Tag Archives: The Underground Bunker

The Only Good Scientologist…

 

Last year I told a member of ASC (Anti-Scientology Cult) royalty that had I foreseen the outcome of my efforts to encourage people to speak and write openly and publicly about scientology, I would not have undertaken them in the first place. I likened the majority of public Scientology discussion to a tabloid pile-on fest. Since then I have watched it degenerate from even that: from a blame-filled pity party into a hate-driven trolling fest. A relatively neutral review of the postings – and ‘discussions’ – on the go-to ASC forums reflects that.

ASC bloggers and moderators and their following regularly congratulate one another for poking sticks in the eyes of Scientologists. They don’t talk about how their blustering will reform anybody or any institution. Instead, they revel in how much ‘pain’ or destruction it will create. ASC’s media liaison Tony Ortega has taken the krew to new depths. For instance, he ‘reported’ on a woman who intentionally drove her vehicle through the front doors of the Austin Texas Scientology Church. The vehicle stopped after smashing through the door to the Scientologists’ nursery. Afterward the driver expressed regret that she had not struck someone with her vehicle. Not one ASC voice in disagreement was raised when Ortega characterized the crime as an act of “vandalism.” Ortega – and his ASC following by encouragement – demonstrated that he literally places more value on inanimate fixtures than the lives of Scientologists, including nursery-aged children.

Anyone who advocates a more objective, intelligent discussion on Scientology is quickly labelled and treated as an enemy by ASC members. Even outsiders simply reporting newsworthy facts. For example, Ortega ragged on TMZ chief Harvey Levin for months because his outlet reported the fact of the prosecution of a man who made death threats against Scientology’s leader. Ortega publically denounced Levin for “carrying water” for Scientology. Apparently in the head of the ASC’s daily anti-scientology meme creator, the only good Scientologist is a dead one. That was certainly the way he treated Cathriona White upon first news of her death; at least while he used his feigned concern to charge (with zero evidence) that Scientologists were somehow responsible for her death. All that changed when media reported facts that pointed suspicion away from Scientologists. Then, even a deceased Scientologist became fair game for an Ortega-led, ASC slime campaign.

The ASC fora are not only riddled with trolls, the bloggers themselves have become trolls. Their antics have little to do with education, imparting understanding, and least of all heroics. The latter was made clear by one ASC blogger pronouncing with an air of authority that scientology is “Fair Game” and one may “say or do anything against scientology” and get away with it scot-free.

Trolls are free to troll and no doubt will continue to do so with lots of derisive laughs, and with no sense of conscience about the cumulative effect such hate might have on others. Those who find themselves considering whether to join the ranks of troll followers who employ degradation and belittlement for entertainment might want to step back and evaluate before they get sucked into that vortex.

A couple of credible studies show that trolls are a special breed of ugly creature. Please see Internet Trolls Are Narcissists, Psychopaths, and Sadists.  The studies highlight an irony. ASC trolls wrap themselves in the ‘abolish disconnection’ flag to give their trolling some sort of noble justification. Yet, Dr. Golbeck notes that the solution to trolls is just that, disconnection. Just as modern psychology recommends be applied to any sociopath or psychopath who might cross one’s path (see e.g., The Sociopath Next Door – Martha Stout).

I imagine that is why most self-improvement, awareness-raising and religious groups teach the virtues of some form of disconnection. For more on that, see Barbara Ehrenreich’s Smile Or Die. She traces the non-denominational disconnection tradition to the Transcendentalists – Emerson, Thoreau, et. al.  – who found societal forced-connection to be oppressive. Her book is a strong indictment of that tradition which in a way makes her account that much more credible. In attacking it, she reveals that the idea that ‘disconnection’ can be considered cathartic is as American as apple pie.

The specter of someone mustering the intelligence and courage to disconnect from sociopathic toxicity is seen as a clear and present danger to ASC leadership. I have seen them resort to deceit, attempting to break up families, bribery, infiltration, propaganda campaigns, intelligence ops, extortion and blackmail to prevent people from disconnecting from their klub.

Those in ASC leadership applying such tactics are also the ones most loudly and persistently complaining about Scientology disconnection. Paradoxically, those people made conscious decisions to disconnect from the ones they spend years wailing about having disconnected from them. They campaign other well-meaning people to join them in a war that promises to mend their familial rifts. By objective result, it has proven to be an avenue that only exacerbates the problems they sought to resolve. When someone is perceived as a threat to their hypocritical racket, ASC leaders apply their own version of disconnection; one that is far more arbitrary than that practiced in Scientology. That they can make a living on such hypocrisy is an interesting study in the culture of complaint our society seems to have devolved into. By wailing loud enough and long enough any wolf in sheep’s clothing can apparently draw a flock.

Ruthless Bunker Mentality

What remarkable effects a little independent thought can produce in cyber-cultist minds imprisoned by self-imposed two-valued, us-vs.-them thinking. Tony Ortega had more comments to his critique of my review of the book Ruthless than he has had since his four-month campaign attempting to destroy my family’s credibility. He ended that series with the injunction to his followers that I was pretty much irrelevant to the Scientology world upon his pronunciamento. But, a simple posting of my thoughts on Ruthless brought his trolling legion to life, his cheerleader in chief working feverishly to spread Tony’s line onto every forum from secret Facebook anti-scientology clubs, to ESMB, to Pinterest, to you name it. A line Ron Miscavige Sr. and his co-author Dan Koon instantly adopted and represented as their own independently arrived at conclusion – their only public response to date.

In the after-flurry of Ortega’s bunker-mentality response, it was brought to my attention that Ortega and Jeffrey Augustine went on record at the Bunker in an effort to discredit my review (a weak-sister imitation of the dead agent caper incidentally, attacking but one fact of dozens shared). Both recounted an episode at my home in 2012. Per them, former scientology PIs Greg Arnold and Paul Marrick claimed to have spoken to David Miscavige. I heard a claim resembling their recollections at the time too. That is why I later asked Marrick and Arnold through their counsel to swear to it under oath in Monique Rathbun vs. Church of Scientology, et al.  A first year law student would understand the importance of such testimony on the issue of David Miscavige’s alleged hands-on involvement in investigative operations.

The lawyer represented it could not happen because Mr. Arnold and Mr. Marrick did not wish to help Monique Rathbun. That seemed odd since it was the Rathbuns who salvaged their white elephant lawsuit that had that lawyer in a desperate, groveling panic. So, what does one conclude? A) Paul Marrick and Greg Arnold were afraid to go under oath on their braggadocio because it was nothing more than telling tales to jack their self-importance? B) Their lawyer is a bottom feeding liar of the most unethical and immoral sort? C) Their lawyer was the one who did not wish to help Monique Rathbun?  Based on a lot of experience I am not at liberty to share at this time, I concluded it was a combination of A, B, and C.

To those not drunk on the ASC (Anti-Scientology Cult) Kool Aid, I have all of this documented for later laughs.

You May Be Right

The verdict is in from the anti-scientology community (ASC), Marty Rathbun is crazy.

You can read and hear all about it across several ASC forums.

I accept the diagnosis as it pertains to the scientology (pro and anti) universe.  Insanity is loosely defined as not seeing or accepting the world as it is generally seen and accepted by the majority of people.

I noted in one of my books that the most valuable thing I got from my scientology experience was the ability to disagree.  That is, freedom from the automatic subconscious acceptance of the way others might want me to see or think.  Today I value that faculty more than ever. Modern science has come to understand that people think in narratives.  They accept them and create them and then judge new experience and data against them – much of that narrative building occurring sub consciously.  I reject the anti-scientology narrative as being at least as inaccurate, exaggerated, partisan and hysterical as the official scientology narrative.  That rejection of the former in no way implies an endorsement of the latter.

I find ASC’s resort to the ‘he’s crazy’ defense/offense to be apropos for a perhaps-final teaching moment in this milieu. I will share it notwithstanding the wave of ‘he’s nuts’ that doing so will inevitably provoke.

Those who have observed me and my detractors for very long will recall that the church of scientology preceded ASC in invoking the insanity defense/offense against me.  Remember the words of the immortal Tommy Davis: “He’s a f____ing lunatic!” As truth slowly struggles to the surface as it sometimes is forced to do, I believe you will find that there were two reasons for the copycatting.

First, the folks running the ASC agenda and authoring its narrative (including the insanity defense/offense) are OSA (Office of Special Affairs) trained and bred.  They often boast of their OSA expertise.  One of them makes good money plying it; another dishes out good money lording it over people. They liberally use that acumen to attack those whom they brand as the attackers. They most spiritedly – overtly and covertly – attack the credibility of anyone who might spoil their pity party by spreading that horrible disinfectant called truth.

Second, the ASC agenda setters have not had an original thought sprout in their heads as long as I have known them (and that is a very long time).  They are and have been wholly unoriginal creatures of stimulus-response thought. I only say this after making extraordinary efforts with each to coax them to rise above such patterns – and only now that they’ve decided no good deed ought go unpunished.

And so, some of the conspiracy chatter on ESMB and Underground Bunker that OSA has infiltrated and seized the ASC conversation – requiring vigilant censorship measures by Tony Ortega and Madam ESMB – contains a grain of truth.

What remains to be seen is whether it is the old OSA or the new OSA and whether the former more effectively influences the latter or vice versa.  In either event, my guess is that the losers will be those who cling desperately to their rusting firearms (and narratives) failing to recognize that the war has been over for several years now.

Then again, both Scientology and ASC may be right, I may be crazy.

Scientology Floggers

Within 24 hours of posting Cyber Cults, the anti-scientology cyber-cult came unglued. If you haven’t read Cyber Cults and its links, I suggest you do so before reading on. The links are to three thoroughly unrelated people – also unrelated to me – who independently shared experiences of cult-like behavior from flogger (a blogger who flogs the alleged lives of others for money) Tony Ortega. Immediately, Ortega followers zealously rallied to his defense, characterizing the calmly-stated, fact-filled observations I linked to as evil-motivated “attacks” upon their dear leader. What was remarkable was the almost uniform application of an important characteristic of cult behavior.

That is taken from Steve Hassan whom the Ortega cult itself has promoted as quite the authority on cults.  It is, “Make the person feel that problems are always their own fault, never the leader’s or the group’s fault.”  Like so many hyenas, the anti-scientology cult members reactively rallied to attack in Ortega’s defense (ignoring the substance of the observations about his conduct) and viciously went after me and all three of those sharing independent experiences about their leader. We were accused of being Scientology operatives, mentally ill, and a plethora of derogatory epitaphs not fit for re-publication here.

One of Ortega’s more hysterical devotees called for censorship of myself and the other three, then targeted a facebook group (containing more than 400 members critical of scientology) as being fair game for having had the temerity to discuss the substance of my post Cyber Cults. Those pronunciamentos (and their avid acceptance and support by other cyber cultists) demonstrated most of the elements of the following additional Hassan cult characteristic:

Require members to internalize the group’s doctrine as truth
a. Adopting the group’s ‘map of reality’ as reality
b. Instill black and white thinking
c. Decide between good vs. evil
d. Organize people into us vs. them (insiders vs. outsiders)

For any who doubt these characterizations of the reaction to Cyber Cults, they can verify them by reading the thread themselves (or as much as they can stomach) at ex-scientologist message board.  While you read their treatment of the three I linked to along with me, keep in mind another of Hassan’s critical characteristics of a cult:

Promote feelings of guilt or unworthiness, such as
a. Identity guilt
b. You are not living up to your potential
c. Your family is deficient
d. Your past is suspect
e. Your affiliations are unwise
f. Your thoughts, feelings, actions are irrelevant or selfish
g. Social guilt
h. Historical guilt

This is an interesting study in extremism. As Robert Hughes aptly demonstrated in his book Culture of Complaint opposite extremes always seem to have a way of meeting (becoming almost indistinguishable in behavior). On that score, principal stars of the anti-scientology cult are warning people that it is “dangerous” to communicate with me. That’s right, it is dangerous to be exposed to ideas that don’t march lockstep with the cult’s doctrinal black and white, us vs. them mentality.  These include people being promoted by Ortega for working with him on tv specials on scientology disconnection. They apparently are so appalled by scientology’s notion of disconnect that they are actively advising people to disconnect from me.

What I have witnessed personally on the part of the anti-scientology community’s leading lights recently is behavior that makes the average dedicated scientologist seem extraordinarily open-minded and tolerant by comparison.

As a final side note, I noticed a lot of cyber-cultists characterizing my recent posts as some sort of ‘war’ on Tony Ortega and that I wish to engage him in some public debate.  That is another indication of their cult-like, insular belief that the real universe revolves around their play world.  As far as Ortega is concerned I am only preparing the ground to correct the public record he polluted for four months about my family.  He is merely one of thousands of click bait floggers plying his trade as floggers do. I have no intention of changing that – that is fundamentally who he is.  The vermin he carries water for might be another story.  It depends on how they continue to respond and not respond.

Bunkeroos vs. Scientologists

The cult of Tony Ortega has recently surpassed the church of Scientology in dysfunctionally partisan behavior.  I have obtained documentary evidence that Bunkeroos (slavish believers and followers of the word of The Underground Bunker) have been soliciting donations to hire private investigators.  The Bunkeroos are promoting the fulfillment of Tony Ortega’s published suggestions on behalf of Ray Jeffrey that the home of Monique Rathbun and her two-year-old child be put under surveillance.

What is so surreal about this situation is that had Monique Rathbun not selflessly endured similar treatment in the past, Tony Ortega and Ray Jeffrey would have long ago become Scientology road kill.  The same is true for the cluster of vermin who have partnered in the Ortega/Jeffrey campaign against Monique Rathbun.

 

Cyber Cults

 

The New York Times recently covered some interesting phenomena that is happening online, see Frank Bruni – How Facebook Warps Our Worlds. Bruni observes that our newfound abilities to facilely pick villains, jump to judgments and duck/cluster with like-opinionated people (all without showing our faces or even necessarily identifying ourselves) has led to some creepy results. You can see how some of that has played out in the world of scientology – where kettles and pots are becoming increasingly indistinguishable – at the following links:

Goodbye to all that…

Alanzo on Ortega and his Underground Bunker

Tony Ortega and Carmen Llywelyn

 

Censorship and Hypocrisy

Tony Ortega’s blogging campaign against my wife Monique and me over the past three months has resulted in the largest wave of hate we have experienced in several years. We even saw that an erstwhile friend published an unsolicited psychiatric evaluation (including still more falsehoods) to explain our behavior as characterized by Ortega. The following descriptions of Monique (some referred to both her and me) written by Bunker regulars and published by Ortega pretty much sum up the sentiments Ortega has fueled:

  • “Sympathy? I has none.
  • Monique, no respect.  NONE. Sympathy? Nope. I never want to hear from these losers again
  • subservience , irrationality, and paranoia
  • Marty and Miscavige are cut from the same cloth. And Monique? Well, she did marry the guy.
  • I wouldn’t be surprised if the Rathbuns name would surface somewhere in the future when some stuff like the “Panama-papers” are leaked again.
  • classless and nasty (both)
  • Mosey has fallen under thrall of whatever fixed delusion he is living under.
  • Somehow they were turned, Whether from threats or payoffs or some combination of the two.
  • I hope like hell the next Rathbun post will be how Mosey blew the ranch and escaped from Marty.
  • Either Monique is drinking Marty’s kool aid or I think the next thing we will hear about is a divorce.
  • The Rathbuns are as mentally ill as Scientology.
  • I’m very much afraid that the one who is going to end up rueing the day is Monique.
  • Well, she does heve to wake up next to Mr Scilon Warrior every day… I don’t envy her that..
  • I find it hard to maintain any respect or trust for them at this point.”

For those Bunkeroos already sold on Tony’s sexist pitch that Monique is incapable of making decisions of her own, the comments describing me included: “a burning train wreck, a fictional Nazi, a hanging judge, a mini-Hubbard, callous and unrepentant, boy, He’s nuts!, an asshole, FUCKIN DELUSIONAL, Marty doesn’t seem stable, an old alter ego who now embraces Hubbard’s paranoia even worse than before, He may or may not be a sociopath…He is certainly narcissistic and has other qualities that are borderline at the very least, I really think Marty has gone off the deep end too, a little mental illness, he is still “living in his head,”MR loves MR alright – but both stand for Mark Rathbun…He has never stopped playing footsie with his ex-boyfriend, He’s a sack of shit, an asshat selfish prick, some serious fuckery, Marty went nuts, My opinion is that Marty has gone over the edge and is behaving very self-destructively (unfortunately now with people to drag down with him), This appears to be a battle of two narcissists, I believe his hands got very dirty.”  And finally, “I don’t think Marty is stable and that is not an environment to raise a child in.”

In this whirlwind of hysteria that became the Bunker comments section a few days ago, a singularly dissident voice interrupted, briefly.  It was not rude. It was not assertive.  It merely posed a question.  The comment was not made by a friend or ally of ours. It was made by Alanzo, a long-time scientology critic who has unloaded quite a bit of criticism on me over the years.  I thought it was interesting how quickly Bunkeroos sought to label him a troll and dismiss his apparently dangerous, if simple, thought. I re-publish it below for two reasons. I believe that standing alone it serves as a textbook study in phenomena we have explored in-depth on this blog (see e.g., Culture of Complaint, Good vs. Evil, Vortex of Hate, etc).  The second reason for re-publishing, which serves to reinforce the first reason, is that Tony Ortega took it upon himself to censor this thread. He left in the plethora of ill-mannered demands for Monique’s and my necks.  But, he deleted and censored Alanzo.

The deleted/censored thread:

Alanzo

Tony wrote: “In a bizarre document, Monique makes accusations that her former attorneys — Ray Jeffrey, Marc Wiegand, Elliott Cappuccio, and Leslie Hyman — had made it “abundantly clear” that the lawsuit was “not worth it financially,” and that the attorneys had filed defective paperwork that allowed Scientology’s attorneys to file appeals that caused delay.

Note Tony’s word “bizarre” used above to describe the document.

Is this Tony’s bias, or is he just reporting the facts?

Alanzo

chukicita  Alanzo • 29 minutes ago

Perhaps it’s a bit of both. Certainly it’s not a typical document, and the accusations are unexpected and unusual. What word would you have used to describe it?

This is a blog, not a newspaper, and I think Tony does an excellent job of bringing the facts to light and keeping his opinions in check at times, even though he doesn’t have to.

Alanzo  chukicita • 4 minutes ago

I think that the document has to perform an abrupt change in a course of action, and that it should be allowed to speak for itself.

Because this is a blog, and not a newspaper which is supposed to be more objective, I think it is even more important to question Tony’s opinions and to be on the look out for his bias on things and to remember that he has no corner on the truth. Other viewpoints and other opinions exist besides Tony Ortega’s, and sometimes those differing opinions shed more light on the truth, and on Scientology, than Tony Ortega could ever muster.

Everyone is biased in favor of Ray Jeffrey here, and his team of lawyers. And we even have another lawyer as an “expert” giving his opinion about the criticisms of Ray Jeffrey, which, unsurprisingly, are very “pro-lawyer”.

Maybe Monique presented a document to the court which was true, and the criticisms of her former attorneys were justified. Why else would such abrupt action need to be taken? Perhaps we should ask Mr Occam, too?

Do clients normally never disagree with the course of actions taken by their attorneys unless they are insane as Tony and Texas Lawyer have both intimated? Do Tony, or even Texas Lawyer, know the particular situation with her lawyers better than Monique?

No.

So I think this is exactly where Tony, and Texas Lawyer, should keep their biases to themselves. And if they are unable to do that, those biases should be highlighted, and questioned by the “commenting community” here.

That is, if the commenting community here cares about the truth.

Alanzo

L Wrong Hubturd Alanzo • 14 minutes ago

5 comments, 6 votes. I do not think you are the real “Alanzo”

Alanzo  L. Wrong Hubturd • 5 minutes ago

Yes. I am the Real Alanzo. I went into retirement last year when I got news that my best friend had cancer, and I could not imagine wasting my time on anything related to Scientology ever again. So I whacked all my accounts.

But my friend has gotten radiation and chemotherapy and it has lengthened the amount of life he has left to live, and so I felt I could afford a little more Scientology in my life.

chukicita  • 15 minutes ago

Additionally, I think the knee-jerk reaction that somehow Monique was being called insane was not useful at all.

The *behavior* of firing successful lawyers was, in the absence of other information, being called out as inconsistent with the original goals of the lawsuit. Reading over the original blog post, no one called *Monique* insane.

chukicita  • 19 minutes ago

I think it’s important to look at the pattern of behavior that at least on the surface seems to be a thread of cohesion in some litigation that involves Scientology. Perhaps Dr. Occam could call up Bob Minton and Ken Dandar.

If you have facts that contradict, why not offer them up?

L Wrong Hubturd chukicita • 12 minutes ago

I do not think think this is the Alonzo you think it is. I think we have an impostor, here to stir the pot.

Alanzo  L. Wrong Hubturd • 3 minutes ago

Oh, make no mistake: I am here to stir the pot.

Obviously you don’t know the Real Alanzo.

Alanzo

ze moo  • 29 minutes ago

No the word bizarre does fit the situation. This filing shows some no longer pent up anger and distrust of the lawyers involved. The client is not always right, but they do have approve what their lawyers do. It seems that a simmering disagreement has boiled over and this is the result.

It is bizarre to fire your lawyers when they are on a roll. All of the delays and appeals were foreseeable and should have been planed on.

While the legal work is over in this case, the story is not over yet.

Alanzo  ze moo • 15 minutes ago

The pay out of this suit was never going to be unlimited. If you look at Monique’s document as a statement of non-viability of the economics of the lawsuit, I do not think it is bizarre at all.

And I think your description of a “simmering disagreement has boiled over and this is the result.” is pretty accurate. I think Marty has pretty good experience with how Church lawyers operate, and Marty and Monique might not have been listened to as closely as they should have been.

And since Monique stated that they were able to achieve outside of the court what the lawsuit sought to achieve in the court, she dropped the suit.

Sorry. This, if true, is not bizarre.

That is only Tony’s bias showing.

Alanzo