Mark Rathbun Blog Takeover

This is unbelievable. I posted the following this morning on Mark Rathbun’s blog knowing it would not be approved:

“So, I’m on to you. Mark Rathbun is not running this blog anymore. I don’t know what you did to him and his family, but I will tell you that despite these videos, which remind me of the North Korean propaganda videos from the Korean War, the overwhelming evidence of how corrupt the church is, and the destruction of the tech, will live on. In your case, you can’t erase the idiocy of the “Squirrel Busters” hounding Rathbun for months and months, and the idiotic video of the SO execs hounding Rathbun at the airport, etc., etc. I don’t know what you did to make Rathbun turn on people who were his friends, but I have to think it is far worse than the squirrel busters caper.

But I’m on to you. You pushed it too far, and now these videos are just evidence of Mark’s surrender. Cheers.”

Guess what happened? My comment was replaced by a long, long diatribe against Tony Ortega and the Village Voice. It was not me who wrote that post. But it’s under my ID because they just deleted my text and replaced it with theirs. Unbelievable! This, to me, is proof that Marty is no longer in charge of his blog.

Cussing unbelievable.

Mark Rathbun has recently starred in a series of videos in which he trashes his former friends and spouts the church propaganda line that he rejected for years. It is pretty obvious from the content that he made some sort of deal with the church or David Miscavige or both. I have no idea why he would do this, but I find it very sad. That his independent blog, the blog that I started posting to seven years ago and which was so instrumental in exposing the abuses of the church, is now a propaganda arm of the church just shows how much a Greek tragedy Scientology is. That he has “turned” is hard for me to believe, but there it is. The mighty has fallen.

And now his blog is run by the church. There is no way Mark would delete my comment and post a pure church propaganda piece under my ID. So unethical. Just shows the church is as corrupt and unethical as ever, and Rathbun’s videos won’t change that.

Kha Khan

Hubbard always liked exotic things, and fancied himself a student of history. He brought up historical references in his lectures, describing them with authority and adding is opinion about them and providing the last word about what should be thought about them. It didn’t matter what the subject was, he would tell the anecdote, and then pronounce judgement on it with finality. Nothing more needs to be said; his point of view is all you need. Subjects included taxes, organizational structures, various leaders, various philosophers, opinions about wars, opinions about doctors and medicine, etc.

In that context, it makes sense that Hubbard would take up something like “Kha Khan.” Hubbard said it was a title from The East. If the emperor designates someone a “Kha Khan,” he is given a status above all else, to the point where he could do virtually anything and be forgiven. Hubbard said the Kha Khan would be forgiven the death penalty ten times. In fact, a Kha Khan is historically an emperor, not a status the emperor bestows on others.

Hubbard adopted this status in Scientology, and handed it out to some of his more dedicated and capable staff members. In Scientology terms, Kha Khan meant the recipient could do ten things with impunity that normally would get the person kicked out of  the church.

Kha Khan is the perfect summation of what is wrong with Scientology ethics and admin. Here we have a status of “this guy is such an A player, such a mensch, that he can (not literally) kill ten people and get away with it. He can screw up hugely ten times with impunity! All hail the Kha Khan!” And yet, I’ve never known of a Kha Khan to ever be forgiven anything, and every one has been busted within a year or two of the status. So, what we have is a person who does something great, rises above the herd, and then gets smacked down shortly thereafter. Kha Khan becomes a nice, big target. And that is Scientology organizational methodology in a nutshell.

The Anti-Scientology Cult vs. Truth

(This is an extension/edit of a comment I made on Mark Rathbun’s excellent “Moving On Up a Little Higher” blog.)

I have been “out” of official Scientology for 6 years – I made my first public post on Mark’s blog and announced my name to the world here about a year or two later. It has been interesting seeing the morphing of the Scientology “universe” over these years. I have lost friends who are still woefully on the “inside.” It was painful; now less so. But I have made new friends.

I think it is important that Mark is calling out the “ASC” (Anti-Scientology Cult) because over these several years, actions, truths, activities, events, and happenstances have piled up, and a group of people have been digesting these things and talking amongst themselves, and then editing the subset of reality they see into a sheen of group agreement about what is “going on.” Much of it is driven by hate – hate for Hubbard, hate for having “wasted” their youth, hate for being so gullible, hate for trusting someone and then having it betrayed – who knows? But the overall conclusions of the ASC are pretty straightforward: Scientology is pure evil, L. Ron Hubbard is pure evil, and Scientology should be eradicated. And therefore, any point of view or comment or conjecture by anyone that does not align with these conclusions is jumped on and disregarded – condemned, derided, mocked, etc. And facts are bent to support the conclusions.

The problem is that that reality of Scientology is broader than the conclusions of the ASC. Neither Scientology nor Hubbard are “pure evil.” They just aren’t. Scientology may be very low for some on the cost/benefit scale, but there is still a benefit. If someone has been in the SO for 20 or 30 years, there is a reason why the person stayed, and there is good that was done even if in the event it may seem the bad outweighed the good overall in their estimation.

Truth matters, even if it is inconvenient. We can’t tolerate lies, even if they support our agenda. Real truths that you can be sure of are those that you have actually seen. Not heard. So, for me, for instance, The Hole at the International Headquarters is not a truth, even though I know it existed. I trust the people who mentioned it, but I have personally not seen the hole, so it is not 100% truth to me.

However, I have seen the RPF (“Rehabilitation Project Force” – Scientology’s staff correctional program) and RPF’s RPF, in multiple places, and I know what goes on there. I have seen crazy stuff in Scientology – I beautiful blond 20-something Supercargo at ASHO-F recruiting SO members from Skid Row in LA (because, they said they never took LSD), and having to put down mini-riots when these new recruits clamored for liquor and got into fights. So I base what I know on Scientology for sure on what I have seen with my own eyes, and what I have done my own self. And at the end of the day that is the only way to do it, because everything else has to be taken on faith, and then when you get guys like Chris Shelton conjecturing, then you start morphing reality. I don’t have anything against Chris, except that his conclusions are wrong even though he calls himself a “critical thinker.” Yeah – arrogant, but whatever.

And, I’ll tell you what else I saw: Church members harassing in the most egregious way Mark and Mosey Rathbun, Mike Rinder, and a number of others. This is real – no need to have faith in anyone, the videos are clear. I saw the hate-sites the church has put up – again – no need to take anything on faith. I saw church members acting like complete jerks to non-Scientologists. I have had people disconnect from me for just having certain friends on Facebook. This is the reality – no need to have it filtered by the lens of ASC people – or OSA (“Office of Special Affairs,” or the church’s gestapo) for that matter. The truth of Scientology that is available unfiltered for the world to see is plenty to condemn it.

HOWEVER – I have also seen the incredibly positive side of Scientology. To me, there is a positive side to my involvement in Scientology. I cannot deny that. I am not just going to go along with someone else’s opinion just because that seems to be the thing to do, and just because someone shows me salacious details about Hubbard or the church. I don’t need to go into details about the benefits, but they exist, for me. I’ve outlined some on this blog.

In the final analysis, all that matters is what I perceived and experienced myself. I can augment these truths with information from others, but the information from others does not supplant what I saw and experienced first hand. And that is true for all of us. The never-ins (people who never practiced Scientology) will have a hard time with the truth of Scientology because everything they think they know is filtered.

One thing I have learned in my years as a Scientologist regarding the subject and its people is to keep your own counsel on it and make up your own mind – this is true inside and outside the church. People will lie to you to forward their agenda. People will distort the truth to fit their world-view – they might even reject their own experiences if it conflicts with their current opinion and circumstances. That is sad.

There is no real “ex-Scientology Community” really. There are a number of people who are out of the church, and they run the gamut of being still fully into the technology and philosophy of Scientology to rejecting all and everything about the subject – even to the point of wanting to edit out completely that portion of their life. There is no common set of beliefs in the ex-Scientology community. There are only degrees of belief. All attempts to “standardize” an Independent Scientology has failed, because their is no authority that says “yay” or “nay” on particular ideas, concepts, and procedures. But that is okay, to me.

Despite the dictates of the ASC, the correct answer is not “Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard are evil!” Just like any agenda from an Independent Scientologist that tries to label people “standard” or “not standard” is BS, the agenda to reject all of Scientology as evil and then enforce that point of view is BS as well. There is no correct answer, except for what you see and perceive yourself, and you owe it to yourself to look clearly at the real facts and reject conjectures based on flimsy data and cast-in-iron agendas. Try to get around confirmation bias. And avoid the Dunning-Kruger effect – if you want to have an opinion on Scientology, learn enough about it to be informed before drawing your conclusions.

I say all this because this needs to be called out – Mark Rathbun is right. There is too much stuff being invented out of whole cloth, too much conjecture and speculation and just crap being manufactured out of very few facts. Too much “us” vs “them.” And when some people claim to know “facts” that are in some vault, hidden from the world, well I call BS on that. And, any “facts” that guys like Tony Ortega have – even if they are in the light of day – are still filtered though their particular lens, and are hearsay from other people. For people to get all uppity on invented or distorted conjectures is pretty crazy. And for anyone to accuse people, like Mosey or Mark, of duplicity or being a sell-out or whatever based on half-digested morsels of speculation is just cussing wrong. Don’t light the cussing torches based on BS.

A “Cram” for David Miscavige, Ecclesiastical Leader of the Scientology Religion

L. Ron Hubbard, of “Going Clear” fame these days, wrote a collection of policies for the church called the “PR Series” (for Public Relations). These policies are (or should be) the guiding policies for all Public Relations activities by the church. The are 47 policy letters in this series.

In the second policy letter of this series, released in August of 1970 (13 Aug 1970), Ron speaks of the missing ingredient in PR: “Reality.” Scientology defines understanding as an interaction between three factors: Affinity, Reality, and Communication.

Ron took the word “affinity” to mean a friendliness or love toward someone or something. Closeness. The higher the affinity for someone, the more you like them. Over the years, I have taken to replacing “affinity” for love, because Love is a strong word and everyone knows what it means. God is Love. Love conquers all. Love makes the world go ’round.

“Reality” means, in this context, what a person agrees exists. What is real versus unreal. To some people, God is very real. To others, God is a fiction. A person can have a vague idea that there is a city called Los Angeles, but it is not really real to someone until he or she actually visits Los Angeles. You can live your whole life with someone, and then find out they are a closet Nazi. Your world shatters because everything you thought was real about the person becomes a lie. The new reality is jarring.

“Communication” is the interchange of ideas or things between people.

These three make up an inter-depended triangle called the ARC Triangle. As you communicate with someone, you find out more about them (Reality), and generally you increase your affinity for them. This is even true of bad people. No one is perfectly bad, and by communicating with someone and gaining reality on who and what they are, you will see that they may be evil, but not 100% so. In any event, the more you communicate with someone, the more you will understand them. Thus, the higher the ARC, the higher the understanding.

So – that is a long preamble to PR Series 2, and the excerpt below:

“When an enforced communication channel carries only lies, then the affinity caves in and you get hate. For the R [Reality] is corrupted.

“PR dedicated to a false reality of lies, then becomes low A [affinity], low C [communication] and recoils on the user.

“So the first [note that: first] lesson we can learn that enables us to use PR safely is to KEEP A HIGH R [reality].

“The more lies you use in PR the more likely it is that the PR will recoil.

“Thus the law:


Emphasis above is Ron’s. My comments in brackets.

Note that this is a law, which Ron set in policy in 1970. Fast forward the last few years, and especially the last few weeks. The church of Scientology is lying through its teeth.

What I find fascinating is that what is happening with the church and with the entire subject of Scientology is happening exactly as Hubbard predicted it would, forty-five years ago. Mr. David Miscavige, I suggest you reread and apply what Hubbard wrote before you finally destroy everything Hubbard did in his lifetime.

Two Rules for Happy Living

“Two Rules for Happy Living

1. Be able to experience anything.
2. Cause only those things which others can experience easily.”

Ron Hubbard, from the book New Slant on Life

It should be noted that if the book and the movie “Going Clear” tells us anything, it is that the church of Scientology and many of its members have wandered from these two very simple rules.

Happy Birthday Ron!

Happy birthday to L. Ron Hubbard. Ironically, today is the day Alex Gibney’s “Going Clear” documentary is premiering in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and New York. I have not seen the movie yet, but by all accounts, it appears to be a compelling piece of work. My hope is that it supplies enough pressure to the church and folks like Tom Cruise and John Travolta that significant changes happen in the organization. One thing is sure, it will contribute to the motion.

Tony Ortega and R2-45

First of all, welcome to those of you visiting from The Underground Bunker. Tony referred to me in today’s posts as an Indie who would criticize him for referring to R2-45.

R2-45, for those of you who are unfamiliar with it, is a joke Hubbard put into Route 2, which is a series of processes described in the book “Creation of Human Ability.” This book was published in 1954. The Route 2 processes are usually a set of questions the practitioner asks the recipient of the session. For example, the entry for R2-44 is called “Must and Must Not Happen” and the entry for it describes the theory behind the process, and the commands themselves – which are “Tell me some things you wouldn’t want to happen again.” and “Tell me some things that you would like to have happen again.” Pretty benign, no? The entries for each process are anywhere from a paragraph or two to several pages long, depending on the process.

The entry for R2-45 reads as follows:

“R2-45: An enormously effective process for exteriorization but its use is frowned upon by this society at this time.”

And that is all it says. It is a cussing joke. And – one is left to imply that “45” refers to a pistol – but nowhere anywhere is the actually said, because Hubbard figured most people would get the joke. Boy was he wrong.

Here we are sixty years later – get that –  sixty years later – and Tony still refers to it as somehow a threat, when there is NO evidence of what it actually is, or that what people think it is actually happened! Of course it was a joke – just as of course he was referring to a .45 when in fact it was never actually mentioned.

People may not like the joke, but a joke it was.

There was a reference to R2-45 in an ethics order from 1968 in which one of the directives was that “any Sea Org member contacting any of them [the subjects of the Ethics Order] is to use Auditing Process R2-45.” As if that’s proof that Hubbard ordered people shot. Now, the lines before it mentioned that the subjects of the order are “enemies of mankind, the planet and all life” and that they are subject to “reverse processes” if they ever came into a Qual (Qualifications) division. The whole ethics order is over the top – and indicates to me that Ron was pissed at these people. Now here’s  the deal: If the order was truly meant to be followed, it surely would have been followed, no? In other words, if Hubbard’s followers actually believed the order to literally mean shooting these people, don’t you think these people would have been shot?

The answer is no, because the whole thing is absurd! The reference to R2-45 was a joke, or more accurately, an indicator that Hubbard was extremely upset with the subjects of the order. Everyone who saw or read it in 1968 knew it. Every Scientologist knew it. But apparently today’s Scientology critics are unable to see this.

For those of you who must dive into this, here’s a list of various references to R2-45. Just remember that no one actually was shot. No one. Ever.