    Basically ITT we are talking about a man who does not seem to want to re-write LRH's policy (that would be like telling Christians to take on a new Jesus) he is a man who many people think wants to take charge of the same organization with the same rules (for the most part) .

    And the same thing with a different leader to many of us is not changing it's present form it is simply putting a new abuser in power. Not a big change if you ask me. And you are taking that first call to arms video waaaaaay to seriously. This is not the same group of people who made that video, some of us are behind that message others are not. It is up to each of us to stop when we think the cult has had enough, and we each want different things out of our fine efforts. This is where we express our goals.

    good day.
  3. Anonymous Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Do your part: Help stamp out Strawman Abuse!
  4. Oswald2001 Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Set 'em up!

    Knock 'em down!

    (Unruly mob noises in background)
  5. Anonymous Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Hi J. Swift. Howz the new sock puppet working for you, ya crazy loon?
  6. CatWatcher Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    A religion that does not allow you to question what you believe, is not a religion but a CULT.

    If you look at the core believe of COS, it is beyond comprehension how they can be classified as a religion and there is NO WAY that their management practice is that of a religious organization. that is not the way to run ANY organization. "Make it go right" method is doom to ruin any organization.

    Even if the leadership were to change, scientology will not work any differently and still be scientology.
  7. Boggle Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    It's a bit more complicated than that.

    The "faith" is not just a simple "faith" or belief system. There are levels, layers, compartments, and secrecy. One is told Scientology is about one thing when introduced to it, then further along is told it's about something else. "Bait and switch."

    I don't accept Scientology's claim to be a "Church," as that - since 1954 - has been primarily an expression of what its founder called "the religion angle." In the 1960s and 70s, some Scientologists dressed up in traditional ministers garb and would laugh at how the "wogs" really believed they were "ministers" and "men of faith." It was a fraud, done for PR and financial purposes.

    Former Scientology insider Larry Brennan's legal declaration (in one of my earlier posts on this thread) details the fraudulent "religious cloaking" scheme of Scientology, as worked out in the late 1970s/early 1980s.

    And the "faith" is not just a faith, in a benign sense; its writings are the source of the abuses. This may be confusing at first inspection, since those writings are deliberately misleading - particularly to outsiders and new Scientologists. There's what is shown to the outsiders (the "wogs"), then what is shown to new Scientologists, then what is shown to established ("public") members, then what is shown to ordinary staff members, then (compartmentalized) what is shown to certain (more senior, specialized) staff members, then what is shown (level by level) to those doing the "Pre-OT levels," then what is shown to ordinary Sea Org members, then what is shown (compartmentalized) to specialized Sea Org members, then what is shown to ordinary "OSA" (Scientology's CIA or KGB), then what is shown to specialized "OSA," then secret finances, etc.

    There's what is usually presented as the "faith," and what many - in the last few years - have been exposed to (through the Internet, TV, etc.), such as the Xenu story. *But* the Xenu story is not just a story. It's part of a long complicated intimate mental process that goes deep into a person's mind, with the person believing that his survival and well being depends on it. The rate of physical and mental illness resulting from these (and related) "upper levels" is something to consider. That's why it's sometimes called "mind fuck."

    So it's not just a harmless "faith." Unfortunately, it's not quite that simple.
  8. Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Rathbun is officially on this anon's shit list.
  9. mrfyde Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Oh glad that is settled.
  10. RobertPaulson Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    This is a generalized response to the replies I received on my recent post. Do not worry; it will be my last comment as well.

    I must first state that my initial post was not only “mine”. That is, it was co-authored by two people. One author is an ex-Scientologist who frequently pickets the CoS alongside other “members” of Anonymous, and the other author (myself) is a social cognitive neuroscience major (basically a psychology major, the “Satan” of the CoS’s beliefs) who is interested in understanding religion for scientific purposes. Having given this full disclosure, to those paranoiacs who immediately attempted to discredit our opinions by accusing us of being sock puppets, I say this: Congratulations, you are all morons.

    Some responses were certainly more thoughtful than others were, and while I think many missed our point entirely, I still appreciate the attempt. However, most responses were as I predicted they would be--full of the childish, snarky, and thoughtless retorts I have come to expect from many of the children in Anonymous. One person tried to flex his critical thinking muscles by calling me out on an alleged “straw man argument”, when I stated precisely within the very quote he cited that I realized NO ONE ACTUALLY was proposing such things. If you had read carefully, you would see that I was simply trying to show the slippery slope of some of your thinking IF taken to its logical conclusion. By stating Scientology and ALL of its beliefs should be destroyed, “dismantled”, whatever, the LOGICAL CONCLUSION necessitates such actions, even though I realize no one was explicitly calling for such actions. To stress the point: I STATED SUCH, which is why it is obviously not a straw man argument. Go back to Wikipedia and read up a bit more on logical fallacies. Another congrats goes out to this moron as well.

    Make no mistake, both the other author and I are happy to see the CoS stumble and falter as it has of late. No one would be happier to watch the CoS’s ultimate demise. Our only point was that SOME people enjoy SOME of the practices of Scientology and should not be persecuted for it. Our aim was not at ALL of Anonymous (so fucking calm down already) but at the many who seemed to be frothing at the mouth to “annihilate” (to use a Tommy Davis favorite) all vestiges of the Scientology belief system. We realize SOME of you give allowances to Freezoners, etc, and we were simply trying to support such tempered and moderate thinking while showing the pitfalls of some of the more extreme perspectives.

    Our intent in the initial post was simply to add some subtle thinking to what otherwise looked like a boneheaded, rabid, hyper-generalized attack on a system of beliefs. I realize now, that was a mistake--precisely because many of you ARE making a boneheaded, rabid, hyper-generalized attack on a system of beliefs. I failed to realize this soon enough. For this, I am embarrassed for the initial post, not because of its content, but because one does not attempt to reason with a single-minded, slobbering idiot. One simply avoids them.

    Now clarified, I take my leave, never to return to this fetid pool of stagnant, artless thinking.

    Good luck.
  11. pooks Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

  12. Mutante Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

  13. RavenEyes Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Lemme guess. You're in the company of a cadre of seasoned Social Workers, amirite?

    <cue creepy music>

    Lrn2SocialJustice, Robert.
  14. Mutante Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

  15. Ogsonofgroo Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Well, thinks I found yer problem Sir.............. there's a gerbil in the fractunator and the fanbelts loose........GAH!

    Lron Flubbernutz, the king of boneheaded, rabid, hypergeneralized, horseshit, is worthy of equal consideration on his own terms.

  16. JohnnyRUClear Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Robert, why worry about that? Who is going to protest an organizationless belief? Where would such a protest take place? Why would anyone care about it?

    Even if some are as extreme in their thinking as you describe, it won't matter. This anti-Scientology movement won't persist in any viable form beyond the dismantling of the Cof$. There simply won't be any further lulz or moralfaggotry available via Chanology at that point, and people will find other things to do.
  17. Kha Khan Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    I'm going to suggest that Anonymous may, or may not, want to do something. I'm tossing out an idea for consideration. I'm not saying do it. I'm saying think about it.

    The suggestion is not for the public education division of Anonymous.

    The suggestion is for the enturbulate and freak the shit out of Scientologists division of Anonymous.

    The suggestion is to print out Marty Rathburn's Thirty-one Theses, boldly attributed to Rathburn, and hand them out to Scientologists, and particularly to Sea Orgers and OSA handlers.

    No, not to help Marty "take over" the Church, which is not going to happen, but to enturbulate the shit out of folks. To give them, and OSA, something to obsess over and worry about. To make them worry about another enemy, another complication. ("It appears Anonymous is now in an alliance with Rathburn." "WHAT THE FUCK!") To drive down OSA stats.

    Yeah, yeah, you're making an alliance, or pretending to make and alliance, with Stalin to defeat Hitler. Then you worry about Stalin. Just make sure to develop the bomb before Stalin, mmmmK?

    No, you don't have to nail the Theses to the door of the Church. That would be vandalism, and you'd get your ass arrested. Plus, the doors are not wood, and the glass would break.

    But these people know Marty. Some, believe or not, actually liked him. Others respected him. Others feared him. He had been there forever. And they will pay attention if says shit. Far more attention than if you were to say the same shit.

    And believe me, DM and OSA do not want lower level Sea Orgers and Scientologists to learn of Marty Rathburn's Thirty-One Theses.

    If there was a chance in hell that Marty could take over, much less "save," the COS, I wouldn't toss out this idea. But there is no such chance. And even if Anonymous started being successful in helping forment a coup (which won't happen, and no I'm not talking about Iran, stay on target), Anonymous could always pull the plug.

    [Though the idea of Anonymous being partially responsible for a Scientology coup is just too.... something.]


    OK, actually "Marty Rathburn's Thirty-One Factors" is more accurate and a far better for use with Scientologists. Hubbard wrote and spoke of the "Factors"; Scientologists are familiar with the term. I simply had to refer to Mark Rathburn's Thirty-One Theses" because the analogy of Rathburn to some sort of demented, dark Martin Luther was too good to resist. Sorry.
  18. mrfyde Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Since you seem to love the sound of your own drivel, could you please use your self-perceived wordsmith abilities to form these ideas into your own TL DR rebuttal for yourself:

    So mr. college student did you take classes in how to be smug or are you a natural ?

    Being considering to be a J. Swift sock puppet isn't exactly paranoia it is was intended to be an insult.

    When you get that degree you might want to come back and re-read this thread to see who has missed the point.

    Childish and snarky, you mean like calling people morons ?

    I am sorry that everyone forgot to thank you for telling us how we should act and think but next time offer a suggestion or at least something other than blanket disapproval of mostly unspecified ideas that you are apposed to while you expect to be accepted by others, the thing that most people ITT are criticizing Rathbun for.

    And thank you for your offer to leaderfag us while giving us the thoughts that we should abide by, but no thanks.

    And the accepted sign off is that you "quite channology for ever"and please remember that you will not be banned automatically your gonna have to ask a mod to cancel your account.
  19. JohnnyRUClear Member

  20. Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    I couldn't agree more. Having read about confusion technique on lermanet and then relistening to the group processing sessions with a critical ear, I find it quite disturbing. I have come to view Scientology as a long drawn out process of incredibly subtle indoctrination. Clearly, Hubbard was a gifted man. He taught a whole group of people how to hypnotize other people without realizing that they were hypnotizing other people. And it was so well crafted that the system has survived his death.

    There is a lecture where he mentions that an auditor can sometimes feel while auditing a PC, they feel they have done an overt (ie committed a sin for the newbies). I believe he said this to dampen or control any feelings of guilt that an auditor might have (if they get some sort of sense that they are indoctrinating people). I strongly suspect that one of the many reasons he made a mockery of psychiatry to his people is so that they would never read up on hypnosis. Additionally, he often talked about implants being booby trapped, so the auditor could justify in their own mind that using coercive techniques on PCs. It's as though he looked at every reason a person could think twice about what he was saying and he had some carefully coded response to keep them in the fold.

    I would love to read a critical analysis of Scientology by a hypnotist - ie a full disclosure of his methods (but whoever did it would have to subject themself to 3000 hours and however many dozens of books) and linking the methods to the behaviours of Scientologists as they have been documented. I would love to understand the mindset of Tommy Davis for example.
  21. chrisanon Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    I've seen several posts ITT questioning Jason Beghe's views on Rathbun and the FZ.

    The post below, from Clambake (where Beghe posts as "bixbear"), gives some answers. It's old, but because BFG has hinted in several recent posts that Beghe is very active behind the scenes, I don't think it's out of date.

    From: OCMB Wed Jun 04, 2008.
  22. Anonymous Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    First hypnotism isn't a science or even scientifically proven it is usually learned in strip malls and hotel ballrooms not accredited universities but if you are reading lermanet you wouldn't know that.

    The auditing itself doesn't control them it is the lead up, indoctrination, and cost of the auditing and the rest of the mind fuck, and it is more likely that he didn't want people to go to psychs because he knew psychs would see thru the standard scam techniques that he used.
  23. Ogsonofgroo Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Kha Khan, idea has merit, but I really lieks the idea of the SPTimes article showing up for ages an' ages, in every restaurant, every Co$ gathering, everyplace its possible for a scilon to show up, along with YFTC exseaorg etc..
    Ooooo, there are several people with multiple e-mail lists, nao wouldn't be a biatch if .............

    Man, the messages are there, peoples just gots ta be free!



    Hmm, hypnotism eh, no, not a science per se, but lots of studies on it over the years from all sorts of angles, I sort of think of it as a type of extreme persuasion ;), but it has been proven that open and susceptible minds can be coersed it many strange ways (hell, history is full of examples of this applied to masses etc.). Lron figured out a method of mind-fuck/control and it permeates the entire mess he created, maybe not science, but it obviously has worked to some extant (rotten dead fucker)... :(

    @11Wasaracer > have you checked out Jon Atak's excellent piece on Hubbard and his quest for control via hypnotism? "Never believe a hypnotist" >

    It is, albeit, long, but a must read for those wishing to become better informed on the matter.

    Another fantastic resource that should not be overlooked is David Touretzky's in depth and very well documented study, also quite a read but worth it too, I've jumped to the chapter on brainwashing here>

    Though both these articles/studies are several years old, they are as pertinent now as they where when written.
    Knowledge is power!

  24. Lorelei Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    The problem, Bob, is that the abuses of the cult are hard-coded into its "tech," if you count mind control and behavioral modification as abuse, and, apparently, the Anons you are complaining about do.

    That said, Anons are not going after the Freezone, which includes a lot of the same "tech" because the most egregious human rights abuses do not seem to be perpetuated by Freezoners.

    Anons may think the beliefs are whack-a-doodle, but they are focusing on actual abuses, not whack-a-doodle beliefs in Xenu and body thetans.

    If Freezoners started indulging in human trafficing, beating staff members, enforcing Disconnection, etc., then Anons would include them when protesting.

    Other Anons have commented that because the "tech" has had abuses built right into it from Day One, that the cult, regardless of who might be at the top of the food chain, is hopelessly flawed, and, as such, can't help but be abusive. If the Cof$ in its present form is dismantled and, miraculously, someone manages to strip the human rights abuses out of the "tech," it wouldn't really BE Scientology anymore.
  25. Anonymous Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Can you put that in a nut shell?
  26. Ogsonofgroo Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?


  27. Kha Khan Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Stupid typo on my part multiplied by copy and paste.
  28. Boggle Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    There are two "problematic" words - problematic, in that their exact meanings are often debated - and those words as "hypnosis" and "brainwashing."

    Usually, I use the term "mind-manipulation" to avoid such debates, but sometimes it's impossible or impractical. For example, when quoting L. Ron Hubbard from his own 1947 (writing to himself)-'Affirmations':

    "Your writing has a deep hypnotic effect on people and they are always pleased with what you write."


    "Your psychology is advanced and true and wonderful. It hypnotizes people. It predicts their emotions for you are their ruler."

    The other word, "brainwashing," can also be debated re. what exactly it means. However, Hubbard, himself, used the term, and while - as with the word "hypnotism" - he said and wrote misleading things about it, he also - inadvertently - made some revealing statements.

    His 'Brainwashing manual' - which he claimed was of Russian origin from the 1930s or 1940s, and which denounced 'Dianetics' (and a later edition 'Scientology' [!] ) several times - is a strange and revealing bit of Hubbardian verbiage:

    Church of Scientology's "Brainwashing" manual (also "Brain-washing")

    On its cover it states, " 'Brainwashing'... The art and science of asserting and maintaining dominion over the thoughts and loyalties of individuals, officers, bureaus, and masses... through 'mental healing'."
  29. suz1948 Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Yes, I agree & NO, NO, NO I DONT WANT SCIENTOLOGY ANY WHICH WAY. I am now me & proud of who I am, Suz & British Mom, dont need Scientology to be able. I have learnt from all my experiences & looking forward to new ones that I pick.

    Since I have been out I have met some wonderful people & come to realise that there are alot of good people in this world. The fear that I had when I was in Scientology has gone. Life is for living & I thank God that I am still around to see this.
  30. Whanonstler Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Bullshit. More like "BAWWWW! I am so smartest of all but you don't bow down and agree so I am going to go away because you are dumb and I am smart you do not acknowledge it! BAWWWWW!"

    Go fuck yourself, turd.
  31. Anonymous Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    "Brianwashing" is a tern coined by a reporter named E.G. Hunter in 1950-51. It was used to describe the process of re-education used in communist prison camps.

    Hypnotism is defined differently by every "professional" hypnotist and is practically folk magick with a marketing package promoted by science fiction writers since Mesmer.
  32. Lorelei Member

  33. MongoLloyd Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?


    Beware the Wrath of Bun!
  34. TypingChimp Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

  35. TypingChimp Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    I know. The Co$ is no better, and in many documented ways far worse, than the Children of God/The Family International cult. It's more of a case of, "if you think the Co$ meets the criteria for a religion, this is why their shit is particularly nasty and must be stopped." Basically, I responded rationally to an idiot, using verbiage an idiot might understand.
  36. OTBT Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Good idea. Mini Miscavige should get slapping mad about this.

    Its a very useful tool, in conjunction with the SP Times articles.
  37. Herro Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Thankfully, unlike you, the feds actually take time to gather real evidence before they go kicking down doors.

    Sounds to me like an undergrad that will soon get knocked down a peg by professors and more intelligent peers. Although he or she made a few interesting points. Too bad he or she had to be such an arrogant twat.

    Says who?
  38. Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Knock 'em down!

    Set 'em up!

    Set 'em down!

    Knock 'em up!

  39. anonymous612 Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    ^this. Whoever's in charge, someone will still be there to throw out the leftover trash. I couldn't care less who is sitting in the fanciest chair when it happens.

    I knew I liked you.
  40. Optimisticate Member

    Re: Checked out Rathbuns site lately?

    Methinks Rathbun would end up being worse than Miscavige merely because Miscavige has opened the door to even greater, more horrifying abuses.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins